You just didn’t provide sufficient information.

I’m not the one keeping it from turning productive and fruitful. You’re the one withholding the knowledge that would make it so.

No it doesn’t.

So tell me why it’s not legally permissible/enforceable to subpoena STRmix, but subpoenaing GitHub is.

What you said amounts to, “Google what a subpoena is.”

No, but I think it makes more sense to subpoena STRmix for the source code than GitHub. Am I wrong? If so, tell me why.

Regarding the edit: why should I explain anything to you? I already told you what to look up. You can find the information you’re looking for if you want it.

Still think that being able to subpoena one company, based on specific grounds grants you the ability to subpoena another company based on those same specific grounds?

If you wanted to make it obvious that you didn’t look it up, you could have just said “I didn’t look it up.”
But feel free to go on pretending that what you’re equivocating is equivocal.

If they refuse to turn it over, THEN go to GitHub with the subpoena showing that the company refused to comply with.

Right. Because you seem to only be understanding this thread as a single topic and, in addressing that topic, Jill’s response is a net positive. Whereas I understand the thread as a collection of tangents, one of which I believe was incurred (however unintentionally) by Jill’s overbroad statement (and possibly belief).

And all I was doing was providing a counterpoint to a poorly worded (overbroad) dismissal - while including a hopeful allowance that I was being too pedantic. As you note: Jill’s staff on this site. Not just some commenter. We’re looking at two different contexts; you the OP’s myopia, me the professional writer’s…

Nothing I said is in opposition to what you wrote, at all. What I’m saying is that if someone introduces themselves as “John”, and then you later say “It’s over by ol’ Johnathan, over there.” and he then says “It’s actually Johannes!”, then you haven’t been rude to Johannes. You just made an incorrect assumption. If…

[...]none of us should assume anyones’ gender.

Yeah. But that doesn’t make anything you’ve said any more relevant.

[...]which is what RTLewis was addressing.

I might be reading this wrong, but it SEEMS like the intent here is to commoditize gifs? So, like, they would be the ones to produce gifs from the show (as NFTs) and then they would aggressively pursue anyone hosting gifs that contain the same content as their gifs (from which they have generated NFTs)?

The headline is very much making a statement about the nomenclature.

Forest for the trees, friend.

Daaaang! I don’t even have a PS5 yet, and I’ll still be buying both of those next month! What a beautiful set of controllers! I guess my PC will get the pleasure until something comes out on the PS5 for me.