>>>>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Mike Hommey wrote: >> "That means you're giving us the right to do things like reproduce >> your content [...]; modify it [...]"
> You're subtly omitting what the "modify it" applies to, though... > the text reads: "modify it (so our server can do things like parse > it into a search index)". The question is if the parenthesis restricts the modification right, or is merely an example. I see it as the latter. > Now, let's go back in time a few weeks, before that ToS existed. > What do you think github was doing with all the files there are in > github repositories, to have the search function working? Has > anything changed about that in the past 2 weeks? No. Two weeks ago they have not asked me to grant them rights that I don't have. And if they violated a file's license on their end then it was not my problem, but theirs. > Now, the question is: 2 weeks ago, was github legally allowed to do > it? Whoever wrote that ToS thinks that was a rather gray area that > needed clarification. > So, if the new ToS doesn't allow you to put something on github, ask > yourself this question: were you actually legally allowed to put it > on github in the first place? > (That said, I don't think parsing a document into a search index > falls into "changing it is not allowed", which applies to > distributing copies of the file ; although one could be anal about > it and say that formatting it in HTML is distributing a modified > copy) Right, these things most likely don't require a modification right. But then, why would they need clause D.4, in the first place?
