Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

GitHub Bans "WebM for Retards" and All its Forks From its Platform

posted by takyon on Saturday July 25 2015, @07:00PM   Printer-friendly

Marneus68 writes:

GitHub, the git repository hosting service, recently disabled access to the repository of the video converter "WebM for Retards".

This tool, allowing a user to easily convert portions of a video to the increasingly supported WebM format, is mostly used on image-boards and image sharing websites. Despite its name, the project is a fully working tool.

Even the forks hosted on GitHub have been affected by this ban.

At the time of writing, the GitHub staff hasn't offered any form of explanation as to why access to the repo has been limited. However it is not hard to imagine that this may have to do with the name of the project. The recent news regarding DICCS come to mind.

takyon: From GitHub's Terms of Service:

We may, but have no obligation to, remove Content and Accounts containing Content that we determine in our sole discretion are unlawful, offensive, threatening, libelous, defamatory, pornographic, obscene or otherwise objectionable or violates any party's intellectual property or these Terms of Service.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
GitHub Bans "WebM for Retards" and All its Forks From its Platform | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 81 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday July 25 2015, @10:35PM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday July 25 2015, @10:35PM (#213666) Homepage

    Those cocksucking kike nigger-faggots. They will censor a legitimate project with a quirky but non-obscene name, but they will illegally keep stolen proprietary source code up? [github.com]

    What's wrong with those fucking wop zipperhead knuckle-dragging ching-chongs?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Flamebait=3, Troll=2, Insightful=3, Funny=2, Total=10
    Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   1  

  • (Score: 2) by timbim on Sunday July 26 2015, @01:39AM

    by timbim (907) on Sunday July 26 2015, @01:39AM (#213725)

    Loooooooooollhoolyshit!

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Pino P on Sunday July 26 2015, @08:58PM

    by Pino P (4721) on Sunday July 26 2015, @08:58PM (#213972) Journal

    GitHub acts on notices of claimed infringement that meet the requirements set forth in OCILLA (17 USC 512), such as a notice that a particular repository contains "stolen proprietary source code". These requirements include having been sent by someone acting on the express behalf of the owner of copyright in the allegedly infringed work. This is because copyright law does not require licensees to disclose having taken an unattributed (or "white-label") nonexclusive license from the copyright owner. Because GitHub has no way to know whether or not such a license is in effect, GitHub has no way to evaluate the merit of such a notice from a third party.