> The fact that copyrighted works were included in the readme shows it was intended for that use
It's an alternative web browser for videos, of course it was intended for copyrighted works, just like Chrome is. I don't understand your argument, is creating alternative web browsers illegal in the US somehow?
It's an alternative web browser for videos, of course it was intended for copyrighted works, just like Chrome is. I don't understand your argument, is creating alternative web browsers illegal in the US somehow?