[Legal question] Theoretically, would the "entertainment only" purposes of copilot make it basically illegal to use in government/corporate settings? (mbin.potato-guy.space)

submitted 2 days ago by potatoguy@mbin.potato-guy.space to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Maybe it's a different contract for the corporate/gov setting, but if the clause is in there, this would it make it non compliant for real work, as basically the copilot contract goes against the normal contract made to purchase the Office suite and the contract intentions, as misleading contracts could be judicialized.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] disregardable@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

No, it's just a "don't sue us" clause. Doesn't even necessarily mean that they can't be sued, especially if Microsoft advertises this service to businesses or sells contracts for it for professional purposes.

this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2026

16 points (94.4% liked)

Asklemmy

54091 readers

197 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago

MODERATORS