They wouldn't be transferring control of IP. The original author or their estate maintain ownership of the copyright. They would just be transferring control of the GH account.
The only potential problem is if the account has any private repositories, but GH could archive and/or delete those beforehand.
Yes, but the property here is control over the legal rights of the code, not the Github account.
Having copyright over the code means being able to provide copies under a license of their choice. They still wouldn't be able to do that: relicensing the code would be illegal. They could only use it under the same license they already had.
The Github account is not IP, it's just a property of Github's system, and it belongs to them (GH), not to the copyright holder.
Comments
They wouldn't be transferring control of IP. The original author or their estate maintain ownership of the copyright. They would just be transferring control of the GH account.
The only potential problem is if the account has any private repositories, but GH could archive and/or delete those beforehand.
What is this if not IP? The right to exercise control over an asset is common for normal property at least.
Yes, but the property here is control over the legal rights of the code, not the Github account.
Having copyright over the code means being able to provide copies under a license of their choice. They still wouldn't be able to do that: relicensing the code would be illegal. They could only use it under the same license they already had.
The Github account is not IP, it's just a property of Github's system, and it belongs to them (GH), not to the copyright holder.