Hacker News Reader

Comment by coleifer | Hacker News Reader

And GitHub bent over.

Just host it somewhere else.

Where? Pretty much anyone will honor a DMCA takedown. There might be some grey area where some hosts will be better at identifying an invalid/bad-faith one, but this one appears to be valid.

Outside of the US

The world is a pretty large place...

Git has an amazing variety of frontends and ways to distribute your code.

On your own web server?

You don't need GitHub to publish or host a git repo...

Your own webserver that's hosted by a hosting company? Most of the have very well oiled workflows for responding to DMCA violations. If you run your own server they'll go to your ISP.

Are you aware that companies in countries like Canada don't respond to DMCA takedown requests, nor do they have domestic equivalents?

Maybe not 100% identical to the DMCA takedown requests but there are systems in place to deal with these kinds of issues. If your hoster / ISP receives a bunch of these notices they'll probably reconsider hosting your content.

https://ic.gc.ca/eic/site/oca-bc.nsf/eng/ca02920.html

Valid point. Bill C-11 certainly made a mess of the situation in Canada. That said, there are plenty of other international jurisdictions where a server or VPS could be used to host this kind of content, so I think the fundamental point still remains: Yes, hosting content on a large US-based provider like GitHub means your content is available at their discretion. Hosting the content yourself gives you a much greater degree of freedom to control the availability of that content.

Which is why I never rely solely on commercial cloud services like this for hosting my content.

This is why codeberg was started.

https://codeberg.org/

Counter-notice fixes it, making github restore it and giving Github immunity.

GitHub waits fourteen days for the complainant to respond to your counter-notice before putting your repo back up, from experience :/

In addition, they won't even give you any info they hold on the complainant other than that explicitly included in the notice itself, claiming 'data protection' (some troll hit a bunch of my repositories with fraudulent takedowns in two waves, meaning it took about a month before they were all restored)

That's a nice way to get legal problems with one of the biggest companies in the world.

Even Bitbucket would follow DCMA requests. Beside that, Github is the best place for the visibility of your project .

> And GitHub bent over.

You mean Microsoft bent over. Legal is the first and most urgent part to integrate when aquiring a company, for obvious reasons.

Choosing not to involve themselves in legally representing a user is not comparable to submissive participation in a sex act.

There's also nothing wrong with submissive participation in a sex act.

Communicate better.

What?

It may not be the meaning you intended, but "GitHub bent over." has a pretty clear, narrow definition.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com