Since Git is licensed under GPLv2, and, to my understanding, GitHub interacts with Git, shouldn't the whole GitHub codebase be open-sourced in a GPL-compatible license?

share|improve this question
9  
Can you please point to the specific paragraph in the GPL which talks about interacting? Hint: there isn't one. – Jörg W Mittag 10 hours ago
2  
@JörgWMittag: confusion to someone who isn't well versed in the subject over whether network access constitutes 'releasing' or propagating isn't unreasonable. – whatsisname 10 hours ago
3  
Readers may also be interested to know there is also an opensource.stackexchange.com. I am not stating an opinion about whether this question is better suited to that site or this, but it seemed worthwhile to bring it up. – kojiro 7 hours ago
    
It's simple: github are not handing you anyone's licensed work -- or rather, to whatever extent they do do that, they follow the license terms. Can you point to some work "fixed in a tangible medium" that they hand you that contains work they licensed from others under the GPL? – jthill 7 hours ago
    
@jthill: the OP is talking about the GitHub Inc's software itself, not the projects that they host. – whatsisname 4 hours ago

3 reasons why:

1) According to the terms of the GPL, people accessing GitHub via the web is not considered releasing (or propagating in GPLv3 terms), and so GitHub is not required to share their source code. If GitHub was to sell a version of their service (which they might do, I haven't bothered to look) where they send you their software and you run an instance of GitHub internally on your own network, then they might be required to also ship the source code, unless:

2) GitHub may very well be accessing the Git client through command-line invocations, in which case that is considered communicating "at arms-length", and thus does not make GitHub a derivative work and therefore not subject to the requirements of the GPL.

3) Additionally, GitHub may very well not even be using the Git software and has written their own core "git implementation" and has re-implemented its interfaces to maintain compatibility, in which case again the GPL's requirements would not come into play.

share|improve this answer
13  
Actually, AFAIK, GitHub has their own implementation of Git, so the license of Linus Torvald's implementation of Git is irrelevant anyway. – Jörg W Mittag 10 hours ago
1  
@JörgWMittag: I mentioned that in my answer. I edited the answer to make that reasoning it's own rather than part of reason 2. – whatsisname 10 hours ago
3  
@whatsisname you should probably mention the concept of "linking" explicitly and describe how it is relevant to GitHub using Git. – Snowman 8 hours ago
2  
Github does release their software. enterprise.github.com – Bryan Chen 6 hours ago

3) Additionally, GitHub may very well not even be using the Git software and has written their own core "git implementation" and has re-implemented its interfaces to maintain compatibility, in which case again the GPL's requirements would not come into play.

I think @whatsisname was right, because Github uses libgit2.

links: https://libgit2.github.com/
source: https://github.com/libgit2/libgit2

share|improve this answer

In addition to the other answers, I would add that the FSF's views on when two cooperating programs form a single work are quite vague:

Furthermore, these views have never been tested in court, except in Germany:

It's an ongoing case but so far the judge has opined that one of the key considerations listed by the FSF for determining whether two programs form a single work, namely, sharing the same address space, has no relevance to (German) copyright law. It should be noted that the FSF is not involved in the lawsuit but the litigating party has been advocating for the FSF view on aggregation/derivation.

So, for persons writing the next Github, I would say, don't assume you are on the wrong side of the law when the FSF says you are (and vice versa).

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.