Correct me if I am wrong: the DMCA takedown process was not designed for circumvention devices - this is what courts are for.
This company is not the copyright holder to these patches - they did not write them nor are they derivative works, so they need to use other legal means to approach this situation.
This is not first time this has happened with GitHub.
The weather data that the circumvention provides access to is not copy righted though right? From other comments I gather it comes from public data and is not the companies.
If so it would not meet the criteria in the first sentence of your link:
> The Copyright Act also prohibits the circumvention of technological measures that effectively control access to works protected by copyright.
That is an interesting corner case, not sure if it is a bug or a feature.
That isn't so obvious to me. For all intents and purposes this is no different from crack. I am not sure if DMCA is right tool but I totally understand why Microsoft wouldn't want to host it.
My understanding was that `revanced-patches` contained just that: patches. The patches themselves are applied to the target apps on the end user device, so revanced doesn't need to host prepatched binaries that they don't own the copyright to.
Other moral or legal issues aside, this is a pretty clear abuse of the DMCA as far as I understand it.
No, Revanced only has the patches themselves in the repo, there's zero source code or binary or anything copyright related belonging to Google here, the DMCA is invalid.
This company is not the copyright holder to these patches - they did not write them nor are they derivative works, so they need to use other legal means to approach this situation.
This is not first time this has happened with GitHub.