this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
720 points (97.6% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

52528 readers
123 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

While we can be pretty confident that Reddit has its own motivations (i.e. self-interest) for fighting these lawsuits, this is still a good news story for pirates.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 227 points 4 months ago (6 children)

Food for thought: Lemmy instance admins probably can’t afford $800 an hour corporate attorneys to fight off subpoenas.

[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 94 points 4 months ago (8 children)

Food for though: In the US judges have ruled on multiple occasions that an IP address doesn't actually prove what individual engaged in the act.

[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 81 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Might I direct you to the huge flaming catastrophe of bullshit known as "the police don't give a fuck lol". All they need to do is make it difficult, costly and time consuming to win and fuck you once you get hit with charges. And would you look at that, the US legal system specializes in all 3 of those! How convenient.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 19 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

Doesn’t matter, these are unpaid volunteers standing up instances. Most, if not all, have no desire to fight that battle on their own dime.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Skelectus@suppo.fi 42 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sure, but that's assuming the logs contain your ip in the first place.

[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 54 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Assume they do until proven otherwise

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FrostyTrichs@lemmy.world 36 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago (1 children)

MFW I went to upvote but couldn't because "error: VPN blocked" 😑

[–] Hubi@feddit.de 21 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Huh, I exclusively browse Lemmy through a VPN and I've never seen that one.

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 4 months ago (5 children)

He's probably talking about reddit They no longer allow vpn's or any user obfuscators to browse the site

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 8 points 4 months ago (7 children)

No they don't. I use the site with a VPN often and it generally works

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Chozo@kbin.social 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That doesn't help instance admins at all, though.

[–] Skelectus@suppo.fi 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

It helps admins help you stay anonymous by relieving them from having to cover for you.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 36 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Oops, I accidentally fired the sd card containing my instance running on my raspberry pie.

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 37 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If that is really how you do it, you won't need to fry it, it will happen soon enough by itself.

[–] Cinner@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Seriously. Lemmy is a house made of patchwork quilt, with a bit of pine sap here and there to steady the few boards.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Illecors@lemmy.cafe 28 points 4 months ago

Would be a real shame if my instance's logrotate was set to, say, only keep a few days of webserver logs. Real shame.

Good luck establishing precedent with that!

[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Oh. They sued an instance? 😱
Anyway... here's another 5 hosted in Russia, or a country where piracy is legal, or just don't give a fuck.

[–] t0fr@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

ok but what if in losing the suit, they must give up the logs and IPs?

Before they go under?

like the instance and the people that discussed piracy will be hurt

and it will put fear in others

[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Not all instances keep logs...
Some intentionally discard them, look into the policys of the instance you're signing up to.
All your comments and posts are hosted on your parent instance then shared to the federated instances.
Some instances don't even let you sign up with an email or make it optional.
Lemmy.world keeps logs, but much more controversial instances often don't.
Also it's much more complex, because you have to think about the scope of the potential lawsuit as well as the given evidence that a user is actually sharing the material infringing on their copyright; which will not be a large amount of the user base. They can't simply sue a user for having an account, the user has to actively be sharing infringing material.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 71 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I was going to download their movies to spite them, but looking it up they've only produced complete trash.

[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago

Sorry, you're going to have to be just a little more specific here, I'm wading in a sea of garbage over here

[–] Ascend910@lemmy.ml 59 points 4 months ago (5 children)

I am so conflicted on which side should I be on :/

[–] arthur@lemmy.zip 74 points 4 months ago (3 children)

A rough translation of a brazilian quote for you: "In a fight between these guys, I cheer for the fight".

[–] shea@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 4 months ago

I'm gonna say this all the time now

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Lev_Astov@lemmy.world 51 points 4 months ago

How is it hard to root for the anonymity of people? This is pretty cut-and-dry.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 29 points 4 months ago

If the film industry wins that could be a really awful precedent. Just sayin'

[–] onion@feddit.de 20 points 4 months ago (2 children)

You don't have to (and shouldn't) side with any for profit company

[–] explodicle@local106.com 25 points 4 months ago

I'm glad Reddit won here because it sets a precedent that will protect less well-funded Lemmy instances.

[–] Hylactor@sopuli.xyz 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Small exception for when two for profit companies are fighting each other. At that point it becomes a question of which is the lesser evil.

[–] Slovene@feddit.nl 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kissaki@feddit.de 50 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Firms wanted seven years' worth of IP address logs

I doubt - or hope they don't - Reddit stores them for that long?

[–] jabjoe@feddit.uk 33 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It's data that could have value, so I doubt they don't store it. I think the movie studios didn't offer enough. Or Reddit thought it was too damaging for this particular sale.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Outtatime@sh.itjust.works 50 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

If you think reddit is on your side, think again.

Reddit can eat my ass with a spoon

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 months ago

Exactly, but it's still a helpful win regardless.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca 31 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

Le reddit wins legain, m'fellows!

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago (2 children)

thanks for the pic it really makes my eyes piss jizz in my mouth

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] chalupapocalypse@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

You'll never narwhal my bacon, see!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] db2@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

For real tough, Steve can suck diseased dicks in hell.

[–] AOCapitulator@hexbear.net 15 points 4 months ago

the rare reddit w?

[–] Gooey0210@sh.itjust.works 13 points 4 months ago (3 children)
[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 41 points 4 months ago (2 children)

it's where everyone in Lemmy came from

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] explodicle@local106.com 16 points 4 months ago

An instance with poor interoperability and boot licker admins.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

It was insane to think they would comply with this to begin with. Downloading pirated media isn't illegal, neither is discussing piracy. What is illegal is redistribution, and good luck proving that on a large scale community like this.

EDIT: These are 2 USA based companies, US Laws apply to this context.

[–] Wolf_359@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Careful with this. Downloading pirated content can definitely be illegal depending on where you live.

It's just not usually enforced as heavily as redistributing.

[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (8 children)

More specifically there is no US Federal Law about obtaining pirated works, only the Redistribution

17 U.S. Code § 506 - Criminal offenses

(a)Criminal Infringement.—
(1)In general.—Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed—
(A)for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;
(B)by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180–day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or
(C)by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.
(2)Evidence.—
For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement of a copyright.
(3)Definition.—In this subsection, the term “work being prepared for commercial distribution” means—
(A)a computer program, a musical work, a motion picture or other audiovisual work, or a sound recording, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution—
(i)the copyright owner has a reasonable expectation of commercial distribution; and
(ii)the copies or phonorecords of the work have not been commercially distributed; or
(B)a motion picture, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution, the motion picture—
(i)has been made available for viewing in a motion picture exhibition facility; and
(ii)has not been made available in copies for sale to the general public in the United States in a format intended to permit viewing outside a motion picture exhibition facility.

So, basically, downloading cracked adobe products is always right. It's always morally acceptable. But your provider is risking their ass.

The big industry names want to make you believe that you'll be punished for downloading a car. It's all fearmongering.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›