They would have avoided most of the complaints, but I'm sure their lawyers would never have approved such ToS. It would mean that github is responsible for ana

They would have avoided most of the complaints, but I'm sure their lawyers would never have approved such ToS. It would mean that github is responsible for analyzing each license and what features they can provide for code under each license, and take the risk of potentially defending their understanding of each license in court if other people disagree. It would also mean that if someone illegally changes the license file on someone else's project and then uploads it to github, then github is at risk instead of the uploader. A better solution would be to describe the features they provide for public repos in detail, and require uploaders to pledge that the license is sufficient to grant these rights, or that they grant the rights themselves.