10

Let's say there is a MIT Licensed repository on github, then by definition all the files that belongs to the repository is owned by the copyright holder of the repository.

But if I fork the project and create some new files in the repository then who will be the owner of all the newly created files.

Does the newly created files will be owned by the original copyright holder(because he owns the whole repository), or the files that I created will be owned by me.

In case I will be the owner of all the files that I created, can I add a copyright notice at the top of each file containg my name in it?

Improve this question
3
  • 1
    "can I add a copyright notice at the top of each [forked] file...?" - Did you add your own creative works to those files? Simply clicking a button to copy or fork a file, does not add any creative work, so that action alone does not give you any copyright interest in those files. If you add your own creative work to one of those files, then the portions that you added are copyrighted to you.
    – Brandin
    Nov 18, 2020 at 14:42
  • 1
    @Brandin That wasn't the question. It was for the "case I will be the owner of all the files that I created".
    – glglgl
    Nov 19, 2020 at 15:39
  • c.f. ToS of GitHub, Section D, §6: "Contributions Under Repository License"
    – Polygnome
    Nov 19, 2020 at 20:30

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
28

Your question suggests that you regard copyrights as property rights. This is a completely understandable misconception - big content creators push this agenda quite hard - but it is a misconception. Copyright is instead a system of time-limited monopolies on certain acts which the law grants to copyright holders for the ultimate purpose of encouraging creativity.

When Alice creates content, she doesn't own it, but she has a copyright interest in that content; she is a rightsholder therein. It is appropriate, though not a requirement, that she alert the world to this interest with a (c) 2020 Alice-style declaration, preferably at the top of each constituent file. If she publishes it on GitHub, let's say under the MIT licence, she still has a copyright interest in every copy of that content that is made.

Generally, when you fork that repository and edit a file the result is a file in which two people now have a copyright interest - you and Alice. It is appropriate, though not a requirement, that you signal this interest to the world by inserting into the file a declaration such as (c) 2020 Vivek Singh, preferably up by Alice's declaration. Any new file you create which contains new code which is derived (in copyright terms) from the existing code (which is likely to be most of the new files you create) should have both copyright declarations at the top. Any new file which contains only new code with no copyright relationship to the existing code should have your copyright declaration at the top.

For those files which contain both your copyright declarations, both of you are rightsholders in the file, and the consent of both of you is required to do things with that file that are controlled by copyright (including but not limited to copying it and modifying it). Alice has indicated her consent by licensing the content to the world under the MIT licence; how you licence the modified version will indicate to the world what, if any, rights you grant it. You will also need to make a clear license declaration in files with only your declaration in, to clarify the same.

Improve this answer
23
  • 2
    Yes you can, that's what I said. As I also said, it's appropriate to do so; I'd add courteous, and maybe even advisable. It's just not a requirement, is all.
    – MadHatter ♦
    Nov 18, 2020 at 11:53
  • 1
    You have an interest in the executable which is compiled out of all those files, definitely. I'm less clear about the individual files; my feeling is that if you haven't done anything to any given file, there's no real reason for you to have acquired a rights interest therein. Why do you ask?
    – MadHatter ♦
    Nov 18, 2020 at 12:18
  • 1
    You put your name, assuming you're writing this code yourself, on your own time.
    – MadHatter ♦
    Nov 18, 2020 at 14:28
  • 6
    @DavidZ Defining ownership is a bit difficult with digital assets. In general though, Alice only owns the original copy of the content she creates, but still retains copyright on any copies of it that are produced even if ownership of those is transferred, unless she specifically waives or transfers copyright. Making an analogy with books, the author has a copyright on the text in the book, but does not own published copies of the book that other people have purchased.
    – Austin Hemmelgarn
    Nov 18, 2020 at 21:07
  • 2
    This does not even attempt to address the question actually asked, which is not about the copied files, or even copied and modified files, but rather about the newly created ones presumably containing the asker's authorship. Of course, that's not really an answerable question, because it depends if those files are intimately coupled to the originals enough to be considered a derivative work.
    – Chris Stratton
    Nov 20, 2020 at 0:06
1

Does the newly created files will be owned by the original copyright holder(because he owns the whole repository), or the files that I created will be owned by me.

Each author owns the copyright in each element of protectable expression that they authored, until or unless they assign that right to someone else.

In case I will be the owner of all the files that I created, can I add a copyright notice at the top of each file containg my name in it?

If a file contains significant protectable expression that you authored, it is entirely appropriate (though not required) for you to add a copyright notice informing the world of this fact.

Improve this answer

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

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