Also, I didn't disclaim any warranty (which is typically part of the license). Does that mean others can sue for damage? (In the BSD 2-clause license this looks like: "THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.")
Concerning the rights granted, the relevant section (D.5) of the GitHub ToS 1 reads:
- License Grant to Other Users
Any User-Generated Content you post publicly, including issues, comments, and contributions to other Users' repositories, may be viewed by others. By setting your repositories to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view and "fork" your repositories (this means that others may make their own copies of Content from your repositories in repositories they control).
If you set your pages and repositories to be viewed publicly, you grant each User of GitHub a nonexclusive, worldwide license to use, display, and perform Your Content through the GitHub Service and to reproduce Your Content solely on GitHub as permitted through GitHub's functionality (for example, through forking). You may grant further rights if you adopt a license. If you are uploading Content you did not create or own, you are responsible for ensuring that the Content you upload is licensed under terms that grant these permissions to other GitHub Users.
I'm pretty sure that means that the implicit license excludes the right to actually modify the code (that is not part of GitHub's functionality and thus cannot be done on GitHub). How does forking-only (which is at the end of the day only a copy) make sense? Why would they do it this way?
I'm in Germany if that matters.