Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> but the Arctic World Archive specifically...

...provides prime-rate marketing bullshit in its marketing materials

> Thus I think it's actually a Github's generic usage grant in the ToS

If you refer to Section D.4, then:

- Arctic Vault is not "for future generations", but for GitHub only, since that section doesn't permit GitHum to just make copies willy-nilly for anything other than "as necessary to provide the Service, including improving the Service over time" and "make backups"

- This specifically makes GitHub "the owner" of that data, and not "some third-party" as you originally suggested




If you insist the term "owner" for copyright grants, you have a faulty understanding of copyright. The terms of service, much like software license, only allows for the licensee to do some specific things (in this case, including backups) under certain circumstances agreed upon in advance. Copyright assignment, which is akin to the ownership transfer, is much harder.

> This specifically makes GitHub "the owner" of that data, and not "some third-party" as you originally suggested

This one is my fault though, I've used the "Arctic Vault" as an archival site, but as I later realized it is a Github's archive stored in the Arctic World Archive. So yeah, it's (only) Github that can retrieve the data.


So this basically brings us into agreement :)

This is a commercial for-profit company, GitHub, taking some code and storing it in cold storage of some other commercial for-profit company, with no one, except these two parties have access to this code. And it doesn't look like GitHub even has the right to do it because it stores it for some purpose other than whatever is stated in their ToS.

I wonder if the whole kerfuffle around Copilot will end up spilling some light on this, too.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: