clarification about the GitHub legalese:

My point is not "do not use github" but "github is not a singularity, no 
exception to the fact that they might close or suddenly turn into a bad actor".

I personally don't believe that this is the point yet nor that their ToS change 
was made with bad intentions.
My current view agrees with this HN comment:

Basically, GitHub moves the legal responsibility from itself to the uploader.
There is no clear incompatibility with FOSS-licenses at the moment.
But such incompatibilities are not ruled out completely or for future GitHub 
service changes.
A minority (afaik) weights the risks so high that they chose not to use GitHub 

Me personally, I find it very bad how they introduced this ToS-change, and 
secondly why should the move the legal risks to mostly private persons and 
non-profit FOSS-projects?
Why don't they keep the legal risk on GitHub, when they have the money and 
lawyers to check, and secondly when that legal risk is probably only arising 
when they would introduce bigger changes in how GitHub services work?
That would be a service for the FOSS-people, not just great technical 
infrastructure but also legal protection from risks that solely come from how 
GitHub behaves.


Reply via email to