DOE vs. Github (amended complaint) Court Filing (Redacted), June 8, 2023 is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This is part 18 of 38.
VII. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
F. Copilot Reproduces the Code of the Named Plaintiffs Without Attribution
97. Because Copilot was trained on all available public GitHub repositories, if Licensed Materials have been posted to a GitHub public repository, Plaintiffs and the Class can be reasonably certain it was ingested by Copilot and is sometimes returned to users as Output.
98. Described below are some specific examples of Copilot’s unlawful behavior using Licensed Materials owned by the named Plaintiffs. These examples were emitted by Copilot after prompting Copilot.
99. In the examples below, original code is shaded gray, prompts to Copilot are shaded orange, and outputs from Copilot are shaded light blue.
Continue Reading Here.
About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.
This court case 4:22-cv-06823-JST retrieved on August 26, 2023, from Storage Courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction.