Lackner: Mr. Schaffer, are you a lawyer? Please elaborate on why you consider Snaphax to be unlawful circumvention. I will assess the merits of your argument and then make a decision.
While people in this thread all give the customary knee-jerk "get a lawyer" response, consider that:
1. The request did not come from Snapchat's lawyers, if they have any retained for the purpose of DMCA claims. Surely they must, right?
2. It does not state what happens if Lackner does not comply. There's no threat of legal action. It just asks Lackner to remove the code from Github.
As such, there's no reason not to ask Schaffer to clarify why he thinks there is a problem.
If lawyers are not involved yet, then asking questions is free.
If this was a clear DMCA violation, then why didn't Schaffer send this to Snapchat's lawyers to handle?
Maybe because he might not get the answer he wanted: that it's a clear DMCA violation and an easy win for Snapchat.
Any lawyer can be asked to send a threatening DMCA violation letter. They will almost always say, "Yes, we can do that for you."
But sending a threatening letter does not mean it's a slam dunk win if the recipient does not comply with the demands in the letter. Sometimes threats are hollow. The sender may have no intention of pursuing litigation any further than sending demand letters. It simply might not be worth the money to pursue litigation over something like Snaphax. If this bit of PHP was that big of a deal to Snapchat, why didn't the request to remove it from Github come from Snapchat's lawyers? Where's the line about purusing all legal remedies?
Not to mention that by sending a threatening letter with no details on why the sender thinks the code at issue is a DMCA violation, there's a risk that the recipient might post a link to the code on HN and set off a "Github fork bomb". Ouch.