31–40 of 74 posts
First, because only the https://github.com/popcorn-team/popcorn-app has been removed. There are plenty of forks of the original popcorn floating around github, some of them with very recent commits (see the network timeline). It seems unlikely that github would remove just that one repo and leave all these others around.
Second, because as noted by some commenters, the website of that fork http://popcorn.cdnjd.com/ is also down. But it is not just down: the whole A/CNAME record does not exist anymore! Digging a bit deeper, you can see that the nameservers of that domain are hosted by Cloudfare.
It seems very unlikely to me that Github and Cloudfare would act so well coordinated in taking down an application and its associated resources, yet they completely ignore all those forks.
That makes me think that this is more of a personal issue. Either someone with all the keys got hacked and that's the result, or someone has been intimidated enough (through legal or other means) to shut everything down.
Anyway, time will tell. Don't start migrating all your github repos elsewhere yet ;P
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The TOS don't make any promises: GitHub does not pre-screen Content, but GitHub and its designee have the right (but not the obligation) in their sole discretion to refuse or remove any Content that is available via the Service. and 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, porn…
That would explain it. It's remarkable how ambiguous TOSs in general are. I can see from a business perspective how Github was probably pressured from outside source, MPAA, to remove the application that could be used as a conduit to illegally download magnet links. This is such a slippery slope though...
I don't think it is really a slippery slope either, there would be a bunch of new law needed to make it so that offering a platform for publication carried the obligation to publish things (a lot of it focused on protecting the service provider from liability).
This is why I always clone repos to disk.
Is it against GitHub's TOS? I have a web app, http://www.moviemagnet.net , that's a movie torrent aggregator that I was going to throw up on GitHub after I wrote some integration tests. It would be shocking to me that they would remove the repo since they weren't technically serving torrents.
The TOS don't make any promises: GitHub does not pre-screen Content, but GitHub and its designee have the right (but not the obligation) in their sole discretion to refuse or remove any Content that is available via the Service. and 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, porn…
There Terms of service are very vague.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The TOS don't make any promises: GitHub does not pre-screen Content, but GitHub and its designee have the right (but not the obligation) in their sole discretion to refuse or remove any Content that is available via the Service. and 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, porn…
Anything can be considered offensive, threatening, libelous, defamatory, pornographic, obscene or otherwise objectionable by some people how do you define such subjective views. There Terms of service are very vague.
I saw a news about this. Is it the successor? http://www.time4popcorn.eu/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The TOS don't make any promises: GitHub does not pre-screen Content, but GitHub and its designee have the right (but not the obligation) in their sole discretion to refuse or remove any Content that is available via the Service. and 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, porn…
Anything can be considered offensive, threatening, libelous, defamatory, pornographic, obscene or otherwise objectionable by some people how do you define such subjective views. There Terms of service are very vague.
You cannot anticipate all future issues but need to be prepared to have the means to act if it creates liability/risk for you (as a company).
Is it against GitHub's TOS? I have a web app, http://www.moviemagnet.net , that's a movie torrent aggregator that I was going to throw up on GitHub after I wrote some integration tests. It would be shocking to me that they would remove the repo since they weren't technically serving torrents.
>> "It would be shocking to me that they would remove the repo since they weren't technically serving torrents." I don't think it matters if they're serving torrents or not. The movie industry will likely sue them anyway and GitHub probably doesn't want to be involved in any way.
I will move away from github if this is true! First the sexism and now this!