Microsoft fixes VS Code after app gives Copilot credit for human's work

2026-05-04 · Source: The Register: Enterprise Technology News and Analysis · Field: Technology & Digital — Software Development & Engineering, Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning · Depth: Intermediate, short

Summary

Microsoft has reversed a change in VS Code's Git extension that automatically added "Co-authored-by: Copilot" to commit messages, following widespread developer complaints. Introduced in VS Code 1.110 in early March via a pull request, this feature was intended to attribute AI assistance, including inline completions. However, developers reported the AI authorship line appearing even when Copilot was not used or its chat features were disabled, and expressed strong dissatisfaction with the default opt-out setting. A developer noted that the co-author line was added post-review, altering the final Git history. Microsoft apologized, acknowledging the implementation should respect disabled AI features and not misreport authorship. A fix, authored on May 3, will appear in VS Code 1.119, changing the default to opt-in.

Key takeaway

For engineering leaders evaluating AI integration into development workflows, you should prioritize opt-in attribution mechanisms for AI-assisted code. Unilateral, default AI co-authorship can erode developer trust and introduce legal complexities regarding intellectual property and liability, especially given varying standards across AI tools and projects. Ensure your teams have clear policies and tools that allow explicit control over AI attribution.

Key insights

Default AI attribution in code commits sparked developer backlash and raised complex IP and liability questions.

Principles

• User consent for AI attribution is critical.
• Transparency in commit history is paramount.

In practice

• Review commit messages carefully before pushing.
• Configure AI tool attribution settings to opt-in.

Topics

• VS Code Git Extension
• GitHub Copilot Attribution
• AI Code Generation
• Developer Workflow
• Intellectual Property

Code references

• microsoft/vscode
• orgs/community
• anthropics/claude-code
• torvalds/linux

Best for: CTO, VP of Engineering/Data, Director of AI/ML, Software Engineer, AI Engineer, Legal Professional

Related on AIssential

• Who Owns the Code Claude Wrote? — AI-generated code ownership is legally complex, unsettled across human authorship, employer IP, and open-source license contamination.
• How to Use the CSC GitHub Template for AI-Assisted Software Development — The CSC GitHub Template offers a structured approach for AI-assisted software development, improving governance and human-AI collaboration.
• Microsoft caught sneaking "Co-Authored-by Copilot" into VS Code commits - even with AI off — Undisclosed AI attribution in code commits can lead to significant user distrust and policy conflicts.
• McClatchy runs AI slop with journalists’ names on it — McClatchy's AI content strategy, using journalists' names and violating union agreements, faces significant internal and external backlash.
• Anthropic Code Crisis Creates Copyright Contradiction — Anthropic's DMCA takedown for leaked code contradicts its prior legal arguments on fair use for AI training data.
• Can coding agents relicense open source through a “clean room” implementation of code? — AI-assisted code rewrites challenge traditional "clean room" definitions and open-source licensing compliance.

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by The Register: Enterprise Technology News and Analysis.