Hacker News Reader

Towards the end of the article he discusses how a project falls under copyright law if no license is provided. Furthermore, he points out that by making a project public it will fall under the hosting site's terms of service; in particular he notes that GitHub allows forking of public projects, which wouldn't normally be the case under default copyright.

View on HN

That still shouldn't give the forker any other permissions not already granted by copyright law.

Forking is copying, and by making a project public on a platform where the ToS mean that includes permitting forkng, there is a good argument that there us an implied-in-fact license; the question then becomes what the bound are of that license. One of the reasons you probably want an explicit license is to avoid that issue. There are lots of things you can do without an explicit license that can give rise to implied license.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com