GitCode, a git-hosting website operated Chongqing Open-Source Co-Creation Technology Co Ltd and with technical support from CSDN and Huawei Cloud.

It is being reported that many users’ repository are being cloned and re-hosted on GitCode without explicit authorization.

There is also a thread on Ycombinator (archived link)

  • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    With the obligatory “fuck everyone who disregards open source licenses”, I am still slightly amused at this raising eyebrows while nearly no one is complaining about MS using github to train their copilot LLM, which will help circumvent licenses & copyrights by the bazillion.

    • kava@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      If I look at a few implementations of an algorithm and then implement my own using those as inspiration, am I breaking copyright law and circumventing licenses?

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        That depends on how similar your resulting algorithm is to the sources you were “inspired” by. You’re probably fine if you’re not copying verbatim and your code just ends up looking similar because that’s how solutions are generally structured, but there absolutely are limits there.

        If you’re trying to rewrite something into another license, you’ll need to be a lot more careful.

        • kava@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          What’s the limit? This needs to be absolutely explicit and easy to understand because this is what LLMs are doing. They take hundreds of thousands of similar algorithms and they create an amalgamation of it.

          When is it copying and when it is “inspiration”? What’s the line between learning and copying?

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            I disagree that it needs to be explicit. The current law is the fair use doctrine, which generally has more to do with the intended use than specific amounts of the text/media. The point is that humans should know where that limit is and when they’ve crossed it, with motive being a huge part of it.

            I think machines and algorithms should have to abide by a much narrower understanding of “fair use” because they don’t have motive or the ability to Intuit when they’ve crossed the line. So scraping copyrighted works to produce an LLM should probably generally be illegal, imo.

            That said, our current copyright system is busted and desperately needs reform. We should be limiting copyright to 14 years (as in the original copyright act of 1790), with an option to explicitly extend for another 14 years. That way LLMs can scrape comment published >28 years ago with no concerns, and most content produced >14 years (esp. forums and social media where copyright extension is incredibly unlikely). That would be reasonable IMO and sidestep most of the issues people have with LLMs.