Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by stormcode 2029 days ago
Sadly, this is corporate America these days. We are living in the Cyberpunk future where corporations have the upper hand and are not required to provide an actual reasonable human to investigate or pass judgement on your issue. You see it with the algos that run user interfacing parts of Youtube, Facebook regularly.

It's messed up. I'm sorry your code got stolen.
2 comments
ficklepickle 2029 days ago
You mean a free service won't pay someone to hold my hand and make me feel better? Egregious!

The whole premise of this post makes no sense. He posted code on his site, that he wants other people to use, but they are forbidden from changing a single line. But he didn't want it on github, because that means that Microsoft stole it.

It is lame that someone copied it without attribution. But it is a pretty minor transgression in the grand scheme of things. Certainly no financial harm done and nothing has been taken away. You can't control bytes once they are out there. Information wants to be free.

If it bothers you that much, pay a lawyer. If it was too easy to get things taken down, it would be abused by wealthy corporations (even more), and youtube-dl would be gone for good.

If I got this upset about every perceived slight, I'd be waging battles dawn til dusk. Pick your battles, folks.

link
gspr 2029 days ago
There's plenty of problems with corporate control of the Internet, but this here ain't one. This is, in fact, one of those situations where the DMCA does a good job.
link
thorough 2029 days ago
All right, you've stated that you think that having to remedy such an obvious abuse by hiring a lawyer is not a problem. But the question is, why don't you think it's a problem?
link
gspr 2029 days ago
I do think that would be a problem. But I don't think that's what's on the line here. Why would you need a lawyer to file a DMCA notice against GitHub if you're 100% certain that the code in question is copyrighted by you and distributed unlawfully?
link
thorough 2029 days ago
I think the article states and it has been repeated several times in the comments here that the author already did so and that a lawyer is now required because the offender disputed the claim.
link
gspr 2029 days ago
Why would a lawyer be required?
link