So why is he complaining about copilot and not the thousands of GitHub repositories redistributing his code with improper license? Typing the little code snippet he showed into copilot is analogous to typing it into the GH search bar and grabbing a properly-licensed result.

> It's not "cherry-picking" to report a crime being committed on your front lawn.

And as soon as he sees someone actually take the chair from his front lawn he can report it as a crime. He cannot report the people walking past because they could potentially steal his chair.

One could even argue that if he didn’t want his chair taken, maybe he should have locked it in his shed.

Of course, these chairs duplicate, so it’s not as if he loses his own chair.

Redistribution of that code, absent its license, is a violation of the license. That's already happened.

I'm done with this thread.

No, it is not.

For it to be a violation you have to lose a court case. To lose a court case a court has to find against your fair-use defense.

A fair use defense is fact specific to the parties involved. What's fair for you might not be fair for me.

Only a court can determine fair use.

Sure, duh, this discussion does not constitute a legal ruling. Nobody here is a lawyer nor a judge presiding over the case. We're potential subjects of a class action suit discussing grievances and merits of the case.