*Please consider adding <
[email protected]> to your address book, which will
ensure that our messages reach you and not your spam box.*
*Read and share online:
<[link removed]>*
Dear Free Software Supporter,
Microsoft GitHub's announcement of an AI-driven Service as a Software
Substitute [(SaaSS)][1] program called Copilot -- which uses machine
learning to autocomplete code (even very large portions of code) for
developers as they write software -- immediately raised serious
questions for the free software movement and our ability to safeguard
user and developer freedom. We felt these questions needed to be
addressed, as a variety of serious implications were foreseen for the
free software community and developers who use GitHub. These inquiries
-- and others possibly yet to be discovered -- needed to be reviewed
in depth.
[1]: [link removed]
[In our call for papers][2], we set forth several areas of
interest. Most of these areas centered around copyright law, questions
of ownership for AI-generated code, and legal impacts for GitHub
authors who use a [GNU][3] or other copyleft license(s) for their
works. We are pleased to announce the community-provided research into
these areas, and much more.
[2]: [link removed]
[3]: [link removed]
First, we want to thank everyone who participated by sending in their
papers. We received a healthy response of twenty-two papers from
members of the community. The papers weighed-in on the multiple areas
of interest we had indicated in our announcement. Using an anonymous
review process, we concluded there were five papers that would be best
suited to inform the community and foster critical conversations to
help guide our actions in the search for solutions.
These five submissions are not ranked, and we decided it best to just
let the papers speak for themselves. The papers contain opinions with
which the Free Software Foundation (FSF) may or may not agree, and any
views expressed by the authors do not necessarily represent the
FSF. They were selected because we thought they advanced discussion of
important questions, and did so clearly. To that end, the FSF is not
providing any summaries of the papers or elaborating on our developing
positions until we can learn further, through the community, how best
to view the situation.
The following papers were selected (alphabetical by title):
### Copilot, copying, commons, community, culture
* Robert F.J. Seddon, Honorary Fellow, University of Durham
* [PDF][4]
* [HTML][5]
* [CC BY-ND 4.0][6]
[4]: [link removed]
[5]: [link removed]
[6]: [link removed]
### Copyright implications of the use of code repositories to train a machine learning model
* John A. Rothchild, Professor of Law, Wayne State University and Daniel H. Rothchild, PhD candidate, University of California, Berkeley
* [PDF][7]
* [HTML][8]
* [CC BY 4.0][9]
[7]: [link removed]
[8]: [link removed]
[9]: [link removed]
### If software is my copilot, who programmed my software?
* Bradley M. Kuhn, Policy Fellow, Software Freedom Conservancy
* [PDF][10]
* [HTML][11]
* [CC BY-ND 4.0][12]
[10]: [link removed]
[11]: [link removed]
[12]: [link removed]
### Interpreting docstrings without common sense
* Darren Abramson, Associate Professor, Dalhousie University and Ali Emami, assistant professor, Brock University
* [PDF][13]
* [HTML][14]
* [CC BY-ND 4.0][15]
[13]: [link removed]
[14]: [link removed]
[15]: [link removed]
### On the nature of AI code copilots
* Stuart Fitzpatrick, Doctoral Candidate, Western Sydney University
* [PDF][16]
* [HTML][17]
* [CC BY-SA 4.0][18]
[16]: [link removed]
[17]: [link removed]
[18]: [link removed]
## What's next?
If this subject is of interest to you, we recommend you read this
selection of papers and share your thoughts and feedback. Several of
the authors have agreed to participate in follow-up discussions which
will be held via [IRC][19], [LibrePlanet Wiki][20], and [LibrePlanet
Discuss mailing list][21]. Listed below is the schedule and details
for these discussions.
[19]: [link removed]
[20]: [link removed]
[21]: [link removed]
### Live events
FSF is planning a series of (now confirmed) live events aimed to
generate discussion around the findings. Please consider joining the
following events:
* 13:00 EST (19:00 UTC) Thursday, March 3, IRC (`#fsf`), [Q&A with Robert F.J Seddon][22]
* 13:00 EST (19:00 UTC) Monday, March 7, IRC (`#fsf`), [general discussion][23]
[22]: [link removed]
[23]: [link removed]
### Discussion on pages
Whether or not you are able to attend any of the live events, we
encourage you to contribute to the discussion on the wiki and mailing
list. As stakeholders in free software, the preservation of user
freedom and copyleft, we would like to engage the community in any
possible actions that must be taken.
Thank you!
Craig Topham
Copyright & Licensing Associate
Free Software Foundation
--
* Follow us on Mastodon at <[link removed]>, GNU social at
<[link removed]>, PeerTube at <[link removed]>, and on Twitter at @fsf.
* Read about why we use Twitter, but only with caveats at <[link removed]>.
* Subscribe to our RSS feeds at <[link removed]>.
* Join us as an associate member at <[link removed]>.
* Read our Privacy Policy at <[link removed]>.
Sent from the Free Software Foundation,
51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor
Boston, Massachusetts 02110-1335
United States
You can unsubscribe from this mailing list by visiting
[link removed].
To stop all email from the Free Software Foundation, including Defective by Design,
and the Free Software Supporter newsletter, visit
[link removed].
