Having a piracy channel on an instance located in a country that does not recognize intellectual property, and a DNS registration in a TLD that doesn't respond to piracy complaints should be pretty bullet proof. Only thing that companies could do at that point would be to try to get a court order to have the DNS entry blocked by US \ EU \ etc DNS providers, or a court order for ISPs blocking the server IP address. These could be easily circumvented by changing the server IP if it happens and updating the DNS.

[–] NightFantom 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Would every instance federated with the piracy instance be at risk as well? Like how facebook or reddit would be for user uploaded content in some jurisdictions

[–] Stimmed@reddthat.com 5 points 1 year ago

There are many variables that makes a yes no answer impossible. Currently there are too many instances for a lawsuit to be brought to each. The instances are in different countries, do different laws would have to be navigated for each. For example, in the US, Google has like to piracy websites. Google doesn't allow housing of piracy on their platform. Google does some removal of listings but it is but exhaustive.

Google is not being held liable, and I bet if an instance happens to cache piracy content due to a user interacting with another insurance, Google and ISPs would be interested in helping that instance so president isn't set that creates liability for traffic that happens to traverse servers, if it is but being served by the server.

This is a very ELI5, and isn't a full discussion of all the variables. A difficult question even limited to one country's laws.

Realistically, the while point of a federation us to make it impossible to shut down, or censor world wide, the community as there are simply too many different servers. This works against corporate attacks as well as legal.

[–] hannes3120@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah I'd guess that such an instance would be on a lot of Blocklists very soon since pretty much everyone hosting instances is doing it as a volunteer and not as a job so noone wants to have this kind of legal trouble as a possibility

[–] JoeKrogan@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Plus its no harm to discuss it and links can be added in base64 or hidden in images so you could just post an image of a game with the link hidden inside. Then users just download the image and run a command to extract the link.

One such tool is called steghide. That way there is no takedown as there is no link in a search engine so its not found. steghide should be in your distro's repository. I'm sure there is probably some windows version too

[–] IsThisLemmyOpen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

deleted by creator

[–] Cmmndrkn@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just my uninformed personal opinion, but the way I see it is that considering Lemmy isn't a corporation and isn't focused on ad revenue, I doubt we'll see the same tight strangulation of rules like we see on other sites. Reddit was a far more free platform in the early days, but once investors and capital growth entered the mix we saw a vast tightening of what was and wasn't accepted on the site. This is just my hope though, as I'm thoroughly enjoying the feeling of the "old" internet that Lemmy has given me since I joined last week.

[–] damipereira@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the problem is that some random lemmy mod won't want to deal with DMCA takedowns and threats, so they will probably enforce it down, which is understandable.

[–] Cmmndrkn@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Good point, hadn't considered the individual repurcussions.

[–] Sleeping@programming.dev 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well considering the instance that !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com is run on is run by the MOD's as long as you follow the rules you should be fine.

[–] bandario@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could you elaborate a little? I think I've got a reasonable handle on how Lemmy works across instances, but there are still a couple of things that I haven't grasped just yet.

User accounts - I have accounts with the same username across 3 or 4 different instances at this point. I'm still yet to grasp how a ban would work in the fediverse, or who would ultimately be responsible for a global ban. If I were banned for posting piracy related content on one instance, would that just mean that I can no longer participate on that particular instance? That nobody from that instance could see my posted content from other instances? Would all of my content disappear altogether? Is there some sort of link between my accounts given that they have the same username?

It's all quite confusing on that front.

Overarching powers - is the banhammer truly localised, or is there an over-arching censor power that could wipe out a user across multiple instances at once?

Thanks to anyone who can help to answer.

[–] Sleeping@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

Let's say you're on your lemmy.ml account, and you get banned from the lemmy.dbzer0.com instance, you would just be banned from that instance not all instances. But if you got banned on lemmy.ml from lemmy.ml then you'd lose access to that account. Alternatively, you can also get banned on a community level as well. In regard to your accounts with the same name between instances there is no link, they are entirely separate.

[–] TheCookieButter@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

I hope less restrictive. Would be nice to speak about these things without feeling like a speakeasy and having to play cherades to help a fellow out.

[–] chocolate_mintute_man@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 1 year ago

The tricky bit is that a smaller ownership structure makes the owners more personally liable, as arguments could more easily be made that the entire server exists to service the most active channel regardless of the other content. Larger platforms are better able to utilise Safe Harbour rules. As someone else has said, it also matters where the servers are located.

[–] variants@possumpat.io 2 points 1 year ago

depends on your instance owner and where they live

load more comments