From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.tangents Subject: Re: Help building Pen.el (GPT for emacs) Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 06:07:18 +0300 Message-ID: References: <83lf642jeh.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1fp1es9.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8at1c63.fsf@gnu.org> <83im1025b7.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26860"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.7+183 (3d24855) (2021-05-28) Cc: stefan@marxist.se, emacs-tangents@gnu.org, mullikine@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 24 05:10:51 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m783u-0006oG-Bu for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 24 Jul 2021 05:10:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45704 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m783s-0000gI-Ju for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 23:10:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33004) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m783h-0000g8-CX for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 23:10:37 -0400 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:59557) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m783f-0000jC-Dt; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 23:10:37 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:197.157.0.30]) (AUTH: PLAIN admin, TLS: TLS1.3,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 0000000000057F2B.0000000060FB84A7.00006E1B; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 20:10:31 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83im1025b7.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.170.207.13; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=stw1.rcdrun.com X-Spam_score_int: -3 X-Spam_score: -0.4 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-tangents@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs news and miscellaneous discussions outside the scope of other Emacs mailing lists List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-tangents" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.tangents:674 Archived-At: * Eli Zaretskii [2021-07-23 22:34]: > > Here are references disputing how "it cannot be true": > > You take everything you read in these blogs for granted? Did you > actually see the original code which these allude to? In case of Copilot, Github admits: https://docs.github.com/en/github/copilot/research-recitation "This investigation demonstrates that GitHub Copilot can quote a body of code verbatim, but that it rarely does so, and when it does, it mostly quotes code that everybody quotes, and mostly at the beginning of a file, as if to break the ice.This investigation demonstrates that GitHub Copilot can quote a body of code verbatim, but that it rarely does so, and when it does, it mostly quotes code that everybody quotes, and mostly at the beginning of a file, as if to break the ice." And fact that it is "rare" does not make it a less problem for copyright purposes as the new author cannot know which part of the code has used "rare" verbatim. > > Question is very particular, specific and concrete: > > ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ > > > > How does Pen.el and background AI services ensure of licensing > > compliance? > > > > I would appreciate if you find solution to that or stay on that > > subject, as if I am wrong or right is not relevant, what I wish is to > > have assurance that it is free software. Prove me wrong by providing > > exact references in not only on country's law but also other > > countries' laws, the lows that make it legal, or how otherwise the > > legality of such code is justified and how users may get free > > software. > > I'm sorry, but I don't work for you. If you have problems with using > code from these services, then the onus is on you to do the research > and make up your own mind. The discussion here is not about the code > these services give their users, it's whether and how Emacs can make > use of those services. Emacs allows the user to write proprietary > code, and there's no legal issues when the user does that. Emacs also > allows the user to copy someone else's code without permission, and > that's not a problem for Emacs when the user does that. If you don't wish to correspond, don't, you are free. I have never said nor implied "you work for me" and I cannot see how is that relevant to the question. If you participate in discussion and respond to my question relating to licensing compliance, then provide a reference justifying its legality. Or simply say you don't have such. Your employment is not subject of my question nor relevant. I am not user of proprietary software and I don't consider options of writing proprietary software. Neither I am participating in discussion to foster ideas of creation of proprietary software. I am free software user and for that specific case I am interested how the licensing issue is solved. However, my question is at least answered by my online research as I have already found the refrences: 1. Julia Reda's reference; and 2. OpenAI_RFC-84-FR-58141.pdf https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/OpenAI_RFC-84-FR-58141.pdf Conclusions are: - legal justifications exists for US jurisdiction as the companies providing the AI are strong enough to find their ways, they are playing on the card as given in references above; as somebody already said, I doubt they would use "fair use" doctrine if the AI would be trained on proprietary software such as Windows; - conflict is serious and it is out there among the people and remains unsolved; AI has been trained on GPL and other free software and is used by corporations to generate new code without attributions; people complain that it is misuse of intentions of authors; - overall international legal situation is thus unclear, especially considering that free software spans the whole world, not just the US jurisdiction, as what may work within US is not same among all jurisdictions; > > As long as you don't tackle those subjects there is no legal solution > > for Pen.el and background AI to be used with assurance that software > > is truly free software. > > You confuse "free software" with "software being used to write free > programs". They are not the same. Maybe I have expressed myself in such way as not to get the point understood. It must be so, as I have finally found the first legal references myself. For Pen.el I have never made any relevance to legality question I made, and I have the pen.el repository over here and license is clear. Never mentioned it. I have not made reference to "software being used to write free programs" as a server side service I did not tackle that, it is most probably proprietary software or some versions could be free software. But that is not relevant. What is at hand is: ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 1. There is pool of GPL and other free software which authors expect compliance to their licenses; 2. Large corporation is trying to use "fair use" doctrine on the pool of software to create a service; 3. Service generates new software, sometimes duplicating verbatim code; Question was and still remains largely unsolved is how authors who use newly generated code can be sure that generated software is free software and to comply to GPL and other free software licenses? Conclusion as of 2021-07-24 is that authors cannot be sure as there are legal uncertainties. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/