[Members] [board] Please review GitHub TOS
aroach at gmail.com
Fri Feb 22 20:40:30 UTC 2013
For what it's worth, and don't take this as the "board's review," but I don't see an issue with the GitHub TOS. I've copied the relevant section below related to copyright and IPR. Seems like they are explicit about *not* owing IP or copyright to that which is hosted on GitHub. Perhaps there's a nuance I'm missing, however. Given that we publish copyright ownership on our publications, forking should carry the copyright with it. Can someone fork from our XSF git repo today?
F. Copyright and Content Ownership
• We claim no intellectual property rights over the material you provide to the Service. Your profile and materials uploaded remain yours. 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.
• GitHub does not pre-screen Content, but GitHub and its designee have the right (but not the obligation) in their sole discretion to refuse or remove any Content that is available via the Service.
• You shall defend GitHub against any claim, demand, suit or proceeding made or brought against GitHub by a third party alleging that Your Content, or Your use of the Service in violation of this Agreement, infringes or misappropriates the intellectual property rights of a third party or violates applicable law, and shall indemnify GitHub for any damages finally awarded against, and for reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by, GitHub in connection with any such claim, demand, suit or proceeding; provided, that GitHub (a) promptly gives You written notice of the claim, demand, suit or proceeding; (b) gives You sole control of the defense and settlement of the claim, demand, suit or proceeding (provided that You may not settle any claim, demand, suit or proceeding unless the settlement unconditionally releases GitHub of all liability); and (c) provides to You all reasonable assistance, at Your expense.
On Feb 22, 2013, at 12:46 PM, bear <bear42 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On 2/22/13 12:37 PM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
> > On Feb 22, 2013, at 11:22 AM, bear <bear42 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> correct. I did bring up the possibility of accepting PRs from
> >> GitHub as something to explore an that is what Kurt is worried
> >> about.
> > I could even further just state that I'd like to see a bit of
> > board-level due diligence before we outsource our XEP repo to a 3rd
> > party... reviewing the terms of service would be part of that.
> > That's all I'm really asking for here.
> I assume everyone here is offering to help maintain our
> infrastructure. ;-)
> yep - its why I am asking these questions.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> bear at xmpp.org (email)
> bear42 at gmail.com (xmpp, email)
> bear at code-bear.com (xmpp, email)
> http://code-bear.com/bearlog (weblog)
> PGP Fingerprint = 9996 719F 973D B11B E111 D770 9331 E822 40B3 CD29
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Members