[leepowers]

It's possible the complaint is using a trivial example to illustrate the type of argument plaintiffs want to make during any trial. A 200-line example is too unwieldy for non-programmers to digest, especially given the formatting constraints of a legal brief.

Look at paragraphs 90 and 91 on page 27 of the complaint[1]:

"90. GitHub concedes that in ordinary use, Copilot will reproduce passages of code verbatim: “Our latest internal research shows that about 1% of the time, a suggestion [Output] may contain some code snippets longer than ~150 characters that matches” code from the training data. This standard is more limited than is necessary for copyright infringement. But even using GitHub’s own metric and the most conservative possible criteria, Copilot has violated the DMCA at least tens of thousands of times."

Does distributing licensed code without attribution on a mass scale count as fair use?

If Copilot is inadvertently providing a programmer with copyrighted code, is that programmer and/or their employer responsible for copyright infringement?

There's a lot of interesting legal complications I think the courts will want to adjudicate.

[1] https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/pdf/1-0-github_complaint...