13 ms·

This is hilarious, well done. I realized something while :+1:-ing your PR: I was thinking about how digg deleted my account over posting the AACS key, I really

This is hilarious, well done. I realized something while :+1:-ing your PR: I was thinking about how digg deleted my account over posting the AACS key, I really couldn't care less if Microsoft deleted my account over it. Very interesting considering that even just 2 years ago I never would have done this for fear of my account being deleted. All of my work and personal projects are moved to gitlab (the CI/Kubernetes/etc integration are just too good to pass up). I know a sample size of 1 has an effectively 100% error rate, but, I think Microsoft is losing mindshare with GitHub. Stuff like this doesn't help. I could see a small company like GitLab needing to toe the DMCA line, but, Microsoft has the deep pockets and could have built some major community will here by handling this better. Unfortunate that they didn't. Anyway, fun hack, I wonder how long it will last, or will they merge it? It must be the most approved PR in GitHub history at this point!

Stephen304 6y ago
Haha thanks, yeah I do wonder whether my account may be impacted. Best case they just delete the PR and garbage collect the repo. Worst case I get the final push to use gitlab.
jcranmer 6y ago
> I know a sample size of 1 has an effectively 100% error rate, but, I think Microsoft is losing mindshare with GitHub. Stuff like this doesn't help. I could see a small company like GitLab needing to toe the DMCA line, but, Microsoft has the deep pockets and could have built some major community will here by handling this better. Unfortunate that they didn't. If MS didn't comply with the DMCA takedown notice, then the RIAA could go to court and get an injunction to force it down. Depending on how spiteful the RIAA and the judge are feeling, the injunction could be worded to take down the entirety of GitHub over a single repository. And the impact of actions like these is to make it more likely that such an expansive injunction is sought or granted.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  RIAA taking down all of GitHub would instantly pit them against all of Microsoft, and make every developer who already hates their guts to pick up the pitchforks and march. They won't try doing it.
  - sieabahlpark 6y ago
    More like RIAA says to all their publishers "don't do business with Microsoft anymore"
  - jjeaff 6y ago
    And as much as RIAA is mostly a slimey pit of lawyers, they would stand no chance again msft's goblin hoard of attorneys.
    - devwastaken 6y ago
      More attorneys does not convince judges more. The RIAA has some merit, therefore they can preliminary injunction github to remove the repo. If github doesn't comply then they receive sanctions. That's simply how it works.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - onli 6y ago
        The other commenters here have argued pretty convincingly that the RIAA has no merit at all. Microsoft should have done the same reading of the letter and determined that this is a hill they have to fight on, in order to operate Github effectively.
  - jcranmer 6y ago
    I doubt they'd fear the PR backlash. They didn't fear it before SOPA, and even when SOPA was defeated, it was largely because the backlash was driven by efforts by sites like Wikipedia, Facebook, and Google advertising counter-SOPA messaging, and that drives far more traffic than sites like GitHub.
- yoz-y 6y ago
  More importantly GitHub could lose the status of safe haven and could be held liable for all repositories.
- matkoniecz 6y ago
  What was submitted was not a DMCA notice, Microsoft was not legally obligated to comply with it. From what I know, DMCA notice requires the identification of claimed copyrighted content and this document does no such thing.
nimbius 6y ago
>I think Microsoft is losing mindshare with GitHub. You're not wrong. Sure, the cloudflare browser checks and antibot pages on gitlab are aggravating, but there are a litany of documented reasons people are walking away from Microsofts latest acquisition. maybe the biggest one is the ICE contract they ardently refused to back out of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub#Controversies Its also pretty obvious MS doesnt check any of these DMCA claims, and just rubber stamps the commits with an insulting and sterile "Process DMCA request" commit msg. gitea and github both host splendidly inside kubernetes or standalone.
- Meph504 6y ago
  Well I've been guessing that github was going to get killed off and rolled into of azure devops at some point. As for the ICE contract, do you have any idea how much money the U.S. government pays to microsoft, of course they aren't going to back out of a contract. if they did, you can bet an emergency board meeting would be held, and who ever made that call would be axed and the contract reinstated, the JEDI cloud storage contract alone is worth $1 billion a year. not to mentions the 25+ million plus OS lisc. and office 365 contracts, and the GCC contracts. It's very possible that microsoft as a corporation doesn't even deal with github DMCA until they become a PR issue like this one. Github processed DMCA noticed before they were acquired, and their staff likely still is. Not like that is a hot button issues to convert and integrate in the grand scheme of things. Just food for thought.
  - oaiey 6y ago
    I think you are right, except your first sentence. Azure DevOps will be the one which will be reoriented to GitHub, not the other way around. Azure Repos and Pipelines are basically duplication in GitHub world. But Azure DevOps issue tracker is superior to GitHubs (or GitLabs but not Jira).
    - Meph504 6y ago
      Actually I suppose Skype over lynx is a good example counter to my own point, who knows? Naming a brand after a concept is an asshole thing to do, sure it puts your product in the search results for anyone googling devops, but it makes looking for anything related to the product painful, so I'm all for another name change.
echelon 6y ago
Microsoft is losing the good will they've worked so hard to rebuild. Microsoft employees, managers, Satya: do you see what you're doing? I love the direction you've taken over the past five years, but bowing to the RIAA and attempting to disrupt an innocuous tool are horrible decisions. It's a chilling note, and everyone involved in tech can hear it. Are you telling us Github is not a safe place to develop software anymore? Because I'll believe it and go elsewhere. Siding with the RIAA and bringing engineers' Github accounts into compliance will tell us who your real customers and allies are. Don't side with regressive legal trolls that bring zero benefit to the world.
- Bjartr 6y ago
  IANAL, but as far as I recall, a site receiving a DMCA notice must immediately remove the stated content. The person who put the content up may then file a counter-notice, which, if uncontested may then be followed by reinstating the content. If contested, the process moves into the courtroom.
  - deelowe 6y ago
    Correct. A company cannot not comply with a dmca takedown. When the law was written, the supposed safeguard against copyright holders filing tons of frivolous claims is that a counter claim can be pretty serious. Of course history has shown that this didn't work out as planned.
    - TheDesolate0 6y ago
      They can not comply if they wish, M$ just doesn't wish it. Plus this is clearly out of scope.
    - bawolff 6y ago
      A company is under no obligation to comply with an invalid notice. Wikipedia ignores invalid DMCA requests all the time. It is risky though, as the company opens itself up to a lot of liability if its wrong.
riffraff 6y ago
why do you think this is MSFT's fault? Didn't github pre-acquisition always comply with DMCA takedown requests too? Also, why shouldn't they? This really doesn't seem like the hill they should choose to die on, if they decide to go against the government they would have far more interesting things to fight for. And this is one of the less defensible ones too, given they explicitly gave examples of infringing copyrights in the code. EDIT: ah, but this isn't a proper takedown notice, as per https://twitter.com/xor/status/1319755776043384838 https://twitter.com/xor/status/1319755776043384838

Stephen304 6y ago

Haha thanks, yeah I do wonder whether my account may be impacted. Best case they just delete the PR and garbage collect the repo. Worst case I get the final push to use gitlab.

jcranmer 6y ago

> I know a sample size of 1 has an effectively 100% error rate, but, I think Microsoft is losing mindshare with GitHub. Stuff like this doesn't help. I could see a small company like GitLab needing to toe the DMCA line, but, Microsoft has the deep pockets and could have built some major community will here by handling this better. Unfortunate that they didn't. If MS didn't comply with the DMCA takedown notice, then the RIAA could go to court and get an injunction to force it down. Depending on how spiteful the RIAA and the judge are feeling, the injunction could be worded to take down the entirety of GitHub over a single repository. And the impact of actions like these is to make it more likely that such an expansive injunction is sought or granted.

saagarjha 6y ago
RIAA taking down all of GitHub would instantly pit them against all of Microsoft, and make every developer who already hates their guts to pick up the pitchforks and march. They won't try doing it.
- sieabahlpark 6y ago
  More like RIAA says to all their publishers "don't do business with Microsoft anymore"
- jjeaff 6y ago
  And as much as RIAA is mostly a slimey pit of lawyers, they would stand no chance again msft's goblin hoard of attorneys.
  - devwastaken 6y ago
    More attorneys does not convince judges more. The RIAA has some merit, therefore they can preliminary injunction github to remove the repo. If github doesn't comply then they receive sanctions. That's simply how it works.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - onli 6y ago
      The other commenters here have argued pretty convincingly that the RIAA has no merit at all. Microsoft should have done the same reading of the letter and determined that this is a hill they have to fight on, in order to operate Github effectively.
- jcranmer 6y ago
  I doubt they'd fear the PR backlash. They didn't fear it before SOPA, and even when SOPA was defeated, it was largely because the backlash was driven by efforts by sites like Wikipedia, Facebook, and Google advertising counter-SOPA messaging, and that drives far more traffic than sites like GitHub.
yoz-y 6y ago
More importantly GitHub could lose the status of safe haven and could be held liable for all repositories.
matkoniecz 6y ago
What was submitted was not a DMCA notice, Microsoft was not legally obligated to comply with it. From what I know, DMCA notice requires the identification of claimed copyrighted content and this document does no such thing.

nimbius 6y ago

>I think Microsoft is losing mindshare with GitHub. You're not wrong. Sure, the cloudflare browser checks and antibot pages on gitlab are aggravating, but there are a litany of documented reasons people are walking away from Microsofts latest acquisition. maybe the biggest one is the ICE contract they ardently refused to back out of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub#Controversies Its also pretty obvious MS doesnt check any of these DMCA claims, and just rubber stamps the commits with an insulting and sterile "Process DMCA request" commit msg. gitea and github both host splendidly inside kubernetes or standalone.

Meph504 6y ago
Well I've been guessing that github was going to get killed off and rolled into of azure devops at some point. As for the ICE contract, do you have any idea how much money the U.S. government pays to microsoft, of course they aren't going to back out of a contract. if they did, you can bet an emergency board meeting would be held, and who ever made that call would be axed and the contract reinstated, the JEDI cloud storage contract alone is worth $1 billion a year. not to mentions the 25+ million plus OS lisc. and office 365 contracts, and the GCC contracts. It's very possible that microsoft as a corporation doesn't even deal with github DMCA until they become a PR issue like this one. Github processed DMCA noticed before they were acquired, and their staff likely still is. Not like that is a hot button issues to convert and integrate in the grand scheme of things. Just food for thought.
- oaiey 6y ago
  I think you are right, except your first sentence. Azure DevOps will be the one which will be reoriented to GitHub, not the other way around. Azure Repos and Pipelines are basically duplication in GitHub world. But Azure DevOps issue tracker is superior to GitHubs (or GitLabs but not Jira).
  - Meph504 6y ago
    Actually I suppose Skype over lynx is a good example counter to my own point, who knows? Naming a brand after a concept is an asshole thing to do, sure it puts your product in the search results for anyone googling devops, but it makes looking for anything related to the product painful, so I'm all for another name change.

echelon 6y ago

Microsoft is losing the good will they've worked so hard to rebuild. Microsoft employees, managers, Satya: do you see what you're doing? I love the direction you've taken over the past five years, but bowing to the RIAA and attempting to disrupt an innocuous tool are horrible decisions. It's a chilling note, and everyone involved in tech can hear it. Are you telling us Github is not a safe place to develop software anymore? Because I'll believe it and go elsewhere. Siding with the RIAA and bringing engineers' Github accounts into compliance will tell us who your real customers and allies are. Don't side with regressive legal trolls that bring zero benefit to the world.

Bjartr 6y ago
IANAL, but as far as I recall, a site receiving a DMCA notice must immediately remove the stated content. The person who put the content up may then file a counter-notice, which, if uncontested may then be followed by reinstating the content. If contested, the process moves into the courtroom.
- deelowe 6y ago
  Correct. A company cannot not comply with a dmca takedown. When the law was written, the supposed safeguard against copyright holders filing tons of frivolous claims is that a counter claim can be pretty serious. Of course history has shown that this didn't work out as planned.
  - TheDesolate0 6y ago
    They can not comply if they wish, M$ just doesn't wish it. Plus this is clearly out of scope.
  - bawolff 6y ago
    A company is under no obligation to comply with an invalid notice. Wikipedia ignores invalid DMCA requests all the time. It is risky though, as the company opens itself up to a lot of liability if its wrong.

riffraff 6y ago

why do you think this is MSFT's fault? Didn't github pre-acquisition always comply with DMCA takedown requests too? Also, why shouldn't they? This really doesn't seem like the hill they should choose to die on, if they decide to go against the government they would have far more interesting things to fight for. And this is one of the less defensible ones too, given they explicitly gave examples of infringing copyrights in the code. EDIT: ah, but this isn't a proper takedown notice, as per https://twitter.com/xor/status/1319755776043384838 https://twitter.com/xor/status/1319755776043384838