GitHubのサポート担当者Brian Goldを2026/08/26に訴訟します

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

[DISTRICT TO BE DETERMINED]

QIANYU YANG,
Plaintiff,
v.
GITHUB, INC.,
Defendant.

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff's Demand for Jury Trial

Plaintiff Qian Yu Yang (“Plaintiff”) brings this action against Defendant GitHub, Inc. (“GitHub” or “Defendant”) concerning the restriction and suspension of Plaintiff's GitHub accounts and alleges as follows:

---

I. INTRODUCTION

1. This action concerns the suspension and restriction of GitHub accounts operated by Plaintiff, including the accounts q1anyuyang and qianyu15.
2. Plaintiff used these accounts for software development, repositories, experiments, and preservation of development-related work.
3. On or about June 10, 2026, GitHub restricted the q1anyuyang account.
4. On or about July 30, 2026, GitHub suspended the qianyu15 account.
5. GitHub stated that the suspension of qianyu15 was based on an alleged violation of GitHub's Acceptable Use Policy concerning threats of violence and violent content.
6. Plaintiff subsequently sought review and clarification through GitHub Support.
7. On August 13, 2026, GitHub Support informed Plaintiff that GitHub had reviewed the account but would not reinstate it.
8. Plaintiff contends that GitHub has not provided sufficient information to permit Plaintiff to understand the factual and contractual basis for the restrictions, the relationship between the affected accounts, or the basis for refusing reinstatement.
9. Plaintiff seeks appropriate relief concerning the account restrictions, the procedures used to impose them, and damages to the extent permitted by applicable law.

---

II. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff Qian Yu Yang is an individual residing in Japan.
2. Defendant GitHub, Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business in California, to Plaintiff's knowledge.
3. GitHub operates the GitHub platform and provides services used by Plaintiff.

---

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff invokes the jurisdiction of this Court only to the extent permitted by applicable federal law.
2. To the extent federal-question jurisdiction exists, jurisdiction is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
3. To the extent diversity jurisdiction exists and all statutory requirements are satisfied, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely upon 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
4. Venue is alleged to be proper only if authorized by applicable law, the parties' agreement, and the applicable forum-selection provisions.
5. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend this Complaint if jurisdiction or venue is determined to lie in another court or forum.

---

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

A. Plaintiff's GitHub Accounts

1. Plaintiff maintained multiple GitHub accounts for software development and related activities.
2. Among those accounts were q1anyuyang and qianyu15.
3. The accounts contained development-related history and materials associated with Plaintiff's activities.

B. Restriction of q1anyuyang

1. On or about June 10, 2026, GitHub restricted q1anyuyang.
2. Plaintiff sought clarification concerning the restriction.
3. Plaintiff disputes the adequacy and accuracy of the explanation provided concerning the basis for that restriction.
4. Plaintiff requested review of the decision.

C. Suspension of qianyu15

1. On or about July 30, 2026, GitHub suspended qianyu15.
2. GitHub's suspension notice stated that the moderation action followed a determination that the account violated GitHub's Acceptable Use Policy concerning threats of violence and gratuitously violent content.
3. Plaintiff acknowledges that certain communications made during the support process contained inappropriate or strongly worded language.
4. Plaintiff disputes that the circumstances surrounding those communications were adequately considered or explained in the resulting enforcement decision.
5. Plaintiff requested review and reinstatement.

D. Subsequent Support Review

1. Plaintiff continued communicating with GitHub Support regarding the restrictions.
2. During the support process, Plaintiff encountered account-verification and access-related difficulties because the affected account was already restricted.
3. Plaintiff ultimately submitted requests through a support route that permitted the request to proceed.
4. On August 13, 2026, GitHub Support stated that it had reviewed the account but remained unable to reinstate it.
5. GitHub Support further stated that future contact concerning the restrictions might be closed without response.
6. Plaintiff contends that this response did not adequately explain the factual basis for the continued suspension.

E. Relationship Between Accounts

1. Plaintiff seeks clarification concerning how GitHub determined that the accounts operated by Plaintiff were related for enforcement purposes.
2. Plaintiff further seeks clarification concerning whether each account was independently reviewed.
3. Plaintiff does not contend that GitHub is prohibited from enforcing its policies against related accounts.
4. Plaintiff contends that enforcement decisions should nevertheless be based on applicable contractual and policy provisions and should not rest upon an erroneous factual association or an inadequately reviewed determination.

---

V. COUNT I

BREACH OF CONTRACT

(To the extent permitted by the applicable GitHub Terms)

1. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 39.
2. Plaintiff entered into an agreement with GitHub governing the use of GitHub's services.
3. Plaintiff performed, or substantially performed, the obligations applicable to the services at issue, except to the extent GitHub alleges otherwise.
4. GitHub was obligated to perform its contractual obligations in accordance with the applicable Terms of Service and other governing agreements.
5. Plaintiff contends that GitHub's restrictions and suspension were inconsistent with those contractual obligations to the extent GitHub failed to apply the governing terms correctly or acted outside the authority granted by those terms.
6. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result.

---

VI. COUNT II

BREACH OF THE IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING

(To the extent recognized and not displaced by the governing agreement)

1. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 45.
2. The applicable agreement imposed contractual duties concerning the parties' performance of their respective obligations.
3. Plaintiff alleges that GitHub's handling of the restrictions and subsequent review deprived Plaintiff of contractual benefits to which Plaintiff was entitled, to the extent such conduct is not authorized by the governing agreement.
4. Plaintiff further alleges that the refusal to provide meaningful review or clarification may constitute a breach of applicable contractual duties, if recognized under the governing law.
5. Plaintiff suffered damages as a result.

---

VII. COUNT III

DECLARATORY RELIEF

(If available)

1. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 50.
2. An actual controversy exists concerning Plaintiff's rights under the applicable GitHub agreement and GitHub's authority to maintain the restrictions at issue.
3. Plaintiff seeks a judicial determination concerning the parties' respective rights and obligations.
4. Plaintiff requests appropriate declaratory relief concerning the application of the governing agreement and policies to Plaintiff's accounts.

---

VIII. DAMAGES

1. As a result of the restrictions and suspension, Plaintiff alleges loss of access to GitHub services and disruption to software-development activities.
2. Plaintiff further alleges loss of access to development history and other materials maintained through the affected accounts.
3. Plaintiff seeks damages in an amount to be established through evidence at trial, subject to any contractual limitations, exclusions, arbitration provisions, or other applicable restrictions.

---

IX. REQUEST FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment in Plaintiff's favor and:
A. Declare the rights and obligations of the parties concerning the affected GitHub accounts;
B. Order such restoration or other equitable relief as is legally available concerning the affected accounts;
C. Award Plaintiff compensatory damages in an amount proven at trial and permitted by applicable law;
D. Award Plaintiff allowable costs and, where legally authorized, attorney's fees;
E. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

---

X. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
Respectfully submitted,
Qianyu Yang
Plaintiff, Pro Se
Address: Yokohama, Japan
Email Address: [e-mail]
Date: August 25, 2026