4 ms·

Isn't that against Github rules? And doesn't that mean the 150 forks (republishings) are in legal danger?

CodesInChaos 5y ago
There is no requirement for software on github to be open source. The github ToS just demand some basic rights needed for github to function (e.g. forking and downloading must be allowed)
ylyn 5y ago
> Isn't that against Github rules? No. There is no rule against proprietary code on GitHub. > And doesn't that mean the 150 forks (republishings) are in legal danger? No. If you actually read the INRIA license: > The License entitles you to use the Software to conduct research or education and to create Derivative Works solely for academic, non-commercial research endeavors of the Licensee (A "Derivative Work" is a work that is a modification of, enhancement to, derived from, or based upon the Software).
shakna 5y ago
No. GitHub's Terms of Service cover certain rights, allowing them to do certain things like fork, and view the code. But... The ToS do not suddenly give everyone the right to modify, publish, or reuse the code, however they wish. > Because you retain ownership of and responsibility for Your Content, we need you to grant us — and other GitHub Users — certain legal permissions, listed in Sections D.4 — D.7. These license grants apply to Your Content. If you upload Content that already comes with a license granting GitHub the permissions we need to run our Service, no additional license is required. You understand that you will not receive any payment for any of the rights granted in Sections D.4 — D.7. The licenses you grant to us will end when you remove Your Content from our servers, unless other Users have forked it. [0] [0] https://docs.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-terms-of-service#3-ownership-of-content-right-to-post-and-license-grants https://docs.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-terms-o...
WoodenChair 5y ago
> Isn't that against Github rules? And doesn't that mean the 150 forks (republishings) are in legal danger? It’s not against GitHub rules. Were you under the impression users could only host repositories on GitHub that have licenses that fulfill the open source definition? How did you get that misimpression?
- SonOfLilit 5y ago
  Not GP, put I was under this impression. I think I saw some instructions to that extent on the create-repo page in 2008 or 2009, which was changed at some point.
  - _ph_ 5y ago
    The free tier of GitHub used to require the repositories to be public. Some time back, they also added free private repositories. Commercial licenses always allowed public and private repositories. And of course, once you set a repository as public, then forking and downloading allowed. Because that is, what the public flag means. Now, once you try to use the downloaded code, the actual license terms apply. But that shouldn't concern GitHub.
aiisjustanif 5y ago
Not if the forks are for evaluation, research, educational and personal purposes.
junon 5y ago
No lol.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

There is no requirement for software on github to be open source. The github ToS just demand some basic rights needed for github to function (e.g. forking and downloading must be allowed)

ylyn 5y ago

> Isn't that against Github rules? No. There is no rule against proprietary code on GitHub. > And doesn't that mean the 150 forks (republishings) are in legal danger? No. If you actually read the INRIA license: > The License entitles you to use the Software to conduct research or education and to create Derivative Works solely for academic, non-commercial research endeavors of the Licensee (A "Derivative Work" is a work that is a modification of, enhancement to, derived from, or based upon the Software).

shakna 5y ago

No. GitHub's Terms of Service cover certain rights, allowing them to do certain things like fork, and view the code. But... The ToS do not suddenly give everyone the right to modify, publish, or reuse the code, however they wish. > Because you retain ownership of and responsibility for Your Content, we need you to grant us — and other GitHub Users — certain legal permissions, listed in Sections D.4 — D.7. These license grants apply to Your Content. If you upload Content that already comes with a license granting GitHub the permissions we need to run our Service, no additional license is required. You understand that you will not receive any payment for any of the rights granted in Sections D.4 — D.7. The licenses you grant to us will end when you remove Your Content from our servers, unless other Users have forked it. [0] [0] https://docs.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-terms-of-service#3-ownership-of-content-right-to-post-and-license-grants https://docs.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-terms-o...

WoodenChair 5y ago

> Isn't that against Github rules? And doesn't that mean the 150 forks (republishings) are in legal danger? It’s not against GitHub rules. Were you under the impression users could only host repositories on GitHub that have licenses that fulfill the open source definition? How did you get that misimpression?

SonOfLilit 5y ago
Not GP, put I was under this impression. I think I saw some instructions to that extent on the create-repo page in 2008 or 2009, which was changed at some point.
- _ph_ 5y ago
  The free tier of GitHub used to require the repositories to be public. Some time back, they also added free private repositories. Commercial licenses always allowed public and private repositories. And of course, once you set a repository as public, then forking and downloading allowed. Because that is, what the public flag means. Now, once you try to use the downloaded code, the actual license terms apply. But that shouldn't concern GitHub.

aiisjustanif 5y ago

Not if the forks are for evaluation, research, educational and personal purposes.

junon 5y ago

No lol.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]