If the model is being trained on the code and is not copying and pasting it or including it directly from the various repositories then I would think a blanket attribution that covers all material used to train the model, basically a giant list of all of the authors, added to the Copilot repo should cover the attribution requirement.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out, to my understanding, these language models are strictly statistical in nature so they aren't creating a database of code that they paste snippets from. They're looking at all the examples and encoding the statistical likelihood that one token follows another and are then just feeding in the pre-amble (the code you wrote) and generating the chain of tokens that most likely follows that. It seems like it would be the same process if a person were to read a lot of code, identify patterns e.g. an <a> tag has an href= attribute or other more complex configurations, and then writes code based on that understanding. If you can prove that is infringing then you could potentially prove that the act of reading other people's code and then writing your own based on what you have learnt is infringement even if it doesn't exactly match the code that other people have written! I hope this can be effectively explained in court.
The main sources of discomfort come from when Copilot really does copy-paste code blocks verbatim. It doesn't happen all the time, but there are still many examples like the following: https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194309
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out, to my understanding, these language models are strictly statistical in nature so they aren't creating a database of code that they paste snippets from. They're looking at all the examples and encoding the statistical likelihood that one token follows another and are then just feeding in the pre-amble (the code you wrote) and generating the chain of tokens that most likely follows that. It seems like it would be the same process if a person were to read a lot of code, identify patterns e.g. an <a> tag has an href= attribute or other more complex configurations, and then writes code based on that understanding. If you can prove that is infringing then you could potentially prove that the act of reading other people's code and then writing your own based on what you have learnt is infringement even if it doesn't exactly match the code that other people have written! I hope this can be effectively explained in court.