• Leraje@lemmy.worldEnglish
    57830·
    1 year ago

    Might be worth remembering here that Lemmy instances, including .world are hosted by regular people. Not massive multinational companies worth billions who can engage the best legal talent around.

    If Hollywood comes after a Lemmy instance, Holywood have a huge legal team and endless money. The Lemmy instance has some guy. They could quite literally destroy a persons life. With that in mind, I don’t blame any instance owners for erring on the side of taking a stance that won’t put them in the legal firing line.

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4311·
        1 year ago

        It’s be nice if there’d been some discussion first, and perhaps a solution other than an admin vanishing a community without notice. Even just some text informing the user “You can’t see this content on lemmy.world. Please go to the instance directly”.

        Regardless if the decision is understandable, the method used here is not going to sit well with people. After how many years of spez, these kinds of behind the scenes snap decisions that change the site overnight with no apparent regard for the community is going to leave a bad taste in people’s mouths. It wouldn’t have hurt to bring it to the community rather than just shadow banning without a word.

        Not even because there needed to be a discussion, but just as a basic courtesy.

        It doesn’t inspire confidence or endear the instance to its users.

        • teolan@lemmy.worldEnglish
          171·
          1 year ago

          Even just some text informing the user “You can’t see this content on lemmy.world. Please go to the instance directly"

          That would have to be supported by Lemmy, which I believe is currently not the case.

        • TheBeanDream@lemmy.worldEnglish
          43·
          1 year ago

          You’re welcome to go to a different instance. That’s the entire point of lemmy. If you don’t like how an instance is ran you can go somewhere else.

    • RadButNotAChad@lemmy.worldEnglish
      806·
      1 year ago

      This is a well reasoned answer. If this were my instance I would also ban communities linking to pirated software. A single lawsuit and lawyer bill for a regular guy, and that can fuck your life up all because you tried to run a decent community. I have a username I use for browsing lemmynsfw, I’ll make one for browsing piracy related things too.

      • agent_flounder@lemmy.oneEnglish
        83·
        1 year ago

        Best bet I think is to set up a non-profit limited liability type of company. Then at least there is a good chance the individual doesn’t get fucked. (Ymmv depending on legal jurisdiction of course)

        • AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.worldEnglish
          16·
          1 year ago

          You still need expensive lawyers to defend yourself. Registering a LLC isn’t a get out of jail free card and corporations don’t shield you from personal criminal liability (unless you’re rich, see comment about expensive lawyers).

    • Durotar@lemmy.mlEnglish
      3831·
      1 year ago

      Why would Hollywood come after them? It is not like people are sharing movies there. Posts there are etremely mild.

        • QuazarOmega@lemy.lolEnglish
          211·
          1 year ago

          Oh man I had forgotten about that thing, it’d be so awful if they end up never winning the case, I really like what Quad9 does and stands for

      • Leraje@lemmy.worldEnglish
        506·
        1 year ago

        I’m not saying they are or aren’t. I’m simply saying that we all know the big media companies go after people at the drop of a hat. They recently tried to get reddit to expose the identities of people discussing piracy over there. To their credit reddit told them no and defended themselves legally. And that’s the issue. The media companies can accuse anyone of anything if it even slightly smells like piracy and the target has to legally defend themselves. This is fine if you’re a multibillion valued company. Not so fine if you’re just some guy who just wanted to run a Lemmy instance out of his own pocket.

    • moitoi@feddit.deEnglish
      43·
      1 year ago

      For me, it looks like people are mad at the US defaultism of the decision.

      I understand why. It makes for part of the users no sense as they are protected by the law. It looks like a US “shitshow”. Countries are protecting the IP of the person, making it nearly impossible to pursue someone. Others have law allowing the use and the copy of copyrighted material for educational purposes. Some allow the download of copyrighted material.

      It’s the same with GDPR. Meta must comply. There is no exception because US defaultism.

      And we can understand this point of view too. It’s not binary as the US people think it is. It’s more mixed depending of the country.

      Generally, outside of this drama, on the internet, people are reclaiming they right and don’t want the US “example” anymore. They want the internet following their local laws like the GDPR for Europeans. They have the right to claim it. Thanks to GDPR, mandatory usb-c, battery replacement and others laws in Europe and outside, the consciences of are awakened that the US is not the model to follow in terms of law on the internet and technologies.