4 ms·
You got me confused, your "You grant to Assembla a non-exclusive, royalty-free, paid-up right and license to use, reproduce, display and distribute such Conten
by Uchikoma 13y ago
You got me confused, your
"You grant to Assembla a non-exclusive, royalty-free, paid-up right and license to use, reproduce, display and distribute such Content on Assembla.com in connection Assembla's provision of the Services to such persons as you may authorize"
sounds much more like Atlassian,
"End User hereby grants Atlassian a non-exclusive license to copy, distribute, perform, display, store, modify, and otherwise use End User Data in connection with operating the Hosted Services."
not at all like the Github TOS.
- mpchlets 13y agoI think you are misunderstanding the wording: "as you may authorize" - that bit is about you making it public, and only about you making it public - nothing else. You authorize it to be made public, github says the same as "By setting your repositories to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view and fork your repositories" github is just not using lawyer speak, which is definitely cooler.
- Uchikoma 13y agoThe point of the post was, you give Atlassian a license, you don't give Github one. In this regard your TOS is the same as the Atlassian one.
- mpchlets 13y ago"However, by setting your pages to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view your Content. By setting your repositories to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view and fork your repositories." You are granting permission of ownership through forking to anyone - including github.
- mpchlets 13y agoI am not even sure that Atlassian has a different TOS than Github nor Assembla. Atlassian is just ensuring with lawyer speak that they are able to do as they need to offer you the service that you signed up for.