software open-source-software is-x-legal
Is it legal for me to provide a download of an unchanged fork of an application that is on GitHub?
<p>I plan to write some tech blogs, where one of them showcases an application from GitHub without a license. Now I just forked it as a backup because I don't want my viewers can't find it someday if the original uploader deleted it.</p>
<p>Now instead of showing the original GitHub URL of the application, I put my fork URL, where I don't change any bit of it. Of cause I will cite the original URL as a backup link in my blog.</p>
<p>The question:  Is it legal that I use my forked URL inside my blog (and only use the original GitHub URL as backup)?
Since I don't have any right to the repo besides the right from GitHub of forking it.</p>
<p>PS: Now, I don't modify the repo itself <strong>at all</strong>. If any visitor from my blog click on GitHub to download. Any notice I need to share on my blog to protect myself?</p>

<p>There seems to be no controversy about whether you are allowed to make a copy of a publicly accessible GitHub repository by forking it.  As they agreed by accepting the GitHub terms of service and making their repository public, the repository owner grants that and a few other rights to all GitHub users.</p>
<p>The actual question seems to be whether you may then publish the URL of your fork.  Of course you may, to the same extent that you may publish anything else.  The URL is data, not a creative work, so copyright does not apply to it.  The considerations are the same as for publishing URL of the original repo.</p>
<p>There are things you might say <em>about</em> the URL or the repository it identifies that could get you into trouble, such as claiming rights you do not have, or misrepresenting the rights that others have or that you can grant to them.  Or publishing false and derogatory remarks about the code might conceivably land you in hot water.  But the URL itself is not an issue.</p>

<p>When you don't specify a licence, the author retains almost all of their rights:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>You're under no obligation to choose a license. However, without a
license, the default copyright laws apply, meaning that you retain all
rights to your source code and no one may reproduce, distribute, or
create derivative works from your work.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/customizing-your-repository/licensing-a-repository" rel="noreferrer">https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/customizing-your-repository/licensing-a-repository</a></p>
<p>However, by making a repository public, the author grants certain minimal rights under Github's ToS. These seem to line up with exactly what you are doing: making a public fork in case the original goes away, and sharing unmodified code on Github itself.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Note: If you publish your source code in a public repository on
GitHub, according to the Terms of Service, other users of GitHub.com
have the right to view and fork your repository.</p>
</blockquote>
