Fri Apr 19 08:27:33 2024
EVENTS
 FREE
SOFTWARE
INSTITUTE

POLITICS
JOBS
MEMBERS'
CORNER

MAILING
LIST

NYLXS Mailing Lists and Archives
NYLXS Members have a lot to say and share but we don't keep many secrets. Join the Hangout Mailing List and say your peice.

DATE 2021-07-01

HANGOUT

2024-04-19 | 2024-03-19 | 2024-02-19 | 2024-01-19 | 2023-12-19 | 2023-11-19 | 2023-10-19 | 2023-09-19 | 2023-08-19 | 2023-07-19 | 2023-06-19 | 2023-05-19 | 2023-04-19 | 2023-03-19 | 2023-02-19 | 2023-01-19 | 2022-12-19 | 2022-11-19 | 2022-10-19 | 2022-09-19 | 2022-08-19 | 2022-07-19 | 2022-06-19 | 2022-05-19 | 2022-04-19 | 2022-03-19 | 2022-02-19 | 2022-01-19 | 2021-12-19 | 2021-11-19 | 2021-10-19 | 2021-09-19 | 2021-08-19 | 2021-07-19 | 2021-06-19 | 2021-05-19 | 2021-04-19 | 2021-03-19 | 2021-02-19 | 2021-01-19 | 2020-12-19 | 2020-11-19 | 2020-10-19 | 2020-09-19 | 2020-08-19 | 2020-07-19 | 2020-06-19 | 2020-05-19 | 2020-04-19 | 2020-03-19 | 2020-02-19 | 2020-01-19 | 2019-12-19 | 2019-11-19 | 2019-10-19 | 2019-09-19 | 2019-08-19 | 2019-07-19 | 2019-06-19 | 2019-05-19 | 2019-04-19 | 2019-03-19 | 2019-02-19 | 2019-01-19 | 2018-12-19 | 2018-11-19 | 2018-10-19 | 2018-09-19 | 2018-08-19 | 2018-07-19 | 2018-06-19 | 2018-05-19 | 2018-04-19 | 2018-03-19 | 2018-02-19 | 2018-01-19 | 2017-12-19 | 2017-11-19 | 2017-10-19 | 2017-09-19 | 2017-08-19 | 2017-07-19 | 2017-06-19 | 2017-05-19 | 2017-04-19 | 2017-03-19 | 2017-02-19 | 2017-01-19 | 2016-12-19 | 2016-11-19 | 2016-10-19 | 2016-09-19 | 2016-08-19 | 2016-07-19 | 2016-06-19 | 2016-05-19 | 2016-04-19 | 2016-03-19 | 2016-02-19 | 2016-01-19 | 2015-12-19 | 2015-11-19 | 2015-10-19 | 2015-09-19 | 2015-08-19 | 2015-07-19 | 2015-06-19 | 2015-05-19 | 2015-04-19 | 2015-03-19 | 2015-02-19 | 2015-01-19 | 2014-12-19 | 2014-11-19 | 2014-10-19 | 2014-09-19 | 2014-08-19 | 2014-07-19 | 2014-06-19 | 2014-05-19 | 2014-04-19 | 2014-03-19 | 2014-02-19 | 2014-01-19 | 2013-12-19 | 2013-11-19 | 2013-10-19 | 2013-09-19 | 2013-08-19 | 2013-07-19 | 2013-06-19 | 2013-05-19 | 2013-04-19 | 2013-03-19 | 2013-02-19 | 2013-01-19 | 2012-12-19 | 2012-11-19 | 2012-10-19 | 2012-09-19 | 2012-08-19 | 2012-07-19 | 2012-06-19 | 2012-05-19 | 2012-04-19 | 2012-03-19 | 2012-02-19 | 2012-01-19 | 2011-12-19 | 2011-11-19 | 2011-10-19 | 2011-09-19 | 2011-08-19 | 2011-07-19 | 2011-06-19 | 2011-05-19 | 2011-04-19 | 2011-03-19 | 2011-02-19 | 2011-01-19 | 2010-12-19 | 2010-11-19 | 2010-10-19 | 2010-09-19 | 2010-08-19 | 2010-07-19 | 2010-06-19 | 2010-05-19 | 2010-04-19 | 2010-03-19 | 2010-02-19 | 2010-01-19 | 2009-12-19 | 2009-11-19 | 2009-10-19 | 2009-09-19 | 2009-08-19 | 2009-07-19 | 2009-06-19 | 2009-05-19 | 2009-04-19 | 2009-03-19 | 2009-02-19 | 2009-01-19 | 2008-12-19 | 2008-11-19 | 2008-10-19 | 2008-09-19 | 2008-08-19 | 2008-07-19 | 2008-06-19 | 2008-05-19 | 2008-04-19 | 2008-03-19 | 2008-02-19 | 2008-01-19 | 2007-12-19 | 2007-11-19 | 2007-10-19 | 2007-09-19 | 2007-08-19 | 2007-07-19 | 2007-06-19 | 2007-05-19 | 2007-04-19 | 2007-03-19 | 2007-02-19 | 2007-01-19 | 2006-12-19 | 2006-11-19 | 2006-10-19 | 2006-09-19 | 2006-08-19 | 2006-07-19 | 2006-06-19 | 2006-05-19 | 2006-04-19 | 2006-03-19 | 2006-02-19 | 2006-01-19 | 2005-12-19 | 2005-11-19 | 2005-10-19 | 2005-09-19 | 2005-08-19 | 2005-07-19 | 2005-06-19 | 2005-05-19 | 2005-04-19 | 2005-03-19 | 2005-02-19 | 2005-01-19 | 2004-12-19 | 2004-11-19 | 2004-10-19 | 2004-09-19 | 2004-08-19 | 2004-07-19 | 2004-06-19 | 2004-05-19 | 2004-04-19 | 2004-03-19 | 2004-02-19 | 2004-01-19 | 2003-12-19 | 2003-11-19 | 2003-10-19 | 2003-09-19 | 2003-08-19 | 2003-07-19 | 2003-06-19 | 2003-05-19 | 2003-04-19 | 2003-03-19 | 2003-02-19 | 2003-01-19 | 2002-12-19 | 2002-11-19 | 2002-10-19 | 2002-09-19 | 2002-08-19 | 2002-07-19 | 2002-06-19 | 2002-05-19 | 2002-04-19 | 2002-03-19 | 2002-02-19 | 2002-01-19 | 2001-12-19 | 2001-11-19 | 2001-10-19 | 2001-09-19 | 2001-08-19 | 2001-07-19 | 2001-06-19 | 2001-05-19 | 2001-04-19 | 2001-03-19 | 2001-02-19 | 2001-01-19 | 2000-12-19 | 2000-11-19 | 2000-10-19 | 2000-09-19 | 2000-08-19 | 2000-07-19 | 2000-06-19 | 2000-05-19 | 2000-04-19 | 2000-03-19 | 2000-02-19 | 2000-01-19 | 1999-12-19

Key: Value:

Key: Value:

MESSAGE
DATE 2021-07-28
FROM From: "Donald Robertson, III, FSF"
SUBJECT Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] FSF-funded call for white papers on philosophical
From hangout-bounces-at-nylxs.com Thu Jul 29 05:38:06 2021
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com
Delivered-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (www2.mrbrklyn.com [96.57.23.82])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73295163F9E;
Thu, 29 Jul 2021 05:38:01 -0400 (EDT)
X-Original-To: hangout-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com
Delivered-To: hangout-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com
Received: by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 20DBA163F91; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 05:37:56 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-From: Ruben Safir
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 05:37:56 -0400
Resent-Message-ID: <20210729093756.GA17962-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com>
Resent-To: hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com
X-Original-To: ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com
Delivered-To: ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com
Received: from mailout0p.fsf.org (mailout0p.fsf.org [209.51.188.184])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10A46163F60
for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 18:59:58 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fsf.org;
s=mailout0p-fsf-org; h=Date:To:Subject:From:MIME-Version:in-reply-to:
references; bh=iSm7uJBLfCR0UC5rYk5BdcPcJc3Yn3t0CEUh9PHw63A=; b=lNfe6whEtPqSaX
mE23oWh0ON5Uhe2s9HOAaLWvY+qHDwFfKdPUDvEDF/2ZN4j3AkgXzdR2iaV9D9JMFn7NT3kueoYJq
sFGJJk6TTNRWvm/rgqstihaUljCu6BH9AFjZ8NWxOrgn3MlvstW64ZXobOPP+l/BfnPTNS6cYxiIL
DC3YjcTycvdvrVDCHwO5OxoD2sHlbfEBrJ3cDnRfgbSrHRIh1lljZ1IHj+wDfUJIy7Ge9Z41ol0Ju
FXoUMWfQZzOFnmIFAsuvotfbNhNmHFO4iL4EjSRQsKxyus5iwgTjU8jyq3PMPPZSFKfB+zwkBJRVl
XMbGIIHVEynJLzhpnHSw==;
Received: from crmserver2p.fsf.org ([2001:470:142:5::223]:48458)
by mailout0p.fsf.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from )
id 1m8sWr-0007r7-4j
for ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 18:59:58 -0400
Received: from localhost ([::1]:35850 helo=my.fsf.org)
by crmserver2p.fsf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from )
id 1m8sWq-0006pH-Sm
for ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 18:59:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Donald Robertson, III, FSF"
job_id: 163834
To: Ruben Safir
Precedence: bulk
X-CiviMail-Bounce: crmmailer+b.163834.68465778.ba96d150fa40630b-at-fsf.org
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 18:59:56 -0400
Message-Id:
Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] FSF-funded call for white papers on philosophical
and legal questions around Copilot
X-BeenThere: hangout-at-nylxs.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30rc1
List-Id: NYLXS Tech Talk and Politics
List-Unsubscribe: ,

List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,

Reply-To: "Donald Robertson, III, FSF"
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1128935344=="
Errors-To: hangout-bounces-at-nylxs.com
Sender: "Hangout"

--===============1128935344==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_b9005ea4ef704d1e47ce95e7ef021a6f"

--=_b9005ea4ef704d1e47ce95e7ef021a6f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

*Please consider adding to your address book, which will
ensure that our messages reach you and not your spam box.*

*Read and share online:
*


Dear Ruben Safir,

Microsoft's GitHub recently announced a new service known as Copilot.
This service uses machine learning to help suggest code snippets to
developers as they write software. GitHub trained this neural network
with the code hosted on GitHub; while the Free Software Foundation
(FSF) [urges free software developers not to host their code on
GitHub][1], many do, and even many who don't have their work mirrored
there by others.

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html#GitHub

We already know that Copilot as it stands is unacceptable and unjust,
from our perspective. It requires running software that is not
free/libre (Visual Studio, or parts of Visual Studio Code), and
Copilot is [Service as a Software Substitute][2]. These are settled
questions as far as we are concerned.

[2]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.en.html

However, Copilot raises many other questions which require deeper
examination.

The Free Software Foundation has received numerous inquiries about our
position on these questions. We can see that Copilot's use of freely
licensed software has many implications for an incredibly large
portion of the free software community. Developers want to know
whether training a neural network on their software can really be
considered fair use. Others who may be interested in using Copilot
wonder if the code snippets and other elements copied from
GitHub-hosted repositories could result in copyright infringement. And
even if everything might be legally copacetic, activists wonder if
there isn't something fundamentally unfair about a proprietary
software company building a service off their work.

With all these questions, many of them with legal implications that at
first glance may have not been previously tested in a court of law,
there aren't many simple answers. To get the answers the community
needs, and to identify the best opportunities for defending user
freedom in this space, the FSF is announcing a funded call for white
papers to address Copilot, copyright, machine learning, and free
software.

We will read the submitted white papers, and we will publish ones that
we think help elucidate the problem. We will provide a monetary reward
of $500 for the papers we publish.

We will also consider requests for funding to do further research
leading to a later paper.

# Areas of interest

While any topic related to Copilot's effect on free software may be in
scope, the following questions are of particular interest:

* Is Copilot's training on public repositories infringing copyright?
Is it fair use?

* How likely is the output of Copilot to generate actionable claims of
violations on GPL-licensed works?

* How can developers ensure that any code to which they hold the
copyright is protected against violations generated by Copilot?

* Is there a way for developers using Copilot to comply with free
software licenses like the GPL?

* If Copilot learns from AGPL-covered code, is Copilot infringing the
AGPL?

* If Copilot generates code which does give rise to a violation of a
free software licensed work, how can this violation be discovered by
the copyright holder on the underlying work?

* Is a trained artificial intelligence (AI) / machine learning (ML)
model resulting from machine learning a compiled version of the
training data, or is it something else, like source code that users
can modify by doing further training?

* Is the Copilot trained AI/ML model copyrighted? If so, who holds
that copyright?

* Should ethical advocacy organizations like the FSF argue for change
in copyright law relevant to these questions?

# Submission guidelines

**Submissions must be received by 10am Eastern Daylight Time (14:00 UTC)
on Monday, August 23, 2021 via email to .**

## General

* The paper should relate to one or more of the areas of interest as
outlined above.

* We prefer that papers have the community of the free software
movement as their target audience, but papers that are written for
legal professionals will be considered.

* We suggest that authors obtain feedback from others before
submitting the paper. While we may suggest or request changes after
our review, the paper should be ready to publish when submitted.

## Format

* The paper should be no longer than 3,000 words.

* The white paper itself should not include any information that
compromises the anonymity of the author(s), so it can be sent to the
reviewers.

* In addition to the anonymized white paper copy, attach a separate
document which includes:

* Name and email of the primary point of contact for the work;

* Any removed or anonymized material, which will not be sent to
the reviewers; and

* The names and affiliations of any co-authors.

* All documents should be submitted in an editable free format, such
as OpenDocument or plain text (not DOC or DOCX).

* We suggest that papers be written in English, but papers in other
languages can be considered.

* Material included from other people's works should be clearly marked
with appropriate citations.

# Review and notification

The FSF's committee will send notifications of acceptance, rejection,
questions, or possible revision requests, via email to the primary
point of contact by Monday, September 20th, 2021.

## Publication

If your submission is selected for publication, we will contact you
about choosing a license for the publication. We would expect to agree
on one or more from the following list:

* [Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal][3];

* [Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license][4];

* [Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 4.0 license][5]; and

* [Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 4.0 license][6].

We strongly prefer to publish the authors' names, but on the authors'
request we may agree to withhold their names.

[3]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#CC0
[4]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#ccby
[5]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#ccbysa
[6]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#ccbynd

# Questions and comments

For any questions about white paper submissions, or the review and
acceptance process, please contact .

Sincerely,

Donald Robertson, III
Licensing & Compliance Manager


--
* Follow us on Mastodon at , GNU social at
, Diaspora at ,
PeerTube at , and on Twitter at -at-fsf.
* Read about why we use Twitter, but only with caveats at .
* Subscribe to our RSS feeds at .
* Join us as an associate member at .
* Read our Privacy Policy at .

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

https://my.fsf.org/civicrm/mailing/unsubscribe?reset=1&jid=163834&qid=68465778&h=ba96d150fa40630b.

To stop all email from the Free Software Foundation, including Defective by Design,
and the Free Software Supporter newsletter, visit

https://my.fsf.org/civicrm/mailing/optout?reset=1&jid=163834&qid=68465778&h=ba96d150fa40630b.
--=_b9005ea4ef704d1e47ce95e7ef021a6f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

































Free Software Foundation







Please consider adding info@fsf.org to your address book, which will
ensure that our messages reach you and not your spam box.



Read and share online:
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/fsf-funded-call-for-white-papers-on-philosophical-and-legal-questions-around-copilot





Dear Ruben Safir,





Microsoft's GitHub recently announced a new service known as Copilot.
This service uses machine learning to help suggest code snippets to
developers as they write software. GitHub trained this neural network
with the code hosted on GitHub; while the Free Software Foundation
(FSF) urges free software developers not to host their code on
GitHub
, many do, and even many who don't have their work mirrored
there by others.



We already know that Copilot as it stands is unacceptable and unjust,
from our perspective. It requires running software that is not
free/libre (Visual Studio, or parts of Visual Studio Code), and
Copilot is Service as a Software Substitute. These are settled
questions as far as we are concerned.



However, Copilot raises many other questions which require deeper
examination.



The Free Software Foundation has received numerous inquiries about our
position on these questions. We can see that Copilot's use of freely
licensed software has many implications for an incredibly large
portion of the free software community. Developers want to know
whether training a neural network on their software can really be
considered fair use. Others who may be interested in using Copilot
wonder if the code snippets and other elements copied from
GitHub-hosted repositories could result in copyright infringement. And
even if everything might be legally copacetic, activists wonder if
there isn't something fundamentally unfair about a proprietary
software company building a service off their work.



With all these questions, many of them with legal implications that at
first glance may have not been previously tested in a court of law,
there aren't many simple answers. To get the answers the community
needs, and to identify the best opportunities for defending user
freedom in this space, the FSF is announcing a funded call for white
papers to address Copilot, copyright, machine learning, and free
software.



We will read the submitted white papers, and we will publish ones that
we think help elucidate the problem. We will provide a monetary reward
of $500 for the papers we publish.



We will also consider requests for funding to do further research
leading to a later paper.



Areas of interest



While any topic related to Copilot's effect on free software may be in
scope, the following questions are of particular interest:




  • Is Copilot's training on public repositories infringing copyright?
    Is it fair use?


  • How likely is the output of Copilot to generate actionable claims of
    violations on GPL-licensed works?


  • How can developers ensure that any code to which they hold the
    copyright is protected against violations generated by Copilot?


  • Is there a way for developers using Copilot to comply with free
    software licenses like the GPL?


  • If Copilot learns from AGPL-covered code, is Copilot infringing the
    AGPL?


  • If Copilot generates code which does give rise to a violation of a
    free software licensed work, how can this violation be discovered by
    the copyright holder on the underlying work?


  • Is a trained artificial intelligence (AI) / machine learning (ML)
    model resulting from machine learning a compiled version of the
    training data, or is it something else, like source code that users
    can modify by doing further training?


  • Is the Copilot trained AI/ML model copyrighted? If so, who holds
    that copyright?


  • Should ethical advocacy organizations like the FSF argue for change
    in copyright law relevant to these questions?





Submission guidelines



Submissions must be received by 10am Eastern Daylight Time (14:00 UTC)
on Monday, August 23, 2021 via email to licensing@fsf.org.



General




  • The paper should relate to one or more of the areas of interest as
    outlined above.


  • We prefer that papers have the community of the free software
    movement as their target audience, but papers that are written for
    legal professionals will be considered.


  • We suggest that authors obtain feedback from others before
    submitting the paper. While we may suggest or request changes after
    our review, the paper should be ready to publish when submitted.





Format




  • The paper should be no longer than 3,000 words.


  • The white paper itself should not include any information that
    compromises the anonymity of the author(s), so it can be sent to the
    reviewers.


  • In addition to the anonymized white paper copy, attach a separate
    document which includes:




    • Name and email of the primary point of contact for the work;


    • Any removed or anonymized material, which will not be sent to
      the reviewers; and


    • The names and affiliations of any co-authors.




  • All documents should be submitted in an editable free format, such
    as OpenDocument or plain text (not DOC or DOCX).


  • We suggest that papers be written in English, but papers in other
    languages can be considered.


  • Material included from other people's works should be clearly marked
    with appropriate citations.





Review and notification



The FSF's committee will send notifications of acceptance, rejection,
questions, or possible revision requests, via email to the primary
point of contact by Monday, September 20th, 2021.



Publication



If your submission is selected for publication, we will contact you
about choosing a license for the publication. We would expect to agree
on one or more from the following list:






We strongly prefer to publish the authors' names, but on the authors'
request we may agree to withhold their names.



Questions and comments



For any questions about white paper submissions, or the review and
acceptance process, please contact licensing@fsf.org.



Sincerely,



Donald Robertson, III

Licensing & Compliance Manager



Image Copyright © 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc., licensed under
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.







--=_b9005ea4ef704d1e47ce95e7ef021a6f--

--===============1128935344==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout

--===============1128935344==--

--===============1128935344==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_b9005ea4ef704d1e47ce95e7ef021a6f"

--=_b9005ea4ef704d1e47ce95e7ef021a6f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

*Please consider adding to your address book, which will
ensure that our messages reach you and not your spam box.*

*Read and share online:
*


Dear Ruben Safir,

Microsoft's GitHub recently announced a new service known as Copilot.
This service uses machine learning to help suggest code snippets to
developers as they write software. GitHub trained this neural network
with the code hosted on GitHub; while the Free Software Foundation
(FSF) [urges free software developers not to host their code on
GitHub][1], many do, and even many who don't have their work mirrored
there by others.

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html#GitHub

We already know that Copilot as it stands is unacceptable and unjust,
from our perspective. It requires running software that is not
free/libre (Visual Studio, or parts of Visual Studio Code), and
Copilot is [Service as a Software Substitute][2]. These are settled
questions as far as we are concerned.

[2]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.en.html

However, Copilot raises many other questions which require deeper
examination.

The Free Software Foundation has received numerous inquiries about our
position on these questions. We can see that Copilot's use of freely
licensed software has many implications for an incredibly large
portion of the free software community. Developers want to know
whether training a neural network on their software can really be
considered fair use. Others who may be interested in using Copilot
wonder if the code snippets and other elements copied from
GitHub-hosted repositories could result in copyright infringement. And
even if everything might be legally copacetic, activists wonder if
there isn't something fundamentally unfair about a proprietary
software company building a service off their work.

With all these questions, many of them with legal implications that at
first glance may have not been previously tested in a court of law,
there aren't many simple answers. To get the answers the community
needs, and to identify the best opportunities for defending user
freedom in this space, the FSF is announcing a funded call for white
papers to address Copilot, copyright, machine learning, and free
software.

We will read the submitted white papers, and we will publish ones that
we think help elucidate the problem. We will provide a monetary reward
of $500 for the papers we publish.

We will also consider requests for funding to do further research
leading to a later paper.

# Areas of interest

While any topic related to Copilot's effect on free software may be in
scope, the following questions are of particular interest:

* Is Copilot's training on public repositories infringing copyright?
Is it fair use?

* How likely is the output of Copilot to generate actionable claims of
violations on GPL-licensed works?

* How can developers ensure that any code to which they hold the
copyright is protected against violations generated by Copilot?

* Is there a way for developers using Copilot to comply with free
software licenses like the GPL?

* If Copilot learns from AGPL-covered code, is Copilot infringing the
AGPL?

* If Copilot generates code which does give rise to a violation of a
free software licensed work, how can this violation be discovered by
the copyright holder on the underlying work?

* Is a trained artificial intelligence (AI) / machine learning (ML)
model resulting from machine learning a compiled version of the
training data, or is it something else, like source code that users
can modify by doing further training?

* Is the Copilot trained AI/ML model copyrighted? If so, who holds
that copyright?

* Should ethical advocacy organizations like the FSF argue for change
in copyright law relevant to these questions?

# Submission guidelines

**Submissions must be received by 10am Eastern Daylight Time (14:00 UTC)
on Monday, August 23, 2021 via email to .**

## General

* The paper should relate to one or more of the areas of interest as
outlined above.

* We prefer that papers have the community of the free software
movement as their target audience, but papers that are written for
legal professionals will be considered.

* We suggest that authors obtain feedback from others before
submitting the paper. While we may suggest or request changes after
our review, the paper should be ready to publish when submitted.

## Format

* The paper should be no longer than 3,000 words.

* The white paper itself should not include any information that
compromises the anonymity of the author(s), so it can be sent to the
reviewers.

* In addition to the anonymized white paper copy, attach a separate
document which includes:

* Name and email of the primary point of contact for the work;

* Any removed or anonymized material, which will not be sent to
the reviewers; and

* The names and affiliations of any co-authors.

* All documents should be submitted in an editable free format, such
as OpenDocument or plain text (not DOC or DOCX).

* We suggest that papers be written in English, but papers in other
languages can be considered.

* Material included from other people's works should be clearly marked
with appropriate citations.

# Review and notification

The FSF's committee will send notifications of acceptance, rejection,
questions, or possible revision requests, via email to the primary
point of contact by Monday, September 20th, 2021.

## Publication

If your submission is selected for publication, we will contact you
about choosing a license for the publication. We would expect to agree
on one or more from the following list:

* [Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal][3];

* [Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license][4];

* [Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 4.0 license][5]; and

* [Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 4.0 license][6].

We strongly prefer to publish the authors' names, but on the authors'
request we may agree to withhold their names.

[3]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#CC0
[4]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#ccby
[5]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#ccbysa
[6]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#ccbynd

# Questions and comments

For any questions about white paper submissions, or the review and
acceptance process, please contact .

Sincerely,

Donald Robertson, III
Licensing & Compliance Manager


--
* Follow us on Mastodon at , GNU social at
, Diaspora at ,
PeerTube at , and on Twitter at -at-fsf.
* Read about why we use Twitter, but only with caveats at .
* Subscribe to our RSS feeds at .
* Join us as an associate member at .
* Read our Privacy Policy at .

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

https://my.fsf.org/civicrm/mailing/unsubscribe?reset=1&jid=163834&qid=68465778&h=ba96d150fa40630b.

To stop all email from the Free Software Foundation, including Defective by Design,
and the Free Software Supporter newsletter, visit

https://my.fsf.org/civicrm/mailing/optout?reset=1&jid=163834&qid=68465778&h=ba96d150fa40630b.
--=_b9005ea4ef704d1e47ce95e7ef021a6f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

































Free Software Foundation







Please consider adding info@fsf.org to your address book, which will
ensure that our messages reach you and not your spam box.



Read and share online:
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/fsf-funded-call-for-white-papers-on-philosophical-and-legal-questions-around-copilot





Dear Ruben Safir,





Microsoft's GitHub recently announced a new service known as Copilot.
This service uses machine learning to help suggest code snippets to
developers as they write software. GitHub trained this neural network
with the code hosted on GitHub; while the Free Software Foundation
(FSF) urges free software developers not to host their code on
GitHub
, many do, and even many who don't have their work mirrored
there by others.



We already know that Copilot as it stands is unacceptable and unjust,
from our perspective. It requires running software that is not
free/libre (Visual Studio, or parts of Visual Studio Code), and
Copilot is Service as a Software Substitute. These are settled
questions as far as we are concerned.



However, Copilot raises many other questions which require deeper
examination.



The Free Software Foundation has received numerous inquiries about our
position on these questions. We can see that Copilot's use of freely
licensed software has many implications for an incredibly large
portion of the free software community. Developers want to know
whether training a neural network on their software can really be
considered fair use. Others who may be interested in using Copilot
wonder if the code snippets and other elements copied from
GitHub-hosted repositories could result in copyright infringement. And
even if everything might be legally copacetic, activists wonder if
there isn't something fundamentally unfair about a proprietary
software company building a service off their work.



With all these questions, many of them with legal implications that at
first glance may have not been previously tested in a court of law,
there aren't many simple answers. To get the answers the community
needs, and to identify the best opportunities for defending user
freedom in this space, the FSF is announcing a funded call for white
papers to address Copilot, copyright, machine learning, and free
software.



We will read the submitted white papers, and we will publish ones that
we think help elucidate the problem. We will provide a monetary reward
of $500 for the papers we publish.



We will also consider requests for funding to do further research
leading to a later paper.



Areas of interest



While any topic related to Copilot's effect on free software may be in
scope, the following questions are of particular interest:




  • Is Copilot's training on public repositories infringing copyright?
    Is it fair use?


  • How likely is the output of Copilot to generate actionable claims of
    violations on GPL-licensed works?


  • How can developers ensure that any code to which they hold the
    copyright is protected against violations generated by Copilot?


  • Is there a way for developers using Copilot to comply with free
    software licenses like the GPL?


  • If Copilot learns from AGPL-covered code, is Copilot infringing the
    AGPL?


  • If Copilot generates code which does give rise to a violation of a
    free software licensed work, how can this violation be discovered by
    the copyright holder on the underlying work?


  • Is a trained artificial intelligence (AI) / machine learning (ML)
    model resulting from machine learning a compiled version of the
    training data, or is it something else, like source code that users
    can modify by doing further training?


  • Is the Copilot trained AI/ML model copyrighted? If so, who holds
    that copyright?


  • Should ethical advocacy organizations like the FSF argue for change
    in copyright law relevant to these questions?





Submission guidelines



Submissions must be received by 10am Eastern Daylight Time (14:00 UTC)
on Monday, August 23, 2021 via email to licensing@fsf.org.



General




  • The paper should relate to one or more of the areas of interest as
    outlined above.


  • We prefer that papers have the community of the free software
    movement as their target audience, but papers that are written for
    legal professionals will be considered.


  • We suggest that authors obtain feedback from others before
    submitting the paper. While we may suggest or request changes after
    our review, the paper should be ready to publish when submitted.





Format




  • The paper should be no longer than 3,000 words.


  • The white paper itself should not include any information that
    compromises the anonymity of the author(s), so it can be sent to the
    reviewers.


  • In addition to the anonymized white paper copy, attach a separate
    document which includes:




    • Name and email of the primary point of contact for the work;


    • Any removed or anonymized material, which will not be sent to
      the reviewers; and


    • The names and affiliations of any co-authors.




  • All documents should be submitted in an editable free format, such
    as OpenDocument or plain text (not DOC or DOCX).


  • We suggest that papers be written in English, but papers in other
    languages can be considered.


  • Material included from other people's works should be clearly marked
    with appropriate citations.





Review and notification



The FSF's committee will send notifications of acceptance, rejection,
questions, or possible revision requests, via email to the primary
point of contact by Monday, September 20th, 2021.



Publication



If your submission is selected for publication, we will contact you
about choosing a license for the publication. We would expect to agree
on one or more from the following list:






We strongly prefer to publish the authors' names, but on the authors'
request we may agree to withhold their names.



Questions and comments



For any questions about white paper submissions, or the review and
acceptance process, please contact licensing@fsf.org.



Sincerely,



Donald Robertson, III

Licensing & Compliance Manager



Image Copyright © 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc., licensed under
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.







--=_b9005ea4ef704d1e47ce95e7ef021a6f--

--===============1128935344==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout

--===============1128935344==--

  1. 2021-07-01 From: "Dana Morgenstein, FSF" <info-at-fsf.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Read and share articles from the Free Software
  2. 2021-07-01 From: "Free Software Foundation" <info-at-fsf.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Free Software Supporter Issue 159, July 2021
  3. 2021-07-02 Osvaldo Alonso <dndsvx-at-outlook.es> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS]
  4. 2021-07-02 Edgar_ <edgar-at-hagenbichler.at> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS]
  5. 2021-07-02 Osvaldo Alonso <dndsvx-at-outlook.es> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS]
  6. 2021-07-02 Edgar_ <edgar-at-hagenbichler.at> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS]
  7. 2021-07-04 Javier <je-vv-at-e.email> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] Pipewire without Pulse
  8. 2021-07-04 zap <zapper-at-dismail.de> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] Pipewire without Pulse
  9. 2021-07-04 Javier <je-vv-at-e.email> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] [ot] pipewire without pulse
  10. 2021-07-04 Ethan Masse <guitaristocrat-at-aol.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] elogind-openrc no longer provides
  11. 2021-07-04 Chris Cromer <cromer-at-artixlinux.org> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] [ot] pipewire without pulse
  12. 2021-07-04 Javier <je-vv-at-e.email> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] [ot] pipewire without pulse
  13. 2021-07-04 Chris Cromer <cromer-at-artixlinux.org> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] [ot] pipewire without pulse
  14. 2021-07-04 Javier <je-vv-at-e.email> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] [ot] pipewire without pulse
  15. 2021-07-04 Chris Cromer <cromer-at-artixlinux.org> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] elogind-openrc no longer
  16. 2021-07-05 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Linux Tablets
  17. 2021-07-05 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Bikes
  18. 2021-07-05 Tajwali Khan <tajwali-at-gmail.com> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Health] MyGNUHealth 1.0 ready to download
  19. 2021-07-06 Axel Braun <Axel.braun-at-gmx.de> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Health] Help for upgrade GnuHealth in
  20. 2021-07-06 Axel Braun <Axel.braun-at-gmx.de> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Health] MyGNUHealth 1.0 ready to download
  21. 2021-07-05 G?bor Szab? <gabor-at-szabgab.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Perlweekly] #519 - Crystal conference and course
  22. 2021-07-05 Michael Stevens <michael.stevens-at-dianomi.com.INVALID> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] New to Embperl. How do I work with a large
  23. 2021-07-05 Chuck Zumbrun <chuck.zumbrun-at-gmail.com> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] New to Embperl. How do I work with a large
  24. 2021-07-05 Chris Brown <cbrown-at-macquarietelecom.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] New to Embperl. How do I work with a large
  25. 2021-07-05 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] New to Embperl. How do I work with a large
  26. 2021-07-06 Ruben Safir <ruben.safir-at-my.liu.edu> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Join me this Thursday for Eleanor Roosevelt:
  27. 2021-07-06 Axel Braun <axel.braun-at-gmx.de> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Health] Help for upgrade GnuHealth in
  28. 2021-07-06 Tajwali Khan <tajwali-at-gmail.com> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Health] Help for upgrade GnuHealth in
  29. 2021-07-06 Tajwali Khan <tajwali-at-gmail.com> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Health] Help for upgrade GnuHealth in
  30. 2021-07-06 Tajwali Khan <tajwali-at-gmail.com> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Health] Help for upgrade GnuHealth in
  31. 2021-07-06 From: "Matt Lavallee, FSF" <info-at-fsf.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Hot new summer items from GNU Press!
  32. 2021-07-10 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Crazy Eddie and Small Business in NYC
  33. 2021-07-10 Alain Knaff <alain-at-knaff.lu> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] GNU mtools 4.0.32 released
  34. 2021-07-08 Joel Rees via gimp-user-list <gimp-user-list-at-gnome.org> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Wacom Intuos PTS
  35. 2021-07-08 Liam R E Quin <liam-at-holoweb.net> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Wacom Intuos PTS
  36. 2021-07-08 Ilya Novikov via gimp-user-list <gimp-user-list-at-gnome.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Fwd: Buttons are blurry
  37. 2021-07-11 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] COVID-19 Inflation is hear to stay...
  38. 2021-07-11 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Everything is secure.... not to worry...
  39. 2021-07-12 G?bor Szab? <gabor-at-szabgab.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Perlweekly] #520 - CPAN Bus Factor
  40. 2021-07-11 From: "New York Sun" <editor-at-nysun.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] The G-20 Shock
  41. 2021-07-12 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [ Docs ] COVID-19 Inflation is hear to stay...
  42. 2021-07-12 From: =?utf-8?Q?Zo=C3=AB_Kooyman=2C_FSF?= <info-at-fsf.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Push freedom even further at double the speed
  43. 2021-07-13 From: =?utf-8?Q?Zo=C3=AB_Kooyman=2C_FSF?= <info-at-fsf.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Step by step encryption with the updated Email
  44. 2021-07-13 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] not quite fished but....
  45. 2021-07-14 facebook <facebook-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Jerisalem
  46. 2021-07-15 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Black Lives matrer
  47. 2021-07-15 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] The MTA spent Billions of Dollars spent and they
  48. 2021-07-16 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] R and Statistics
  49. 2021-07-19 G?bor Szab? <gabor-at-szabgab.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Perlweekly] #521 - Floods in Perl
  50. 2021-07-18 Nick Clifton <nickc-at-redhat.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] GNU Binutils 2.37 has been released
  51. 2021-07-20 NYOUG <execdir-at-nyoug.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Upcoming Events for Oracle Professionals
  52. 2021-07-20 From: =?utf-8?Q?Zo=C3=AB_Kooyman=2C_FSF?= <info-at-fsf.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Freedom moving forward: An overview of the FSF's
  53. 2021-07-21 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Watershed moment on political use of law
  54. 2021-07-21 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Critical Race theory is RACISM
  55. 2021-07-21 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Linux Phones
  56. 2021-07-21 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Phone Choices are costs one can think of as
  57. 2021-07-21 Paula Koval via gimp-user-list <gimp-user-list-at-gnome.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] .webp images
  58. 2021-07-16 Cliff Pratt via gimp-user-list <gimp-user-list-at-gnome.org> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Recurring mouse problem in GIMP
  59. 2021-07-21 Ken Moffat via gimp-user-list <gimp-user-list-at-gnome.org> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] .webp images
  60. 2021-07-20 Jack Ogden <jack-at-striptwist.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Levels glitch
  61. 2021-07-20 Dilli via gimp-user-list <gimp-user-list-at-gnome.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] gimp 2.99
  62. 2021-07-16 Alexandre Prokoudine via gimp-user-list <gimp-user-list-at-gnome.org> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.18.0: Toolbox not present
  63. 2021-07-17 Liam R E Quin <liam-at-holoweb.net> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Recurring mouse problem in GIMP
  64. 2021-07-17 Michael Schumacher via gimp-user-list <gimp-user-list-at-gnome.org> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Recurring mouse problem in GIMP
  65. 2021-07-16 Techno <techno6-at-glib.com> Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Gimp-user] Recurring mouse problem in GIMP
  66. 2021-07-21 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Tic Tok artificial behavior intelligence...
  67. 2021-07-25 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Linux Penertration in the computing marketplace
  68. 2021-07-25 Luis Falcon <falcon-at-gnuhealth.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Release of MyGNUHealth 1.0.3
  69. 2021-07-26 G?bor Szab? <gabor-at-szabgab.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [Perlweekly] #522 - Promote Perl
  70. 2021-07-26 From: "[RSS/Feed] nixCraft: Linux Tips, Hacks, Tutorials, Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] nixCraft Linux / UNIX Newsletter
  71. 2021-07-26 Ruben Safir <ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Getting control of the Tech
  72. 2021-07-28 From: "Donald Robertson, III, FSF" <info-at-fsf.org> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] FSF-funded call for white papers on philosophical
  73. 2021-07-25 Javier <je-vv-at-e.email> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] poppler-qt6 and poppler
  74. 2021-07-29 Naomi Calabretta <tony0000.ac-at-gmail.com> Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] [artix-general] Community-made installation guide,

NYLXS are Do'ers and the first step of Doing is Joining! Join NYLXS and make a difference in your community today!