DMCA Takedown – Popular PHP Barcode Removed (opens in new tab)

(github.com)

42 pointskernelcurry10y ago47 comments

47 comments

Strangely, I agree with the original author who sent the DMCA.

Imagine that you're working on some project and you find one of those forks with no GPLv3 attached (or worse, some other license that is more permissive). You integrate it, publish, and then find out that your project is in copyright violation.

I'd rather see a takedown induce an easily remediated repo change, than a big legal PITA down the road. It's not like he took his repo down, nor any of the forks that kept the license. He just DMCA'd the ones that stripped the license files.

orclev10y ago

Yeah, you could maybe argue that DMCA is kind of heavy handed but for a change it doesn't seem to be an abuse, it's actually being used for what it was intended. In particular the fact that he went through the trouble of spelling out exactly what was being violated, gave a number of rather reasonable ways to address the violation, and provided links to replacement repos for the code in question I think shows that some time and consideration was spent on this. This wasn't just your run of the mill blanket "OMGZ MY IP!" type of DMCA request we're used to seeing from media companies and certain large corporations.

0x010y ago

So... is the TL;DR that a GPL3 project on github is DMCA'ing a bunch of github forks that stripped the copyright/authorship notices?

markbnj10y ago

That's what I get from it.

pluma10y ago

LGPL, even.

ascendantlogic10y ago

Seems reasonable if they copied the code and stripped all attribution and licenses.

sp33210y ago

Instead of a takedown request, it would probably have made more sense to ask those projects to add the required license information.

dlanouette10y ago

That was an option that he gave (towards the bottom). I have no idea if GH passes these on to the repo owner or not. GH may have just removed the repos.

But, the original author did give that option.

1 more reply

tzs10y ago

If I didn't botch counting, there were 69 of them. Thats a lot of projects to deal with. Dealing with a single point of contact (Github's DMCA procedure) is a lot more efficient than dealing with 69 points of contact.

ascendantlogic10y ago

While I agree with you, if they went through the trouble to copy the code and strip out the obvious attribution and license information, I'd have a hard time believing they didn't do it with intent. I'm no DMCA fan but you'll have a hard time selling me that this was an honest mistake that is easily remedied via some friendly emails. But maybe I'm wrong.

1 more reply

dubcanada10y ago

What if he did? You have no idea if he did or didn't, you can't assume that the first action he took was to send a DCMA notice.

1 more reply

dublinben10y ago

If the complaint is to be believed, most of these weren't really 'projects' but just copies of the original source code.

1 more reply

s1lver10y ago

What crazyness is this? A DMCA we're not raging against??

aikah10y ago

well people here are infringing a GPL license by stripping it from the original code. I agree with that. All my projects on github are GPL so I'd do the exact same thing in the same circumstances.

krapp10y ago

The DMCA is only bad when it's used to defend non-free copyrights.

phkahler10y ago

Question. Is stripping the authors names OK? Obviously stripping the license isn't, but does the GPL require you to "advertise" all contributors? I thought that was considered a problem with one of the BSD variants.

donatj10y ago

Looking back through Github's DMCA history, Tecnick.com has sent a fair number of DMCA takedown notices in the last couple months. Looks like they're in crackdown mode.

chuckreynolds10y ago

used this in the past but nothing current. interesting to see but it does seem the DCMA request is valid considering what I've been reading about all the stripped gplv3 and other references to OP. Now for somebody fork it from a recent pull and put in the required licensing and references as, from what I understand, this repo had nice improvements from the OP. Just a matter of time now.

oso2k10y ago

It's a bit ironic that the original author's website's favicon looks a lot like a Microsoft Windows 95 icon.

kernelcurryOP10y ago

Have been using this repo for a long time now, and now deploys are broken :( going to have to re-write some code i guess...

orclev10y ago

Should probably use https://github.com/tecnickcom/tc-lib-barcode or https://github.com/tecnickcom/TCPDF both of which are mentioned in the DMCA notice.

52510y ago

Or not deploy from random repos you don't control.

2 more replies

wiredfool10y ago

And do a license review to see if the gplv3 license imposes any cconditions on the use of the code.

1 more reply

Sanddancer10y ago

If you've been using the repo for a long time and you didn't have a local copy to use in case github went down, etc, your deploy was already broken. Having local mirrors of third party repos, and pulling those into your build system is fairly trivial, and will save a lot of heartache in cases like this.

noir_lord10y ago

Especially if you want to be sure that a version you pegged exactly for stability will be around in a year or two (looking at you node land).

cbd198410y ago

If I knew someone was deploying from one of my repos, changing my code to make their site ALL PONIES ALL THE TIME U GUISE would honestly occur to me.

It would occur to me, and I might not be strong enough to resist.

PONIES!

grymoire110y ago

And they are down.... "This repository is currently disabled due to a DMCA takedown notice"

cpeterso10y ago

So who first deleted the license and copyright notices?

nieve10y ago

Either @dineshrabara stripped them since the first commit is based on an official release three days earlier and lacks the notices or they copied it from someone who moved really fast to do so and distributed them in some mysterious third location. The former seems more likely.

ETA: An HN account of the same name was created 235 days ago, so it's probably the same person if they choose to respond.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

47 comments

Rantenki10y ago

Strangely, I agree with the original author who sent the DMCA.

orclev10y ago

0x010y ago

So... is the TL;DR that a GPL3 project on github is DMCA'ing a bunch of github forks that stripped the copyright/authorship notices?

markbnj10y ago

That's what I get from it.

pluma10y ago

LGPL, even.

ascendantlogic10y ago

Seems reasonable if they copied the code and stripped all attribution and licenses.

sp33210y ago

Instead of a takedown request, it would probably have made more sense to ask those projects to add the required license information.

dlanouette10y ago

That was an option that he gave (towards the bottom). I have no idea if GH passes these on to the repo owner or not. GH may have just removed the repos.

But, the original author did give that option.

1 more reply

tzs10y ago

ascendantlogic10y ago

1 more reply

dubcanada10y ago

What if he did? You have no idea if he did or didn't, you can't assume that the first action he took was to send a DCMA notice.

1 more reply

dublinben10y ago

If the complaint is to be believed, most of these weren't really 'projects' but just copies of the original source code.

1 more reply

s1lver10y ago

What crazyness is this? A DMCA we're not raging against??

aikah10y ago

well people here are infringing a GPL license by stripping it from the original code. I agree with that. All my projects on github are GPL so I'd do the exact same thing in the same circumstances.

krapp10y ago

The DMCA is only bad when it's used to defend non-free copyrights.

phkahler10y ago

donatj10y ago

Looking back through Github's DMCA history, Tecnick.com has sent a fair number of DMCA takedown notices in the last couple months. Looks like they're in crackdown mode.

chuckreynolds10y ago

oso2k10y ago

It's a bit ironic that the original author's website's favicon looks a lot like a Microsoft Windows 95 icon.

kernelcurryOP10y ago

Have been using this repo for a long time now, and now deploys are broken :( going to have to re-write some code i guess...

orclev10y ago

Should probably use https://github.com/tecnickcom/tc-lib-barcode or https://github.com/tecnickcom/TCPDF both of which are mentioned in the DMCA notice.

52510y ago

Or not deploy from random repos you don't control.

2 more replies

wiredfool10y ago

And do a license review to see if the gplv3 license imposes any cconditions on the use of the code.

1 more reply

Sanddancer10y ago

noir_lord10y ago

Especially if you want to be sure that a version you pegged exactly for stability will be around in a year or two (looking at you node land).

cbd198410y ago

If I knew someone was deploying from one of my repos, changing my code to make their site ALL PONIES ALL THE TIME U GUISE would honestly occur to me.

It would occur to me, and I might not be strong enough to resist.

PONIES!

grymoire110y ago

And they are down.... "This repository is currently disabled due to a DMCA takedown notice"

cpeterso10y ago

So who first deleted the license and copyright notices?

nieve10y ago

ETA: An HN account of the same name was created 235 days ago, so it's probably the same person if they choose to respond.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse