What kind of “protection” could they possibly offer when someone sues because Copilot straight out copied their code because it doesn’t know any better?
I really don’t understand what’s Microsoft’s master plan here. It’s very weird for a software company to undermine copyright.
If it’s ok for Copilot to pirate code it must also be ok for everybody else to pirate Microsoft products.
Sounds like Microsoft is trying to engage in champerty as a means of establishing beneficial case law (or avoiding the opposite) because government regulations could devalue their investments in the AI field.
I think they’re gambling that either the legal precedent will end up in favor of generative AI being exempt from copyright, or that they can out spent anyone who would want to take them on.
What kind of “protection” could they possibly offer when someone sues because Copilot straight out copied their code because it doesn’t know any better?
I really don’t understand what’s Microsoft’s master plan here. It’s very weird for a software company to undermine copyright.
If it’s ok for Copilot to pirate code it must also be ok for everybody else to pirate Microsoft products.
Sounds like Microsoft is trying to engage in champerty as a means of establishing beneficial case law (or avoiding the opposite) because government regulations could devalue their investments in the AI field.
I think they’re gambling that either the legal precedent will end up in favor of generative AI being exempt from copyright, or that they can out spent anyone who would want to take them on.