3 ms·
I did say, "If this is a real DMCA takedown...". You are legally correct that GitHub in isn't obligated to take down a work if they receive a DMCA notice. But
by dwheeler 6y ago
I did say, "If this is a real DMCA takedown...".
You are legally correct that GitHub in isn't obligated to take down a work if they receive a DMCA notice. But that would be very bad advice to take. GitHub handles millions of repos. GitHub could take a huge gamble by keeping the material posted after a DMCA request, or just take it down, wait for the DMCA counterclaim, and put it up after the counterclaim was filed. A CEO could easily get fired for risking the entire company when there was a no-risk alternative with the same result. The legal penalties are so stiff, and so easily avoided, that it would be improbable for a company to do anything else. This apparently isn't a DMCA takedown anyway, but I thought I should comment on your response.
Anyway, I'll repeat myself yet again: They need a lawyer.
- nullc 6y agoYet companies ignore DMCA complaints all the time. Github is unusual in my experience in that they act on even transparently fraudulent DMCA notices (I am reminded of a few years ago where they took all of Mozilla's repost offline because of a obviously bogus DMCA complaint filed by a intern that was furious that their changes weren't merged or something along those lines). And while copyright penalties look pretty stiff, they're pretty non-threatening compared to ordinary state product liability-- which is almost completely non-disclaimable. Liability is just one of the consequences of doing business. I certainly wouldn't suggest that Github should be ignoring DMCA complaints as a general practice (though plenty of providers sure seem to do so), but in this case I think they could make a calculation that the risk might be worth it: I know quite a few parties that have moved off github as a result of this incident.