What can flog whips in the digital age? How does GitHub comply with DMCA, RFC 7725 and what is HTTP 451?
Back in 2012, “restrictivers”, “deliters”, “censors”, and also “abuse-resistant” providers were discussed in Habré in the article about the fact that a new HTTP status was proposed for censorship , or rather for resources that are restricted because of problems with the law.
The actual HTTP 451 status was suggested by Tim Bray from Google, and the culprit (in the literal and figurative sense) of the commotion was once again blocked, forgotten, censored and great The Pirate Bay.
Why is it important? Because you, probably, like me, use GitHub, program not only for the soul and, possibly, own profitable Internet resources.
')
You are already in the copyright law field.
On writing this post, the first in 2 years of silence on Habré, I was pushed by a story that happened recently to me. If interested, it is at the bottom of the post, and now about RFC 7725, GitHub and DMCA.
More recently, in February of this year, the aforementioned proposal of a Google employee was ratified by the IETF in the form of RFC 7725 standard (trans. Status code reporting legal restrictions) .
This means that in the near future, Internet service providers, hostings, search engines and various services will show a sad "error" 451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons instead of 404 Not Found , 403 Forbidden and instead of what the first thing occurred when trying to access the Internet -resources, which are imposed by law restrictions.
Just the day before yesterday , a note appeared on the GitHub blog that GitHub now supports RFC 7725.
Along with mentioning this RFC, the post states how to correctly file claims on copyright infringement to GitHub and how GitHub meets the requirements of the DMCA.
It turns out that GitHub has its own repository, which contains the texts of references to GitHub holders . This repository contains essentially specific precedents (1139 at the moment), specific situations that can be encountered by publishing your code in GitHub, using someone’s source code without saving the proper licensing records or grossly violating the rights of the authors.
Among the legal authorities that have asked GitHub to block access to someone’s repository are the following organizations: Oracle, Cisco, Sony, Nintendo, Instagram, Microsoft, Apple, Adobe Systems, IEEE.
The time has come when thinking about DMCA,instead of bringing light to people, has to be done more often than doing its own business.
For example, the site of the innocent application GBA4iOS (GameBoy Advance emulator for iPhone), which used GitHub as a hosting, was deleted on demand of Nintendo Of USA .
If you suddenly “pick up” someone's popular mobile application about photos and use, for example, shaders from it, and then post your project on GitHub - you can be whipped out .
Do not try to rename the names of methods or classes in someone's source code in order to "cover up" the authorship - you must be calculated and imprisoned in a dungeon .
Do not try to remove the commentary with some words about the MIT License, even if you are working on the BitCoin fork - you can be buried in the neck in the sand .
Well, you understand, about 1135 more examples of bad ideas .
I hope these great tips will help you! Thanks for reading my post!
Share this post with a friend hanging out on GitHub.
PS Recommend more links to articles on law and the web!
The actual HTTP 451 status was suggested by Tim Bray from Google, and the culprit (in the literal and figurative sense) of the commotion was once again blocked, forgotten, censored and great The Pirate Bay.
Why is it important? Because you, probably, like me, use GitHub, program not only for the soul and, possibly, own profitable Internet resources.
')
You are already in the copyright law field.
On writing this post, the first in 2 years of silence on Habré, I was pushed by a story that happened recently to me. If interested, it is at the bottom of the post, and now about RFC 7725, GitHub and DMCA.
451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons
More recently, in February of this year, the aforementioned proposal of a Google employee was ratified by the IETF in the form of RFC 7725 standard (trans. Status code reporting legal restrictions) .
This means that in the near future, Internet service providers, hostings, search engines and various services will show a sad "error" 451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons instead of 404 Not Found , 403 Forbidden and instead of what the first thing occurred when trying to access the Internet -resources, which are imposed by law restrictions.
GitHub already supports
Just the day before yesterday , a note appeared on the GitHub blog that GitHub now supports RFC 7725.
Along with mentioning this RFC, the post states how to correctly file claims on copyright infringement to GitHub and how GitHub meets the requirements of the DMCA.
What does RFC 7725 say?
As stated in the specification, this status code can be used to provide transparency in circumstances where legal or public policy issues affect the operation of the server, and that such transparency can be useful both for operators and end users.
The HTTP response with code 451 is cacheable by default, unless other HTTP headers are specified that affect the caching of the request.
The server responding to the request may not be the destination server. This type of legal restrictions is associated with the work of Internet providers and search engines.
In addition, it is stated that the answer should contain an explanation in the body of the HTTP response with the details of the restriction imposed: the person imposing such restrictions, the reason for imposing the restriction, and in relation to which persons such restriction is valid.
Also, the HTTP response Link header should contain the URI of the server that blocked access to the source resource.
The response with HTTP status 451 does not indicate the presence or absence of the resource, but only indicates the presence of restrictions.
For security reasons, the client should not rely on the answer 451, because a situation is possible when a certain legal authority wants not only to demand access restriction, but also to hide its involvement in imposing restrictions.
The HTTP response with code 451 is cacheable by default, unless other HTTP headers are specified that affect the caching of the request.
The server responding to the request may not be the destination server. This type of legal restrictions is associated with the work of Internet providers and search engines.
In addition, it is stated that the answer should contain an explanation in the body of the HTTP response with the details of the restriction imposed: the person imposing such restrictions, the reason for imposing the restriction, and in relation to which persons such restriction is valid.
Also, the HTTP response Link header should contain the URI of the server that blocked access to the source resource.
The response with HTTP status 451 does not indicate the presence or absence of the resource, but only indicates the presence of restrictions.
For security reasons, the client should not rely on the answer 451, because a situation is possible when a certain legal authority wants not only to demand access restriction, but also to hide its involvement in imposing restrictions.
And the DMCA is what?
The DMCA is the US copyright law in the digital age. Why not just copyright? Because initially, US copyright described various legal relations in the production and distribution of literature, music, films and did not take into account the emergence and development of digital technologies, which create certain difficulties in the application and use of copyright "as is" without taking into account the features of digital technology.
GitHub honors DMCA
It turns out that GitHub has its own repository, which contains the texts of references to GitHub holders . This repository contains essentially specific precedents (1139 at the moment), specific situations that can be encountered by publishing your code in GitHub, using someone’s source code without saving the proper licensing records or grossly violating the rights of the authors.
Among the legal authorities that have asked GitHub to block access to someone’s repository are the following organizations: Oracle, Cisco, Sony, Nintendo, Instagram, Microsoft, Apple, Adobe Systems, IEEE.
findings
The time has come when thinking about DMCA,
For example, the site of the innocent application GBA4iOS (GameBoy Advance emulator for iPhone), which used GitHub as a hosting, was deleted on demand of Nintendo Of USA .
If you suddenly “pick up” someone's popular mobile application about photos and use, for example, shaders from it, and then post your project on GitHub - you can be whipped out .
Do not try to rename the names of methods or classes in someone's source code in order to "cover up" the authorship - you must be calculated and imprisoned in a dungeon .
Do not try to remove the commentary with some words about the MIT License, even if you are working on the BitCoin fork - you can be buried in the neck in the sand .
Well, you understand, about 1135 more examples of bad ideas .
What to do?
I do not want to violate copyright
- Check under which license the code you are using is located
- Communicate with the author of the source code via e-mail and request either add the attribution of the desired license or author's permission to use his code
- If you can not get any response from the author by e-mail, write to him on Twitter that sent a letter
- Read copyright news, study case law and law.
- Try to make life easier
I violate copyrights
- Don't tell everyone about it
- Try to stop violating at least some rights, following the section "I do not want to violate the rights of others"
- Accept yourself for who you are.
- Find the best lawyer in advance, find out its value.
My rights violated
- Are you offended or do you suffer material losses?
- Contact GitHub by following the appropriate instructions , and do not forget to add these formalities.
- Take action so that others cannot follow suit and violate your rights.
- Maybe you should think about how to make your work public?
- Try to file a lawsuit to the offending party.
- Get over the injustices of this world and tell us about your experiences.
I hope these great tips will help you! Thanks for reading my post!
Share this post with a friend hanging out on GitHub.
Bonuses read
GitHub Gist, Stackoverflow and MediaWiki Story
Once in a thread on Stackoverflow, I posted a small snippet and uploaded it to GitHub using the Gist service.
My gist began to enjoy a certain popularity, and unexpectedly for myself I received a message from a certain FlorianSW , which is developing an extension for MediaWiki . The message contained a request to add an open license to the snippet, since This will allow him to calmly use this snippet in his project.
Without really thinking, I, having decided to do a good deed, simply added the MIT license to the snippet, since This is one of the most free licenses. In addition, it is compatible with GPLv2. I was outraged and alarmed by the fact that it seemed that I had published my snippet in the public domain, but for some reason it was easy to take and modify or use it for someone unacceptable because of the DMCA.
Later, of course, I realized that the author was probably alarmed that the content on Stackoverflow is published under CC BY-SA 3.0 and allegedly my snippet could also be covered by this license.
... And the sediment remained.
My gist began to enjoy a certain popularity, and unexpectedly for myself I received a message from a certain FlorianSW , which is developing an extension for MediaWiki . The message contained a request to add an open license to the snippet, since This will allow him to calmly use this snippet in his project.
Without really thinking, I, having decided to do a good deed, simply added the MIT license to the snippet, since This is one of the most free licenses. In addition, it is compatible with GPLv2. I was outraged and alarmed by the fact that it seemed that I had published my snippet in the public domain, but for some reason it was easy to take and modify or use it for someone unacceptable because of the DMCA.
Later, of course, I realized that the author was probably alarmed that the content on Stackoverflow is published under CC BY-SA 3.0 and allegedly my snippet could also be covered by this license.
... And the sediment remained.
Perhaps useful links
- Civil Code, Chapter 70, Copyright Consultant Plus
- Copyright of the Republic of Belarus (introduction to the copyright of Belarus)
- Law of Ukraine on Copyright and Related Rights
- US copyright laws in one PDF at Copyright.gov
- Opinion of the court regarding the claim of Metro Goldwyn Mayer against the company selling something like a torrent client
Interesting on Habré and Megamind
- If you put a Like button on your site, are you breaking the law?
- Do you violate copyright using Google Maps images?
PS Recommend more links to articles on law and the web!
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/279639/
All Articles