Once upon a time, people KNEW that the burden of proving someone had broken the law was on the accuser. Not one person here has proven this was an illegal upload, yet whoever was good enough to create this PND in the first place has been assumed guilty, and their efforts withdrawn from circulation without even so much as an official "cease and desist" request. Frankly, this kind of community paranoia and over reaction is contemptible.
I believe you are entirely wrong in your assessment. I don't think it's contemptible of the community to be cautious. The file is still there, the link can be found easily, and restored in a heartbeat, and there's a lot of optimism about it. It's not like we've ceased talking about it.
Because you see, a C&D is not necessarily the first step. Rovio can, without any warning whatsoever, launch directly into litigation. Now, EvilDragon and OPT in general would be found entirely innocent in this, even if the link were left up. There is no evidence that Rovio could provide that would prove OPT is encouraging people to pirate anything, especially not Angry Birds, but they could try anyway, and in trying it would tie up everyone in a potentially expensive and definitely time consuming trial.
You are very mistaken in "innocent until proven guilty" as well. That is what a lot of papers and people try to say, but there has never, ever, at any point in time anywhere in history, been such a thing. If people truly were "innocent" until proven guilty, no one would be detained until after a complete trial; arrests could not be made based on "sufficient" evidence because sometimes "sufficient evidence" turns out to not be enough proof in a court of law, let alone merely suspicion. You are innocent until accused of a crime, then you become an accused: neither innocent nor guilty. If you cannot be proven guilty, you become innocent again, but during the time you are accused there are bills to pay, places to go, lots of people to talk to. This IS how it is, it is how it has always been, it is how it needs to be in order for the system to have even a chance of working, unfortunately. Innocent until proven guilty is a fallacy. It should be "innocent unless proven guilty", and that is precisely how it (usually, for better or for worse) goes.
By taking preemptive precautions until things are properly sorted out, we keep OPT well within the innocent side, and away from the accused. Yes, if Rovio chose to accuse them of infringement they would eventually be found innocent due to the "innocent unless proven guilty" but in the meantime they are still "accused", and with it comes bills, places, people, and above all time that OPT really can't afford to spend.
