4 ms·

I don't think gitlab* vs github matters. All public sites in the US and allies need to have a mechanism for DMCA removals, or they lose their safe haven status

I don't think gitlab* vs github matters. All public sites in the US and allies need to have a mechanism for DMCA removals, or they lose their safe haven status (which allows them to not be legally liable for what their users do with respect to copyright). Losing safe haven status is a death sentence. * by this I mean gitlab's own instance of gitlab. Of course, you can host your own, and then its up to you how you respond.

martini333 6y ago
But this was "created for educational purposes"
- stu2b50 6y ago
  DMCAs are a shoot first, talk later kind of deal. Or rather take it down first, file counterclaims, and see if the other party responds, then put it back up they don't.
  - salawat 6y ago
    Counterclaims are an international poison pill though, as by doing so you agree to having the case adjudicated under U.S. jurisdiction. Think twice. Don't let clever legal tricks like were pulled with DMCA catch you out.
vmception 6y ago
Just clone it and move on DMCA take downs don't delete stuff stored client side on your computer, I fail to see what all this discussion is even about If it looks hot, just clone it and forget about it
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  That's fine for a book, but not software (like youtube-dl) that is always written against the moving target of the real world.
  - vmception 6y ago
    git clone && move on works perfectly fine for me
    - t0astbread 6y ago
      They meant that sites like YouTube change from time to time in ways that break youtube-dl so without updates your copy will stop working some day (same thing could apply to Spotify)
- chippy 6y ago
  > DMCA take downs don't delete stuff stored client side on your computer Github Desktop project mangers are taking notes, don't give them ideas!
andrepew 6y ago
IANAL but doesn’t the DMCA takedown system only apply to distribution of content itself? No RIAA member has the ownership rights to this software. It probably is illegal but I believe another legal mechanism other than a takedown notice is required. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. This is a layman’s understanding.
- stu2b50 6y ago
  There's also a provision in the DMCA law about "circumventing copyright law" https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 Which you could argue this falls into.
  - andrepew 6y ago
    Yes the DMCA prohibits circumvention but I’m asking if a takedown notice is the correct legal remedy for such violations? I thought notices were just for content distribution.

martini333 6y ago

But this was "created for educational purposes"

stu2b50 6y ago
DMCAs are a shoot first, talk later kind of deal. Or rather take it down first, file counterclaims, and see if the other party responds, then put it back up they don't.
- salawat 6y ago
  Counterclaims are an international poison pill though, as by doing so you agree to having the case adjudicated under U.S. jurisdiction. Think twice. Don't let clever legal tricks like were pulled with DMCA catch you out.

vmception 6y ago

Just clone it and move on DMCA take downs don't delete stuff stored client side on your computer, I fail to see what all this discussion is even about If it looks hot, just clone it and forget about it

hombre_fatal 6y ago
That's fine for a book, but not software (like youtube-dl) that is always written against the moving target of the real world.
- vmception 6y ago
  git clone && move on works perfectly fine for me
  - t0astbread 6y ago
    They meant that sites like YouTube change from time to time in ways that break youtube-dl so without updates your copy will stop working some day (same thing could apply to Spotify)
chippy 6y ago
> DMCA take downs don't delete stuff stored client side on your computer Github Desktop project mangers are taking notes, don't give them ideas!

andrepew 6y ago

IANAL but doesn’t the DMCA takedown system only apply to distribution of content itself? No RIAA member has the ownership rights to this software. It probably is illegal but I believe another legal mechanism other than a takedown notice is required. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. This is a layman’s understanding.

stu2b50 6y ago
There's also a provision in the DMCA law about "circumventing copyright law" https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 Which you could argue this falls into.
- andrepew 6y ago
  Yes the DMCA prohibits circumvention but I’m asking if a takedown notice is the correct legal remedy for such violations? I thought notices were just for content distribution.