The ToS of GitHub state that it's not their property, they only claim the license for redistribution. If it would be their property, legal cases (e.g. DMCA) wou

The ToS of GitHub state that it's not their property, they only claim the license for redistribution. If it would be their property, legal cases (e.g. DMCA) would be against GitHub, not the owners of the repositories. So from their point of view they do not want to be legally responsible for the code they're hosting. So I'd argue that it wasn't GitHubs backyard. They might be the landlord but they can't take ownership of the things that you build in your (rented?) flat. Don't get me wrong, I also agree with you. For me this whole situation is kind of a paradox where there's no easy moral (or legal) answer on what to do, and on what society already has agreed upon.