4 ms·

Wildly spitballing here: what if somebody took the entire repository and stuck it in a place or places that are secure from takedowns. What if, after that happe

Wildly spitballing here: what if somebody took the entire repository and stuck it in a place or places that are secure from takedowns. What if, after that happens, another person set up a public repo called, I dunno, ld-ebutuoy. This repo would contain no source code but would allow collaboration, PRs, issues, and so forth. Each time there's a push, only the changed files would appear in the repo. Both the private and public repos would be active simultaneously in order to do a build. In other words, your project would have two folders with git active, and the build would combine those folders as part of the CI/CD pipeline. Every now and then the process of taking all of the current master branch and moving it offline would happen again. In this way, you'd never have a public repo that would have anything more than a few files in it. In this scenario, the only things that are being hosted publicly are tiny bits of source code that are changed in order to keep the base updating. And even then, on a regular basis they would be deleted. tl;dr: simply because you have to take down a repo doesn't mean you have to take down a location for publicly developing F/OSS software. </speculation>

CameronNemo 6y ago
That is a lot of work considering that you can simply move the hosting to Europe (using cgit and a ML, or gitea, or self-hosted gitlab) and be immune from DMCA requests. Also probably a way to host a git repo over tor. But that would make life a bit harder for devs.
- dheera 6y ago
  Sure, not the EU. The EU will cooperate with the US if they want an extradition. In all seriousness, move it to Russia, China, or some other country that has better freedoms in this particular regard and won't take crap from the US about silly copyright concerns. Or put the source code on the blockchain and it will never be eraseable. Even better, build a decentralized Github that is actually based on a blockchain but allows transparent interaction via the "git" command. No matter what the DMCA or RIAA want there is nobody that can erase anything from past commits.
  - CameronNemo 6y ago
    Right Europe will extradite and enforce copyright claims, but the first one would require actual charges to be filed and the second does not apply here. DRM circumvention is a purely American ban, and a European host would not have to pay mind to it.
    - Mindwipe 6y ago
      DRM circumvention is absolutely not "purely an American ban." EU law bans circumvention software under DIRECTIVE 2001/29/EC from 2001. This is codified into local law in various ways by various member states, but as an example in the UK it became section 296zb of the Copyright Design and Patents Act (as modified by the Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003), which can be found at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/296ZB https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/296ZB. (1)A person commits an offence if he— (a)manufactures for sale or hire, or (b)imports otherwise than for his private and domestic use, or (c)in the course of a business— (i)sells or lets for hire, or (ii)offers or exposes for sale or hire, or (iii)advertises for sale or hire, or (iv)possesses, or (v)distributes, or (d)distributes otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the copyright owner, any device, product or component which is primarily designed, produced, or adapted for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of effective technological measures. (2)A person commits an offence if he provides, promotes, advertises or markets— (a)in the course of a business, or (b)otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the copyright owner, a service the purpose of which is to enable or facilitate the circumvention of effective technological measures. I shall spare you the rest, which is available at the link. But I would note it's not even a civil offence, it's a criminal one, with a maximum two year prison penalty.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - Paianni 6y ago
        "effective technological measures" That's the grey area.

CameronNemo 6y ago

That is a lot of work considering that you can simply move the hosting to Europe (using cgit and a ML, or gitea, or self-hosted gitlab) and be immune from DMCA requests. Also probably a way to host a git repo over tor. But that would make life a bit harder for devs.

dheera 6y ago
Sure, not the EU. The EU will cooperate with the US if they want an extradition. In all seriousness, move it to Russia, China, or some other country that has better freedoms in this particular regard and won't take crap from the US about silly copyright concerns. Or put the source code on the blockchain and it will never be eraseable. Even better, build a decentralized Github that is actually based on a blockchain but allows transparent interaction via the "git" command. No matter what the DMCA or RIAA want there is nobody that can erase anything from past commits.
- CameronNemo 6y ago
  Right Europe will extradite and enforce copyright claims, but the first one would require actual charges to be filed and the second does not apply here. DRM circumvention is a purely American ban, and a European host would not have to pay mind to it.
  - Mindwipe 6y ago
    DRM circumvention is absolutely not "purely an American ban." EU law bans circumvention software under DIRECTIVE 2001/29/EC from 2001. This is codified into local law in various ways by various member states, but as an example in the UK it became section 296zb of the Copyright Design and Patents Act (as modified by the Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003), which can be found at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/296ZB https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/296ZB. (1)A person commits an offence if he— (a)manufactures for sale or hire, or (b)imports otherwise than for his private and domestic use, or (c)in the course of a business— (i)sells or lets for hire, or (ii)offers or exposes for sale or hire, or (iii)advertises for sale or hire, or (iv)possesses, or (v)distributes, or (d)distributes otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the copyright owner, any device, product or component which is primarily designed, produced, or adapted for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of effective technological measures. (2)A person commits an offence if he provides, promotes, advertises or markets— (a)in the course of a business, or (b)otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the copyright owner, a service the purpose of which is to enable or facilitate the circumvention of effective technological measures. I shall spare you the rest, which is available at the link. But I would note it's not even a civil offence, it's a criminal one, with a maximum two year prison penalty.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - Paianni 6y ago
      "effective technological measures" That's the grey area.