7.4 KiB
Are you the owner of the content that has been disabled, or authorized to act on the owner's behalf?
I am the owner of the content that the requester is willing to take down.
What files were taken down? Please provide URLs for each file, or if the entire repository, the repository's URL:
The requester did not specify the list of files for taking down. Based on this I assume the entire https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit repository was meant.
Do you want to make changes to your repository or do you want to dispute the notice?
I want to dispute the notice.
Is there anything else you think we should know about why you believe the material was removed as a result of a mistake? (optional)
The license and the copyright for the https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit have been changed in the 6245de17ae since the repository has been unforked from the https://github.com/cibox/cibox and no longer contains the work of the original development.
The https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit was the fork of the https://github.com/cibox/cibox since November 9, 2015 (c4f4dd8b86). The license type and the copyright had been changed on December 24, 2016, within the 6245de17ae. On the same day, on December 24, 2015, the software had been renamed from "cibox" to "cikit" indeed (as the requester mentions, referencing to the 58c949b1d2). But in fact, if someone takes a closer look, it becomes obvious that the https://github.com/cibox/cibox has never had the codebase that had been renamed (Vagrant provisioner, written on Ruby, control utility, written on Bash etc.). The project had remained under the name "cibox" until I decided to take a completely different direction.
After all mentioned above, I, [private], stating the following:
- I am the main creator and author of the code of https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit since December 24, 2015.
- I do not claim an authorship of the idea, mortgaged in the https://github.com/cibox/cibox (which is a root repository).
- I am sure the idea of the https://github.com/cibox/cibox (which is a root repository) cannot be copyrighted and is not the original and/or unique since the world knew at least single project, directed to do a similar job - https://github.com/geerlingguy/drupal-vm.
- The https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit has the components that the main project has never had (March 5, 2016 -
f16f349bbb, November 23, 2015 -e2524f3ce7etc.) and the requester is not liable to ask for taking down the entire repository. I am wondering whether the requester made an investigation and comparisons of two repositories before submitting the DMCA request. - I know the https://github.com/cibox/cibox is using modified copyrighted materials without mentioning that. Having a look at the
ae6ab8bfa5/core/cibox-jenkins/defaults/main.yml (L60-L61)the https://cibox.github.io/cibox-jenkins-theme/cibox-theme.css may be found. By the link is a modified and compiled source code of the https://github.com/afonsof/jenkins-material-theme, which is a MIT-licensed project. - I have the evidence of prejudice of [private] towards me, I have witnesses to the conflict we had and I am ready to provide all the needed information in a case. The requester, [private], knew about the https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit all the time and never had an interest in the project (even when I was a contributor to the main repository - https://github.com/cibox/cibox/commits?author=BR0kEN-) until he got started to be motivated by personal animosity.
I completely disagree with the following statement of the requester: "MOst of the job done in CIKit repo started from rename cibox to cikit".
Most of the job that was done in https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit was connected to the virtual machine provisioning style (host-based instead of guest-based), Ansible compatibility, a centralized utility for actions controlling and, a bit later, to custom Vagrant provisioner that https://github.com/cibox/cibox has never had.
[private] - is a developer with more than 10 years of experience, one of the creators of the https://github.com/cibox/cibox who had inspired a lot of people to contribute to the Open Source software. It is strange that the person who like no one else understands all technical details, states that "most of the job" in the fork is reduced to files renaming. Why does he not notice on explicit changes in the fork? Why is he providing with misleading information?
I completely disagree with the following statement of the requester: "I've asked Br0ken (fork's owner) to fix License issues and received "No".".
I was not asked, directly or indirectly, to change the license or the copyright by [private] or anyone who, as stated, affected. I did not receive any contact requests from [private] or anyone else who, as stated, the copyright owner or authorized to act on behalf of it. Please, provide the evidence of the actions you are describing.
I have to clarify on the "you can see that even logo was done in a same style" phrase. The logo that was a part of the https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit has been made via public instrument - http://patorjk.com/software/taag/#p=display&f=ANSI%20Shadow&t=CIIKIT. Just visit the link.
As a counter-gesture, I am ready to contact the requester and describe him all technical aspects of the development in case he is not willing to dedicate the time to delve into the https://github.com/BR0kEN-/cikit.
Type (or copy and paste) the following statement: "I swear, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good-faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled."
I swear, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good-faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.
Type (or copy and paste) the following statement: "I consent to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which my address is located (if in the United States, otherwise the Northern District of California where GitHub is located), and I will accept service of process from the person who provided the DMCA notification or an agent of such person."
I consent to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which my address is located (if in the United States, otherwise the Northern District of California where GitHub is located), and I will accept service of process from the person who provided the DMCA notification or an agent of such person.
Please confirm that you have you have read our Guide to Submitting a DMCA Counter Notice: https://help.github.com/articles/guide-to-submitting-a-dmca-counter-notice/
I have read and understand GitHub's Guide to Filing a DMCA Counter Notice.
So that the complaining party can get back to you, please provide both your telephone number and physical address:
Telephone: [private]
Address: [private]
Please type your full legal name below to sign this request:
[private]