If GitHub wants to implement DRM-like copy control, they should implement actual DRM-like copy control, and leave fork the heck alone. Part of the problem is t

If GitHub wants to implement DRM-like copy control, they should implement actual DRM-like copy control, and leave fork the heck alone. Part of the problem is that instead of being explicit about how things work they're being implicit. Instead of users being told a fork is not a, you know, fork they're lied to only to have the fork vanish later. Why is there no banner at the top of the repo warning you this is a fake repo? Why is there no ability for the original owner to delegate a full fork to the children? If this implemented this correctly you'd expect to have control over how it works (or turn it off).