Fixed auto-detected typos

[gtsiam]

I discovered jj a few days ago, and it seems pretty neat!

While I familiarize myself with the codebase (there will be an actual PR at some point, I promise), here's a few typos typos was screaming at me for.

[google-cla]

Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information.

For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request.

[gtsiam]

Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, You hereby grant to Google and to recipients of software distributed by Google a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute Your Contributions and such derivative works.

WTF?

So I'm granting google specifically the right to do whatever the f**k it wants with my contributions irrespective of the project license now and forever? Uhh... No? I'd much rather start my own fork than this.

You're claiming that this is a community project, even though google is involved. That rings hollow if I have to sign this shit.

[arxanas]

See #4849 for additional discussion. (Please upvote/react if this blocks you, as it would probably be useful data to take to the Google lawyers at some point?)

I am not a lawyer, but I'm not sure that the specific text you're quoting is as unusual as you're remarking.

• Google probably wants the right to distribute the project code for fairly mundane reasons. As an example, GitHub includes similar terms here, although much more readable than the Google CLA. (I personally recall being shocked by seeing similar terms in the Facebook terms until somebody explained to me that they need the right to reproduce and redistribute my photos for free so that my friends can actually see them.)
• I'm not sure that the text actually grants Google rights regardless of the future license of the project (in that I think 'sublicense' doesn't let you change the license arbitrarily, only add restrictions, and you would expect a consumer to be able to use the original project code and license as an alternative), but I can't say authoritatively.
• There's commentary in the above discussion noting that copyright is still held by the original authors.

To me, it seems that the CLA is not practically that useful, and it certainly would be better for the project if we didn't have it, but it seems like it will be an uphill battle to remove it for now.

[gtsiam]

@arxanas Yeah, I just finished diving into the CLA. You (people at google) should really have a word with your legal department. IMHO this is all very unnecessary (See discord).

FYI, I ended up signing the CLA. Granting google an apache license plus a DCO seems reasonable.