33

Sometimes a GitHub Gist contains carefully crafted code that seems to qualify for what the Apache License would call a "original work of authorship", but the as far as I can tell the author never selected or knowingly agreed upon a license.

Is there a default license for content on gists.github.com?

What I assume is that code published in this way is not considered to be a complete work but only an example and can therefore be copied and used with or without credit to the original author.

eradman
  • 439
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
    In addition to the duplicate question (what is the default license), you raise the issue of copyrightability. Many copyright systems require some degree of non-obviousness and creativity to be protected by copyright. But quantity is not the only mark of creativity: a short Haiku or Limerick poem, or a single-line APL program would certainly be protected, whereas 5MB of logfiles would be not. If in doubt, assume that a work (e.g. a non-trivial code snippet) is protected. Also note that merely crediting the author does not give you permission to use the creative work! – amon Nov 14 '15 at 09:41
  • Note also that in some jurisdictions, software programs are exempt from the copyrightability bar. I think it used to be this way in Germany, for example. – Jörg W Mittag Nov 14 '15 at 13:18
  • 49
    I don't agree this being marked as a duplicate as the question is specific to GitHub Gists. It could be that the Gists site has an implicit license definition for published code snippets similar to [StackOverflow implying the MIT License for code contributions](http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/271080/the-mit-license-clarity-on-using-code-on-stack-overflow-and-stack-exchange). – sschuberth Aug 08 '16 at 13:12
  • 6
    Github says [a Gist is a Git repository](https://help.github.com/articles/about-gists/), which means at least that everyone is [allowed to view and fork a public Gists](https://help.github.com/articles/licensing-a-repository/) according to GitHub's TOS. – kapex Feb 16 '17 at 15:09
  • 4
    Some people do this: https://gist.github.com/martinbuberl/c0de29e623a1e34d1cda7e817d18bafe – fodma1 Dec 27 '17 at 05:05
  • 1
    @kapex I'm not sure that would hold up in court. – Ryan Leach Oct 29 '18 at 23:39
  • 1
    @fodma1 it is easier to just write "Gists under MIT license" in your profile description like people write "Tweets CC BY" in there Twitter profile description. – baptx Sep 27 '19 at 15:40

0 Answers0