4 ms·
While I’m not trying to lessen the implications of something like this, but didn’t we all agree to them being able to do this when we agreed to their TOS?
by carlgreene 5y ago
While I’m not trying to lessen the implications of something like this, but didn’t we all agree to them being able to do this when we agreed to their TOS?
- unanswered 5y agoYeah, but I don't think you're allowed to interrupt the circlejerk by pointing that out. Every piece of code pushed to GitHub comes with: an implied licence for GitHub and its users, which is an alternative to any explicit license in the code(!!!) and also a representation that you're authorized to grant such a license. Of course one imagines that in many cases uploaders are not actually authorized to grant such a license, such as if they're uploading something they themselves have received under GPL license, but IANAL.
- lucasyvas 5y agoI don't believe ToS are ever legally binding.
- MiddleEndian 5y agoLet's assume that is enforceable through the TOS (which I doubt), would that make hosting GPL'd code on Github a violation of the GPL? If programmer X releases GPL'd code on his website and programmer Y copies it to Github, then it could presumably be considered a bypass of the copyright.