Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by itsme-alan 1762 days ago
The funny thing is GitHub already fixed it.(https://github.blog/2021-01-05-advancing-developer-freedom-g...)
1 comments

According to that post, "fixing it" was quite a lot of effort:

> And separately, we took our case to the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), part of the US Treasury Department, and began a lengthy and intensive process of advocating for broad and open access to GitHub in sanctioned countries.

Over the course of two years, we were able to demonstrate how developer use of GitHub advances human progress, international communication, and the enduring US foreign policy of promoting free speech and the free flow of information. We are grateful to OFAC for the engagement which has led to this great result for developers.

And I bet that if Fedora wanted to do the same, they couldn't simply invoke GitHub as a precedent, they would have to do the whole process again.

On the other hand, there is a tendency of projects to massively overshoot the target just to be on the safe side - see Project Gutenberg blocking all access from Germany because they got sued over 3 (three!) books.

"On the other hand, there is a tendency of projects to massively overshoot the target just to be on the safe side - see Project Gutenberg blocking all access from Germany because they got sued over 3 (three!) books."

Do I remember correctly that the German courts wanted those three (3!) books removed from Project Gutenberg entirely?

In any case, here's your two choices:

* At a minimum, block access to those three books in Germany, allowing German courts' decisions to apply the Project, which is officially based on US copyright law, where those decisions are more stringent than US law.

* Block all access to Germany. (If Germans want to complain, let them complain to their own government.)

Which precedent do you choose?

In 99% of cases complying is cheaper and easier than going to court, sadly.