Github is obligated to take down the "offending" content as soon as they receive a DMCA notice. It's then on the owner of that content to file a counter claim to restore it.
Even if the content is not in violation of DMCA, your files will be gone for a day or two, or longer depending on how slow the publishing platform operators are to process the counter claim and how long it takes to file the counter claim.
> Github is obligated to take down the "offending" content as soon as they receive a DMCA notice.
No, they aren't obligated to do anything.
Github is immunized from any liability they would otherwise have to the complaining party for hosting the material affected by the notice if they comply within the parameters of the DMCA safe harbor provision (which requires action "expeditiously" rather than "immediately") when they receive a notice.
This is semantics. Because github absolutely would not be able to exist if it lost its safe harbor protections.
So, it is "obligated", in that if it does not follow these laws, then it will 100% have shut down, eventually, due to business reasons.
If the alternative to doing a certain action, is that your business will almost certainly be shut down eventually, then I think that is a reasonable situation to use the word "obligated" for.
> Because github absolutely would not be able to exist if it lost its safe harbor protections.
It wouldn't lose them generally, just with regard to the act of hosting that specific item. Without commenting on the particular case, if the claimed theory of infringement was patently frivolous on its face, even if the notice was formally valid under the DMCA, it would be reasonable for a provider to ignore the notice because they had insufficient risk of liability to concern themselves with.
(This is conversely why providers tend to be less good at responding to counter-notices, again, the only hammer is liability shield, but this is for any liability they would have to the person whose content was taken down for taking it down. As this is usually none to start with, they are quite free to be cavalier with counter-notice process.)
Has anyone tried sending automated DMCA for the entirety of Github? Once half of github is under bogus DMCA, maybe that'll make them think for a minute.
You as a random person would be committing what's essentially (or actually?) perjury and I'd expect you'd either be ignored or prosecuted. Big companies seem to get freebies on this, doubt you would.
Even if the content is not in violation of DMCA, your files will be gone for a day or two, or longer depending on how slow the publishing platform operators are to process the counter claim and how long it takes to file the counter claim.