hi everybody, On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Gervase Markham <[email protected]> wrote: > On 15/07/13 19:04, Bruno F. Souza wrote: >> So, basically, they are saying you can fork the repository, but you >> don't have any rights to "reproduce or create derivative works". >> Seems directly contradictory... > > It's not contradictory - normally, no license means no reproduction, but > if you are on Github, then you've given everyone that right (so, in a > sense, you do have a licence). > > However, it's not contradictory, but it is dumb - because what's the > point of being able to "view and fork" a repository if you don't have > the right to make derivative works? Or distribute them to others?
I don't think it is contradictory, nor dumb. I suspect it is part of the business model of github. "You can use our infrastructure, whatever you do is visible by anybody else, if you want to close it, you pay a fee". I think it is a smart way to try to convert others. This is also a great opportunity to show that Free and Open Source Software is not the same as "you posted your code somewhere where anybody can download it". But for persons who are not familiar with that subtle difference, they might think they can use it (at their own risk, of course). Having said that, what about the right for public study? Arguably one can make a copy for that purpose (in some jurisdictions, not necessary all). > > (Or it could be that that's not a full summary of what the Github > licence allows.) > > Gerv > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss -- --dmg --- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
