| ▲ | penskymaterial 10 hours ago |
| You want to sue people for blocking ads? Did I read this correctly? If you want to make proprietary software that's cool, but client-side JavaScript was a terrible choice. The cat is out of the bag. There's a reason software for which you purchase a license key generally doesn't give you source code outside rock-solid legal agreements. |
|
| ▲ | ChrisRR 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| No, you did not read this correctly |
|
| ▲ | jffry 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You did not read it correctly. Author stated that people are modifying and redistributing their code in an unauthorized manner. |
| |
| ▲ | penskymaterial 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Did those people sign a legally-binding end-user license agreement? Because what I see is essentially "they're storing stolen property" but the burden of proof is on the author to prove it was, indeed, stolen. I imagine the bar for that is pretty high otherwise anyone could weaponize DMCA to target their competitors' repositories. | | |
| ▲ | jffry 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You seem to be thinking about "adblocker running in browser", since you brought up EULAs. That's not what OP alleges - they are saying people are redistributing modified versions of OP's copyrighted code. DMCA is an appropriate measure in such a situation, but it's unclear why OP's DMCA takedown was rejected by GitHub. Without more detail, it's hard to comment further | | |
| ▲ | verdverm 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | one would think, if it is still up there, OP might point us at it so we can see for ourselves, right now it's "trust me" |
| |
| ▲ | majorchord 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | People are absolutely abusing the DMCA process. https://reclaimthenet.org/kiwi-farms-dmca-subpoena-anonymous... |
|
|
|
| ▲ | bartread 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > You want to sue people for blocking ads? Did I read this correctly? That is an extremely disingenuous and bad faith interpretation of what OP has said and I think you know it. You want to be edgy? Go comment on Reddit. OP is rightly frustrated that their copyrighted work, that they’ve been working on full time for over a decade, is simply being ripped off by people and GitHub refuses to do anything about it. |
| |
| ▲ | penskymaterial 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Publishing source as client-side JS when millions are out there looking to rip you off at every turn is a losing proposition. And I think you know it. Shifting blame to GitHub is absolutely idiotic. Try removing locks from your doors in a high crime area (which is what the Internet is) then being indignant when the police can't stop all the criminals stealing your property. | | |
| ▲ | cbarnes99 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | 'losing proposition' is irrelevant. The law is clear in this case, and the law makes Github's obligations exceptionally clear. By refusing to act, if the DMCA notice was valid, Github is breaking the law and forfeiting their safe harbor status. | | |
|
|
