Actually, we were forbidden to look at open source code at Microsoft (circa 2009) because it might influence our coding and violate licenses.
In fact, the little precedent that exists over learning from copyrightable code is in favor of it.
More important, the rule urged by Sony would require that a software engineer, faced with two engineering solutions that each require intermediate copying of protected and unprotected material, often follow the least efficient solution (In cases in which the solution that required the fewest number of intermediate copies was also the most efficient, an engineer would pursue it, presumably, without our urging.) This is precisely the kind of “wasted effort that the proscription against the copyright of ideas and facts . . . [is] designed to prevent.” (Sony v. Connectix)
Meanwhile open source software has had an immeasurable benefit to society. My computer, tv, phone, light bulb, etc all benefit from OSS—running various licenses, and only a subset using a copyleft like license.
Like, copyright laws are also stifling my innovative business creating BluRays of Disney films and selling them on Amazon.
OpenAI did a dirty job though judging by the cases of the model just reproducing code to the comment, so I can understand why one would criticize this specific project.
