Malus, which is a piece of "satire" but also fully functional, performs a "clean room" clone of open source software, meaning users could then sell, redistribute, etc. the software without crediting the original developers. But I have a hard time with the "clean room" argument since the LLM doing the behind-the-scenes work has already ingested the entire corpus of open source software -- and somehow the output of the LLMs isn't considered a derivative work.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 52 points 4 months ago (9 children)

It's obviously not clean room since the original code was in the training data.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 15 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Yep. But good luck getting a court to agree with you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Omg Imagine if half of the case is just an ML course to teach the jury what training data is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    That sounds painful. Absolutely no shade to the lovely older person I overheard today say: "so how do you get the little folks on the screen to know what buttons I pressed?"

    But I'm guessing it could be similar to music copywrite law where jurors don't have to understand audio engineering to know two samples sound the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Nope the class will be dropped down to teach all the basics and then up to vector databases and word embeddings to understand the case.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments