[Fedora-legal-list] New github TOS

Should Fedora Legal issue an opinion on this? This affects a lot of upstream projects used by Fedora. A number of people (not lawyers) have seen the new github Terms of Service as incompatible with GPL, CC-BY and other free/libre licenses - and therefore recommend removing all affected content immediately. Examples: Recommend removing content: https://www.mirbsd.org/permalinks/wlog-10_e20170301-tg.htm#e20170301-tg_w... http://joeyh.name/blog/entry/removing_everything_from_github/ New TOS are innocuous: https://www.earth.li/~noodles/blog/2017/03/github-tos-change.html My (IANAL) opinion so far (from #spf(a)irc.perl.org) : (01:48:09 PM) SDGathman: ScottK: My reading of the new TOS is that *IF* you don't bother to include an explicit LICENSE in a repo, it has an implicit BSD license. (01:48:53 PM) SDGathman: Maybe he is worried he might accidentally upload a repo with no LICENSE ? (01:50:57 PM) julian: I doubt that a git hoster's TOS can legally force any license on your code without you explicitly declaring it. (01:51:27 PM) julian: unless they, say, explicitly create a `LICENSE` file for you stating that license. (01:51:35 PM) julian: and you don't remove/replace it. (01:55:01 PM) SDGathman: Mainly, the TOS explicitly says that by uploading, you grant github the right to reproduce your content to provide their service, *and* grant other github users the right to "fork" the content. (01:55:33 PM) SDGathman: There is no implicit license to distribute beyond github. (01:56:11 PM) SDGathman: If you don't want people to fork your repo, maybe it shouldn't be on github? (Or you can buy their private commercial service.) (02:16:32 PM) lennyvaknine: or bitbucket :) (03:03:48 PM) ScottK: One of those posts (or one referenced) says bitbucket is similar. (03:04:25 PM) ScottK: sdgathman: OK. I didn't have a strong opinion, but wanted to make sure you were aware. (03:07:10 PM) SDGathman: The main takeaway is, just like github warns you, make sure your repo has a license before uploading. When you create a new repo on github, they have a menu of standard free/libre licenses to put in your empty project from the getgo. (03:07:52 PM) ScottK: And yet, so many don't have it. (03:09:15 PM) SDGathman: And in that case, the github TOS says it has an implicit BSD like license. (03:10:53 PM) SDGathman: Which isn't so bad - unless you are a commercial company and don't want a competitor grabbing your code just before the commit that added the LICENSE. (03:12:35 PM) SDGathman: I always start with GPL, and add PSF or other looser license later if needed. (03:13:13 PM) SDGathman: It took a while to cultivate that habit...