[Udo]

It's not GitHub who stole the code, it's a GitHub user who published it there against the licensing terms.

While I do share the author's frustration with the fact that GitHub does zero fact checking, my concerns go entirely in the other direction: much of the internet now works in such a way that a DMCA takedown notice will effectively remove any content someone doesn't want out there.

I do understand why platforms do it like this, being in the business of arbitrating who is right and who is not is not feasible (and it's probably also not legal).

Criticisms of this process should be levied against lawmakers and the law itself.

However, to be perfectly frank, it's a good thing that hiring a lawyer to send this letter on your behalf is the minimum effort required to do this. Of course that doesn't solve malicious takedown notices sent by big law firms and corporations, but I do believe it limits the overall amount of letters that get sent.

[stormcode]

A world where the true author of software(or anything) can't get it taken down when it has been stolen isn't great.

Company's should be held responsible. If you are allowing a vehicle for theft, you need to have reasonable anti-theft procedures in place. We can't let corporations deny their own responsibility here.

[CarelessExpert]

> A world where the true author of software(or anything) can't get it taken down when it has been stolen isn't great

What? He can. He even told us how to do it: hire a lawyer to draft a letter demanding it's removal.

Yes, that costs money. Welcome to the adversarial legal system in the Western world. But he has a path if he wants to take it.

Personally I much prefer this over GitHub unilaterally acting as judge, jury, and executioner.

[shadowgovt]

The reasonable anti-theft procedure in place is the DMCA takedown process.

It has flaws to be sure, but the next step for this complaintant is to follow it. They asserted copyright, the person who posted the code challenged their assertion, and their relief is in the courts.