They DCMA doesn't say that the repo was used to host copyrighted material:
>The identified files and code are preconfigured to find and provide infringing copies of our Members’ film and tv content to Nyaa.si users in violation of copyright law.
They are basically saying "this is the codebase for nyaa.si, and as proof here are a bunch of files that prove that assertion". What I don't understand is the legal grounds they have to compel GitHub to remove the repository. It would be like if I removed ffmpeg from github because freestreams.tv was using it to power their backend.
I understand that, but those files do not show that the repo is preconfigured to host copyrighted files. I don't get what the search XML or database migration is supposed to prove for example.
All they have demonstrated is that it is the source code for nyaa.si. I don't get how that is enough to do anything.
>The identified files and code are preconfigured to find and provide infringing copies of our Members’ film and tv content to Nyaa.si users in violation of copyright law.
They are basically saying "this is the codebase for nyaa.si, and as proof here are a bunch of files that prove that assertion". What I don't understand is the legal grounds they have to compel GitHub to remove the repository. It would be like if I removed ffmpeg from github because freestreams.tv was using it to power their backend.