legoboyvdlp wrote in Tue Mar 26, 2019 2:38 pm:GitHub may be particularly at risk - especially if you think about e.g. FGMEMBERS which has at least one pirated sound file and some navigraph files in its history to my knowledge. Unfortunately this legislation will almost certainly force git sites to implement some form of filtering.
The new law only concerns itself with commercial content hosting; not-for-profit platforms, even if funded by (but otherwise organizationally independent from) for-profit organisations are not required to implement any filtering (though they would still have to answer to takedown notices and such). Currently, all the feasible code hosting platforms are for-profit (github, gitlab, sourceforge, bitbucket), but I can easily imagine a service being run by an NPO, similar to how for example Debian works - commercial stakeholders "donating" money to a non-commercial project. I wouldn't be surprised to see such a platform pop up in the not-so-distant future.
legoboyvdlp wrote in Tue Mar 26, 2019 2:38 pm:However, if they implement filtering or allow responsible projects (ie flightgear and their fgaddon) to prove that they have their own filtering process etc then that shouldn't be a problem
I don't think the law would allow that. If you're a sufficiently large commercial service for sharing user-uploaded content, then you *must* implement a "reasonable" amount of upload filtering, period. The only alternative would be for the hosting platform to negotiate a deal with all the relevant rights holders organizations, paying a flat fee for being allowed to redistribute protected content. This is possible in principle for things like music, where copyright is globally organized through centralized copyright organisations, but for software, no such organisations exist, and copyright is generally negotiated with each rights holder individually.
legoboyvdlp wrote in Tue Mar 26, 2019 2:38 pm:as a worst case scenario, flightgear could host a git repository on flightgear.org - however, the problem would be securing funding for that and it would be very inconvenient as there would not be much capability for forks / pull requests etc.
This isn't super unrealistic, actually. It would require someone to donate sufficient server space and bandwidth, but the requirements are not insane. I'd estimate a couple hundred per year should go a long way.
legoboyvdlp wrote in Tue Mar 26, 2019 2:38 pm:I don't think trademarks would be problematic - isn't this more about copyrights than trademarks (especially since FlightGear is free of charge?)
The law is formulated vaguely enough to cover all forms of "protected content". And being free of charge is completely irrelevant, as long as the hosting platform is a for-profit effort. Copyright, patents, trademarks, moral rights, portrait rights, etc., could all be argued to qualify.