4 ms·
Bit confused. If I have code on GitHub with most restrictive licence possible (no commercial reuse, no derived works) then how did Githubs legal get comfortable
by monkeydust 5y ago
Bit confused. If I have code on GitHub with most restrictive licence possible (no commercial reuse, no derived works) then how did Githubs legal get comfortable with this approach? What am I missing ?
- Tenoke 5y agoThere's an assumption that public repos can be read by humans and machines both which hasn't been questioned legally.
- monkeydust 5y agoBut the repos are provided under licenced terms no which can vary depending on publishers choice? Put another way, is there a licence that would prohibit reuse in this manner ?
- Tenoke 5y agoYou can likely write/find one but if you don't want your code seen perhaps it'd be simpler to use a private repo.
- oauea 5y agoYou uploaded your code to their service and agreed to their TOS.
- mariusor 5y agoBy using github you have acceded to their terms of use[1]: > Short version: You own content you create, but you allow us certain rights to it, so that we can display and share the content you post. You still have control over your content, and responsibility for it, and the rights you grant us are limited to those we need to provide the service. We have the right to remove content or close Accounts if we need to. [1] https://docs.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-terms-of-service#d-user-generated-content https://docs.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-terms-o...