Another example of DMCA takedown on github passing on HN


While this is maybe too soon to speak about fedeproxy, but someone mention forgefed and radicle:

So wouldn’t it be a good idea to open a account on HN now to get enough karma to post later when this topic will come again ?

1 Like

In fact, now I think of it, it could be a pitch to Github/, implement the API for forgefed, and this will help reduce your cost related to DMCA takedown, both direct cost related to their legal department having to deal with it (since usually, there is a cost that can be estimated for each cases), and indirect cost like reputation hit

1 Like

This is a nice idea (having more HN karma). I have an account with very low karma myself :stuck_out_tongue: And the thread is an interesting read. Mostly everyone assumes all online web sites are subject to DMCA although it varies a lot depending on the jurisdiction. I’m familiar with takedown notices issued by copyright holders (or their representatives) in Germany and France and they are not based on the same legal grounds and are fading away over the years (not that they have ever been effective but they are less frequent as time passes).

The cost angle is interesting but I’m not sure how it would work, could you expand on this idea?

Sure. Dealing with DMCA is costly to companies (how much, I do not know).

Either they pay lawyers to look at requests thoroughly (more time, so cost more), or they don’t and deal with a communication problem when a repo is banned while it shouldn’t and it hit HN. The more repos are on Github, the more likely this will happen. So something that shouldn’t be too costly (hosting a git repos) suddenly either required highly paid lawyers, or intervention from CEO, communications professionals, etc, with also a flow of people to their competitors.

If the system was more distributed, Github would get less DMCA requests (since people would go elsewhere after being kicked too often), or they would be less criticized when a error happen, because it would be less disruptive.

In both cases, that’s a win for Github.

If we do a cost analysis, there is a likely a few repos who are costing more to Github than others for this kind of reasons. Anything that ease migration outside of Github infra would help them, since people with a need to be more DMCA resilient would be hosted elsewhere (like in a country where they care less), and the rest would still go on Github because they do not care about that, and Github can compete on features.

It makes perfect sense. I assume that it would be compared with the estimated income associated with user lock-in. Improving the migration path for projects will:

  • Decrease the user lock-in derived income
  • Decrease the DMCA handling costs

Demonstrating that it saves more money than it costs because users are not so strongly locked in is non trivial.