What I haven’t seen pointed out is that this is really Githubs problem. They shouldn’t automatically respond to DCMA. The process should really be passed on to the owner of the repo and make them liable. Basically, defaulting to rolling over to DMCA requests had led to an environment where there’s no way to fight them. Even if I hosted something like YouTube-dl myself, my internet provider could cut me off.
It’s the same issue with deplatforming people, do we want a world where literally you lose the ability to share knowledge others don’t agree with Or in this case, a tool that could be used maliciously
> Basically, defaulting to rolling over to DMCA requests had led to an environment where there’s no way to fight them
That's the DMCA works I thought? When the host receives the notice they have to take down the content then forward the notice to the user, who can then file a counter-claim and then the host restores the content (if they don't take it down they they're liable).
GitHub's DMCA policy[0] is very clear on how to reinstate content. It's not extremely difficult, but you do have to send GitHub a properly-formed counter notice, and you do have to be prepared that the sender of the original DMCA notice may sue you to prevent the content from being reinstated.
It’s the same issue with deplatforming people, do we want a world where literally you lose the ability to share knowledge others don’t agree with Or in this case, a tool that could be used maliciously