this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
821 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

59597 readers
3518 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1Fuji2Taka3Nasubi@lemmy.zip 56 points 10 months ago (2 children)

If Meta win this lawsuit, does it mean I can download some open source AI and claim that "These million 4k Blu-ray ISOs I torrented was just used to train my AI model"?

Heck, if how you use the downloaded stuff is a factor, I can claim that I just torrented those files and never looked at them. It is more believable than Meta's argument too, because, as a human, I do not have enough time to consume a million movies in my lifetime (probably, didn't do the math) unlike AIs.

But who am I kidding, I fully expect to be sued to hell and back if I were actually to do that.

[–] UNWILLING_PARTICIPANT@sh.itjust.works 15 points 10 months ago (4 children)

You can be actually be sued for piracy? Is this mostly in the United States?

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

The most common method for this to happen is to get sued for distributing pirated material. They go after you for the upload from your torrent. They stoped doing this about a decade ago though.

[–] 1Fuji2Taka3Nasubi@lemmy.zip 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think you can be sued in the civil court for anything if someone has the time and money and can convince a lawyer to take up a case against you. For copyright infringment, you can also be criminally prosecuted in some cases.

[–] wikibot@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:

Criminal copyright laws prohibit the unacknowledged use of another's intellectual property for the purpose of financial gain. Violation of these laws can lead to fines and jail time. Criminal copyright laws have been a part of U.S. laws since 1897, which added a misdemeanor penalty for unlawful performances if "willful and for profit". Criminal penalties were greatly expanded in the latter half of the twentieth century, and those found guilty of criminal copyright infringement may now be imprisoned for decades and fined hundreds of thousands of dollars. Criminal penalties, in general, require that the offender knew that he or she was committing a crime, while civil copyright infringement is a strict liability offense, and offenders can be "innocent" (of intent to infringe), as well as an "ordinary" infringer or a "willful" infringer.

^to^ ^opt^ ^out^^,^ ^pm^ ^me^ ^'optout'.^ ^article^ ^|^ ^about^

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

What is wrong with this bots opt out message lmao

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Could be that your client, like mine, doesn’t support this particular flavor of markdown, or the markdown could just be wrong. I’m honestly not sure which.

[–] Asudox@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

It's the former. This, for example, also appears weird in Jerboa. Seems fine in the web version though.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago

I figured it was a markdown thing, all I see is carrots

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago

You can be sued in any court for copyright infringement, but the US is generally unique in that punitive damages can be awarded - ie the rightsholder can be awarded more than the damage they actually suffered. In other, more reasonable jurisdictions, only actual damages are awarded. Thus it is not worthwhile to prosecute in those jurisdictions, because the damages are less than the cost of prosecution.

On top of this, I believe copyright is one of the rare exceptions in the US where legal costs of the plaintiff are paid by the losing defendent. Given that the plaintiff in copyright has so much money, they can afford to front the cost of the most expensive lawyers, further penalising their target. Other jurisdictions generally award costs to the winner by default (both ways), rather than only in specific exceptions, but they also limit those costs much more reasonably.

[–] Siegfried@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I heard that this is a common thing in central Europe, but i would love anyone to confirm it.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 10 months ago

If you could survive discovery and defend any other uses evident on your home devices....

But why does that strike me as really unlikely?