A judge has dismissed a lawsuit which claimed GitHub's AI code assistant infringed the copyright of user content used to train it.
The suit was filed by Matthew Butterick, a lawyer and open-source programmer, in conjunction with Joseph Saveri Law Firm [which claimed] "Despite Microsoft's protestations to the contrary, it does not have the right to treat source code offered under an open-source license as if it were in the public domain." …
In a decision first announced on June 24, but only unsealed and made public on July 5, California Northern District judge Jon S. Tigar wrote that "In sum, plaintiff's claims do not support the remedy they seek. Plaintiffs have failed to establish, as a matter of law, that restitution for any unjust enrichment is available as a measure of plaintiffs' damages for their breach of contract claims."
Judge Tigar went on to state that "court dismisses plaintiffs' section 1202(b) claim, this time with prejudice. The Court declines to dismiss plaintiffs' claim for breach of contract of open-source license violations against all defendants. Finally, the court dismisses plaintiffs' request for monetary relief in the form of unjust enrichment, as well as plaintiffs' request for punitive damages."
I remember finding one of these lawsuits well-intentioned but alarming, in the sense that it didn't seem to grasp the tech and seemed vaguely inclusive of human- as well as machine-learning.
