Commit snafu slapped an irrevocable Apache 2.0 license on confidential API Docs.

    • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
      3·
      5 months ago

      Have you heard the joke about the SEO manager who walks into a bar pub saloon watering hole place to meet friends great cocktails beer on tap?

  • TheButtonJustSpins@infosec.pubEnglish
    0·
    5 months ago

    I feel like intent should matter? And authority? You can’t just leak information and say it’s licensed now. The person who published it both didn’t intend to do it and didn’t have authority to release it.

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      1·
      5 months ago

      I mean, that makes sense, but consider the other side. You find some document that very clearly says that you have a license to do whatever the hell you want with it.

      In this particular case, you probably heard the news, but in many other cases, you just couldn’t trust any license anymore, because there’s just no way to know whether something was intended to be licensed like that. It would pretty much defeat the purpose of licensing anything at all.

    • tuckerm@supermeter.social
      1·
      5 months ago

      Bleh, I really hate to side with Google, especially when releasing this documentation benefits users and hiding it benefits Google.

      But it seems weird for this new license to be legally binding. If someone committed this to the wrong repo, and that person didn’t have legal authority over the original content, then how can they have legally relicensed it?