A developer recently shared their frustrating experience on Reddit: they open sourced a project, and within two weeks, someone forked the entire repo, deleted the license file, and claimed the work as their own. This kind of copyright violation isn’t just disrespectful. It undermines the trust that makes open source work in the first place.
Why removing a license file matters
Open source doesn’t mean free-for-all. When you release code under a license, you’re setting clear terms for how others can use it. Most licenses require attribution and specify whether derivative works need to stay open source. When a forker removes your license file, they’re not just being rude. They’re committing a copyright violation and trying to erase the legal framework you established for your work.
This isn’t a gray area. Publishing code you have no right to claim is serious business. Legal experts note that misappropriating trade secrets or violating licenses like AGPL can lead to real consequences. The problem is that enforcement often falls on the original creator, who usually just wants to build cool stuff, not fight legal battles.
The DMCA takedown process
When someone strips your license file and claims your repo as their own, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act gives you a path forward. Platforms like GitHub must respond to valid DMCA takedown notices. You prove the copyright violation, point to your original license file, and request removal of the infringing content.
The catch? It’s tedious and emotionally draining. You’re forced to spend time on paperwork instead of coding. A DMCA notice can remove the stolen repo, but it doesn’t undo the betrayal or automatically restore proper attribution. It’s reactive, not preventative.
As discussed on Stack Exchange, even open source licenses carry legal weight. They don’t strip away your rights to control attribution and distribution terms. You can’t dictate what people build with your code, but you absolutely can enforce how it’s credited and shared. The legal framework exists. The challenge is making it easier for developers to use. You can read more about this at What happens if stolen software is published as Open Source?{rel=“nofollow”}.
Why this hurts the whole community
When bad actors treat open source as a buffet where they can grab code and remove any unnecessary files like licenses, it creates a chilling effect. Developers might hesitate to share their work if they know it could be stolen and rebranded. The collaborative spirit that powers much of our digital infrastructure depends on mutual respect and trust.
This mirrors other digital ownership battles we’ve seen, from Anna’s Archive losing its domain to Thomas the Tank Engine modders facing corporate legal threats. The fight for creative control never really ends, even in spaces designed for sharing.
The bet forker types who strip licenses are gambling that creators won’t have the time or energy to fight back. Sometimes they’re right. But the more the community talks about these violations and uses available tools like DMCA notices, the clearer the message becomes: this behavior won’t be tolerated.
Platforms and communities need better prevention mechanisms. Right now, most of the burden falls on victims to police their own work. That’s backwards. Just as amateurs track secret military strikes with public data by leveraging shared resources responsibly, the open source world needs systems that make ethical use the default, not the exception.
The original discussion that sparked this conversation is worth reading: Reddit Discussion{rel=“nofollow”}. It’s a reminder that even the most generous systems need protection from those who would exploit them. Making a repo copy is fine. Stripping the license and claiming ownership crosses a clear line from collaboration to theft.