Well, the reason I said I'd "probably" uninstall is because, as I mentioned, I was not even aware of the concept of banned add-ins until I got the response in this thread, and my initial reading of the Banned Add-ins page, doesn't make it clear if the issue was the use or the discussion of such on a forum:
"This is an example list of repositories and add-ons that have been identified as violating the Kodi Official:Forum rules. This means they have been banned from any official Kodi forums, websites, IRC channels and any social media accounts that are under the control of Team Kodi or the XBMC Foundation."
What's more, that page goes on to state:
"The basic rule of thumb for what is not allowed, is that if the Add-on is offering something for free that you would normally expect to pay for by any other means, then it'll most likely be using pirate feeds."
So, given that (as can be seen in my log dump), the ONLY add-in I had installed from that repo was "Browser Launcher", it would seem my actions don't meet the criteria for being banned.
Hence, my needing to digest the whole thing and stating I'd "probably" uninstall it, as apparently the issue may be even there mere existence of the repo in your installation, not if you are actually using a plugin that violates any terms of service or attempts to pirate content, which is... weird.
What's more, the Kodi Forum rules state:
"2.5 Piracy Policy
Kodi's Official Piracy Policy
All discussions dealing directly with or linking to add-ons, websites, or services that violate US copyright laws ("pirated content") will be closed when a forum moderator has been made aware of them. The original poster or add-on creator may provide a link to a website not hosted by Kodi for further discussion and inquiries.
Discussions for add-ons that link directly to pirated content and enables the user to access that content through the add-on will be shut down.
All links to pirated content will be removed. Requests on where to obtain pirated content will also removed.
"Pirated content" add-ons, websites, and services typically do not include the following (to be determined on a case-by-case basis if necessary):
A. The add-on does not actually perform the act of accessing pirated content ("mistaken identity") [For example, Sickbeard, which performs no actual downloading or streaming.]
B. The add-on has the potential to access pirated content, but is potentially useful for downloading legal content as well. [For example, an add-on that downloads torrents is not, itself, a problem, since a torrent can cover a wide variety content, including legally distributed videos.]
C. The add-on links/accesses content in a similar way to a normal web browser. This is done under the assumption that if the content owner did not want the content streamed, the owner should have not made the content available to be streamed in their site. [For example, the Bluecop Repository.]
D. The add-on accesses content with permission of the content owner, the content is "copyleft", or the add-on accesses content without the clear disapproval of the content owner. Kodi will do its best to comply with DMCA-related takedown requests.
Thread originators or add-on developers may petition Forum Moderators to re-open a thread that was closed if he or she believes one of the above exceptions applies.
Fair use exceptions apply for issues such as small video samples for testing and debugging, fanart and related artwork, video and audio summaries, subtitles, etc.
These rules apply only to the http://XBMC.org/Kodi.tv websites. At no point will any user be prevented from using Kodi as they so choose, nor will they be prevented from adding additional add-ons from any source they choose to use."
So the repo itself does not access pirated content. The sole add it from that repo I installed also does not access pirated content. So it's not immediately obvious to me that my actions violated anything...
As for "Playing the innocent party", see above... the sole add-on from that repo is an add-on that attempts to launch a browser from a library item containing a URL. Is that considered violation-type behavior, or are assumptions being made?
All that having been said, I appreciate being directed to docs outlining the issues with certain content in some repos. However, the accusations aren't supported by the evidence in the logs... feel free to assume good faith and innocent until proven guilty. Most of us folks new to a product/forum aren't aware of all the nuances right off the bat.
