- cross-posted to:
- piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- cross-posted to:
- piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
My class action Spidey sense is tingling
Well, at least they released llama for free, But honestly, their hypocrisy is so pathetic.
Hey, who knows? Maybe now they’re gonna like start funding legal defense funds for people torrenting. Part of their whole corporate social responsibility, If they feel so strongly about it… right? /s
Let’s just make legal the evil we do…
So not just they pirated them, which may or may not be a crime and where I may or may not be impartial, but they are also leeches who would be banned on any decent torrent tracker of the olden days.
Truly despicable. Seeding to at least 1 to 1 is the bare minimum of courtesy and humanity. If you dont, its unethical
Hey now some of us just have wildly shit upload speeds and couldn’t hope to reach 1:1 without spending an entire year seeding a single movie.
Seeding shouldn’t be done on ratios - being the only one seeding 10 seasons of a tv show and getting it to 0.4:1 is way more helpful than seeding the same movie as everyone else and getting to 20:1, you’re noy contributing anything there other than decreasing your bandwidth for things that aren’t already at 100,000% availability
I’d you are the only one seeding it and get to 0.4, you just left others hanging with incomplete downloads.
However I do agree in general
That’s what I’m saying
It’s better to not even half-way seed a torrent with low availability than it is to seed one that everyone else is seeding, regardless of how high your ratio goes - it’s a point on how pointless it really is to waste your resources seeding something like that
Seeding to ratios is self correcting, in my inexperienced opinion as I only share ISOs.
Unpopular thing sits on someone’s computer (not mine) for ages just happily waiting until it’s useful. Popular thing is in and out. Purely for files intended to be churned; try a distro (in facebook’s case a book), use it, and delete it.
1:3 could be said to be a minimum (1 for to pay back, 1 to pay forward, and 1 to pay for a leecher)
Things that are going to be archived can be set as limitless as long as strain on hardware can be tolerated.
This is irrelevant because Meta should not be tried for this the same as a private individual would be.
The case for torrenting being illegal for private individuals is one or both of:
- Downloading in of itself is stealing.
- Uploading is giving unauthorized access to someone else who otherwise might have had a harder time finding it. Anything else, such as watching, reading, listening, learning, etc. is not illegal (or does not make sense to make illegal). The exception might be publishing. This is rare for private individuals (e.g. using pirated FL studio to make a commercial song).
For corporations, a lot change. Firstly, a corporation downloading a torrent is necessarily making unauthorized material available for some people of the company. It’s like a group of 20 friends all downloaded and uploaded to each other. Secondly, they used this copyrighted material commercially (like playing pirated music in a public night club). Both should be illegal.
However, all of this is still a distraction. The real issue is using copyrighted materials to train commercial AI. Does Meta require permission from copyright holders to make AI based on their work? The law is grey on this, and desperately needs regulations.
Just my thoughts.
AI has already stolen everyone’s work. The internet is officially a free for all.
just like back in the good ol’ days.
Except in the good ol’ days just about everything on the 'net benefited most of us in some way … and it was free. Now it sure as hell ain’t free and it’s been co-opted to benefit billionaires only.
I started torrenting 23 years ago and it was easy. Just a client, no VPN required. Now I need not only a VPN, but a good router that I can flash with a (still mostly free) program, hours of working out how best to set up the router with wireguard etc, then scroll through dozens of links to try and find a stable stream to watch hockey.
It’s fucking exhausting.
That’s true, it’s not really your problem in most areas if you don’t seed, basically scraping them. If a legal person comes your way it’s not good but for facebook they have lawyers. They will just say not our problem, we never hosted it, just scraped it. not many people would decide to go against facebook lawyers bc they can pay to drain you.
Rules for thee and not for me, plus we PROFIT off of it to boot. But none of you guys can do that. Only for Richys.
Of course that fuck isn’t a good seeder. Leech.
Double Standard!
It’s not illegal to download books without yourself offering them for upload. What’s illegal is when you feed those books into your reality devouring content monster and it outputs all that copyrighted content in a slightly different order and you profit off that content vomit.
Also I love how they they don’t say they didn’t seed, just say there is no proof
This is a motion to dismiss not an answer. That’s how those work. It is linked to by the journalist in the article.
So it’s okay if we download content from well known online repositories?
Another example of Republican principles. Corporations are protected by laws but not bound by them, while the average citizen is bound by laws but not protected by them.
What does this have to do with the Republican party? The other party upholds the same copyright law.
In group and out group baybee!
I want to know how to switch groups.
pull yourself up by your bootstraps and become rich. pretty simple, no?
Too late, you should’ve been born with lots of money. Actually, you could marry someone who’s rich I guess…
You wouldn’t download car…and then upload its stats to a centralised system
Well good news if they are successful in their arguments it can set precedent to make piracy legal.
That’s what I’m saying. Let the Zuck cook.
According to the law (the thing that determines if something is or isn’t illegal) it’s illegal. Zuck is a criminal.