this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
26 points (96.4% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53948 readers
1024 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
top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sgagvefey@lemmynsfw.com 18 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

DMCA subpoenas are nonsense. Having a judge rule on sufficient cause should always be the standard for any subpoena, and DMCA subpoenas can be signed off by a clerk.

A judge evaluating the merit and determining that there's cause for a subpoena is fine. But it's supposed to be the first step, not reliant on a platform pushing back and spending resources to make it happen.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 7 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

The other dumb thing here is X pushing back via the first amendment when multiple district courts have ALREADY ruled and thus set case law and precedent that copyright infringement does not qualify for first protections.

Like I'm not sure why they'd take a tact they probably knew wasn't going to work other than to preen about protecting user rights, but doing it in a way that wouldn't work?