well, is it legal to do a "clean-room" implementation from the descriptions in the papers themselves, without looking at any provided code?
(this should almost always be feasible, and is commonly done for non-IP-related reasons e.g. someone might make a PyTorch version of something when the original version was done in Tensorflow.)
i'm not a lawyer but I would have assumed "probably", unless there's a patent. i mean, if it's not this would suggest it's illegal to attempt to replicate scientific experiments.
also, in many cases even for the code provided by the researchers there is an actual LICENSE file included, and it's often BSD or MIT. (Which sort of makes sense -- these two permissive free software licenses are named after the universities they came from. they reflect the academic CS culture around stuff like this.)
(this should almost always be feasible, and is commonly done for non-IP-related reasons e.g. someone might make a PyTorch version of something when the original version was done in Tensorflow.)
i'm not a lawyer but I would have assumed "probably", unless there's a patent. i mean, if it's not this would suggest it's illegal to attempt to replicate scientific experiments.
also, in many cases even for the code provided by the researchers there is an actual LICENSE file included, and it's often BSD or MIT. (Which sort of makes sense -- these two permissive free software licenses are named after the universities they came from. they reflect the academic CS culture around stuff like this.)