What

And how do they know it’s violating copyright law?

And anybody could try to take down your repository by pointing to copyright law in general. Bad faith takedowns are not a new phenomenon.

Then why not say it’s not allowed to upload code you don’t have copyright to? This would make sense, nobody would question it and it would generally also cover AI-generated code.

Mentioning vibe coding just upgraded it into a social and moral topic, while the sole fact that AI generated code is no issue at all, just that there is not a general concensus in the world who holds the copyright to that code.

It’s kinda like blanked banning cooking, because you can’t cook without a knife, and knife can be used as a weapon.

It’s more like banning cooking anything with mushrooms in it, because we haven’t sorted out which mushrooms are poisonous or not. You could make it more accurate by instead banning cooking with anything poisonous, but of course then lots of people will keep cooking with their mushrooms, naively thinking they are not poisonous and therefore allowed.

It’s just a different analogy but the point is the same, why not ban poisonous ingredients? It implies poisonous mushrooms also, but doesn’t criminalize cooking.

The point is that cooking was never criminalised in my analogy, only cooking with mushrooms. I also already wrote why that might be preferable to making the ban on poisonous ingredients

Just one problem with that: Every piece of work - code or otherwise, made by a human or not - may violate copyright law. There really is no way to know without actually checking against all other works (which you can’t because you don’t have access to all of them).

What GitHub does is what a sane person would do: React to claims. They just assume that what they get uploaded isn’t violating copyright until someone claims otherwise. And as it is literally impossible to actually know, that is the only sane way to approach this problem apart from just not hosting other people’s stuff at all.