And the complaint itself:
> On GitHub at https://github.com/revanced/revanced-patches there is a patch that unlocks the subscription without payment for "Pflotsh ECMWF" and various other products.
If that’s true, this can’t really be very controversial?
This company is not the copyright holder to these patches - they did not write them nor are they derivative works, so they need to use other legal means to approach this situation.
This is not first time this has happened with GitHub.
[0] https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/content-removal-polic...
If so it would not meet the criteria in the first sentence of your link:
> The Copyright Act also prohibits the circumvention of technological measures that effectively control access to works protected by copyright.
That is an interesting corner case, not sure if it is a bug or a feature.
That isn't so obvious to me. For all intents and purposes this is no different from crack. I am not sure if DMCA is right tool but I totally understand why Microsoft wouldn't want to host it.
Yes, and you cannot take down crack using DMCA either!
Edit: If the crack is a keygen or patcher, of course. Patched orginal binaries can be taken down.
That's what Vanced was, isn't it the same case with ReVanced?
Other moral or legal issues aside, this is a pretty clear abuse of the DMCA as far as I understand it.
Apart from the taken down revanced-patches repo, other repos in the revanced gh org are still up.