2 ms·
> We asked them 24 days ago to remove functionalclam[.]com on the original commit. / Their response seemed to indicate they would only take action if GitHub agr
by stordoff 9y ago
> We asked them 24 days ago to remove functionalclam[.]com on the original commit. / Their response seemed to indicate they would only take action if GitHub agreed.
That's your take on that interaction? To me, the commit comment reads as someone borderline impersonating GitHub. "has been reported to circumvent copyright access controls" - reported to whom, exactly? By linking to GitHub's policies, you suggest that it is GitHub, but A) according to your post did not report it until _after_ that comment, and B) a report to GitHub doesn't mean you can demand removal through alternative channels.
- carlosdp 9y agoThis comment should be higher, they literally tried to impersonate a Github "dmcahelper" bot. Far cry from "We asked them 24 days ago to remove functionalclam[.]com on the original commit."
- dreae 9y agoLet's not forget that the commentor is named 'dmcahelper' with a profile description which reads 'Help all parties understand and resolve DMCA issues efficiently and effectively to minimize file and repository impacts.' And as far as I can tell the account's only activity has been to comment on EasyList. Doesn't seem very borderline to me, looks like a blatant attempt to confuse the issue by pretending to be some sort of authority.