dmca/2015-06-22-nprobe-counternotice.md

Dear Sir / Madam,

I'm writing regarding a DMCA takedown of my repository https://github.com/kvitaly2005/lprobe reasons published here https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2015-06-04-nProbe.md

I have read and understand GitHub's Guide to Filing a DMCA Counter Notice.

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.

In short: This code I published in the lProbe repository is a legally obtained source code of the nProbe 6 software which was distributed by the author, Luca Deri under the GPLv2 license and therefore, I now have well known rights (GPL 1,2) granted to distribute the source code of application under the same license while preserving the copyright, that I did. There is no GPL violations at my part, so my freedom to distribute and modify the software are in place.

However, author is intentionally misinterpreting and hiding this fact in his communications because of commercial profit he want to get from the new version nProbe 7 that he is now selling at his site.

I'm aware of another similar fraudulent take down author filed to github in 2014 - https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-12-23-nProbe.md

I have the following evidences that at the time of purchase nprobe 6 (April 7, 2014) software was provided to me under GPLv2 license granting the users with all stated rights and freedoms

1. I legaly bought this software and have transaction ID, paypal receipt and confirming email. (Order (id 1396860027) completed [Amount 99.95 EUR][Transaction Id: 6SG00224BG595015G] mail with all headers see ev_1.txt)

2. Author, Luca Deri is clearly stated on his own site that license of nprobe is GPLv2 in the time of purchase, see independent source here: http://web.archive.org/web/20140418232353/http://www.ntop.org/products/nprobe/ in FAQ section: "Q: Is the nProbe™ source code available?" "A: Yes of course, it’s GPL."

3. Binary file installation I get contains text of license and requre that I agree to it. While it is not technically correct, but it also a clear sign that author consciously choose GPL license for the software.

[image: Inline image 1] [image: Inline image 2]

The win32 executable I got after purchase you can run and see yourself: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7otJX4PM2NlbjRPMkFGdW1TZ3c/view?usp=sharing

4. My request to the source code based on GPL freedoms was fulfilled and no other conditions was set in the conversation. (see ev4.txt)

Again, according to the copyleft license author does not have rights to forbid me to distribute a legaly obtained GPL code fork under non trademarked name while I did not remove any copyright and keep the license and so is complaint to the GPL.

Therefore, while Luca Deri, as an author can set any license on distribution of nProbe 7and future versions, as the use of GPLed code is a matter of possible investigation in future, he can not revoke my freedom given by the GPL license of the nProbe 6 while the distribution of it is fully complaint to the GNU Public License.

Based on all above I ask to re enable the content to restore my rights on the software "nprobe 6" given me by the author under GPLv2 license, which is confirmed by all the mentioned evidences.

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.

Best regards, [private]