The are plenty of source available or open core projects where use of GPL-ed code would both be visible and incompatible with the licensing.
> Oh yeah, and I just remembered that GitHub’s Terms already carve a necessary exception to whatever license you use in your project, to allow Github to host & display your code. I assume those terms already include some CoPilot coverage…?
Letting github host and display the code is compatible with open source licenses but is very much different from letting third parties incorporate that code into non-open codebases.
> If not, and if they aren’t legally covered already (which I bet they are), then they could change the terms to stipulate that hosting code on GitHub bars people from suing over incidental amounts of automated copying. Main point here being that the GPLv3 license on your project is neither the only nor the primary license governing GitHub’s relationship with your code.
GitHub TOS can only possibly give them authorization from those directly uploading code to GitHub. They don't give github any additional license for code that was uploaded by a someone else (for example a mirror bot) becose that someone does not have the rights to give out that license.
And even if they write in their TOS that they can do whatever they want it does not mean that they can actually legally do whatever they want - even moreso when retroactively changing those terms.
