> If it's actually co authored then you should be fine on copyright
replyHow so? All your outoutput is now legally partly owned by Microsoft?
If I write "I own lelanthran's car", does that make me the legal owner of your car? No?
reply> If I write "I own lelanthran's car", does that make me the legal owner of your car?
replyIf I counter sign agreement, certainly. How do you think that sales of both movable and immovable property work?
That's not what we were talking about. We were talking about a third party modifying your document without your consent (and sometimes even without your knowledge). You write git commit "Fix bug" and then a third party swoops in the night and modifies that with "Co-authored by: Microsoft".
replyThe bot (and therefore microsoft) doesn't get any copyright at all.
reply> The bot (and therefore microsoft) doesn't get any copyright at all.
replyBut then neither do you, for every commit that was marked with copilot.
What makes you say that?
replyIf a monkey uses a typewriter, there's no copyright.
If I use a typewriter with a monkey, I get copyright and the monkey doesn't.
Why would the monkey need copyright for me to get copyright?
> If I use a typewriter with a monkey, I get copyright and the monkey doesn't.
replyRight, because monkeys cannot be granted copyright. If you use a typewriter along with Microsoft, the resulting copyright will be owned jointly.
This story isn't about a monkey claiming co-authorship, it's about Microsoft claiming co-authorship.
No. Legal ownership doesn't depend on whether aislop edited your commit message.
reply