Based on that logic, ammunition and arms manufacturers should be held liable for damages as well.
Yes, but that would mean that logic has any bearing on what the Supreme Court decides to do
I hate that you’re absolutely correct
The US has a law to limit the liability of gun manufacturers.
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a U.S law, passed in 2005, that protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. Both arms manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible. However, they may be held liable for negligent entrustment if it is found that they had reason to believe a firearm was intended for use in a crime.
More like, if you steal something you are banned from using roads and sidewalks and doors.
Yeah, sure but to “steal something” is to imply that you’re depriving the original owner use of the thing you stole. This is more like making an exact copy depriving nobody of use of the original thing.
it’s more like depriving someone use of roads, sidewalks, and doors because they got caught walking out of Kinkos
I’m not a judge, but isn’t internet essentially a utility these days? Cutting someone off because of piracy seems like cutting off electricity or water because they did something illegal with it.
This would be the case had net neutrality not been killed off nearly a decade ago
Pragmatically, yes. Legally, no. Progressives have been fighting for years to get internet classified as a utility in the US, and regressives and (ironically) internet companies have been fighting against that effort at every turn in the name of profit.
And now look how well that’s turned out. Gee, if only some people had warned them that deregulation was a monkey’s paw…
I’m some places in the States they will cut off your electricity or water for sharing with a neighbor that has had theirs shut off. I have seen both happen personally, and not in some back water state. They both happened in upstate NY.
If it’s upheld, that’s the precursor to full-blown info blackouts, just cut off internet to anyone ‘accused’ of wrongspeak against the powers that be, which is basically everyone.
Oh, so like they do in the uncivilized middle-east?
Naaaah
Being accused of will lose you access to basic infrastructure? Why not cut electricity too?
Don’t give them ideas. Next they’ll cut the blood stream to your brain.
Pretty sure they’ve already done that by not regulating social media better
give it a few months, they’re working up to it.
So if Meta is convicted of pirating books for AI training, they lose all internet connectivity? 🧐
dint they just rule AI can legally scrape/books, but not for people who are pirating directly.
IIRC the judge said they could use the data for training, but specifically added that piracy is still piracy and he didn’t rule on that.
So Disney can just sue Meta for one trillion 😀
The US is such a silly place. Everything is so wrong.
God willing
I nominate we test with out with the Zuck and his networks.
This still won’t make me pay for Netflix
But it will make me pay for VPNs!
Accused???
Well alrighty then, I hereby accuse the operators of donaldjtrump.com of piracy! Anybody else notice any piratical activity? Foxnews.com seems pretty fishy.
And OpenAI of course.
But it’s not piracy if you use it for an LLM, right‽
Yes we are all training our LLMs. Perfectly legal.
Thanks for reminding me that I need to go train my LLM on the new season of Yellowjackets
And now I’m on a VPN because if they’re just gonna cut people off for accusing of piracy they’re gonna have to cut off everyone with a VPN.
TBH I should have been behind a VPN before
Mullvad is the best $5 and change I spend each month.
I love Mullvad and used them for years, but without port forwarding, they’re not the service you want for torrenting. Some alternatives like AirVPN or ProtonVPN are better suited for that stuff.
Before the haters jump in and tell me “it works fine fer me!” it’s only working because the user on the other end, like myself, have port forwarding set up. Since you don’t have it, you’ll never connect to anyone else like yourself nor will they be able to connect to you.
Of course there are alternatives like streaming and Usenet but there are tradeoffs no matter what you pick.
I don’t think your explanation of why it seems to work is correct.
I seems to work (works in a limited way, even), because any remote machines that your bittorrent client connected to during downloading are temporarilly recorded on the Mullvad router on the other side of your VPN doing NAT translation as associated with your machine, so when those remote machines connect to that router to reach your machine, it knows from that recorded association that those connections should be forwarded to your machine.
This is quite independent of people on the other side using port-forwarding or not.
Port-forwarding on the other hand is a static association between a port in that router and your machine, so that anything hitting that specific port of the router gets forwarded the port in your machine you specified (hence the name “port” “forwarding”). With port-forwarding there is no need for there having been an earlier connection from your machine to that remote machine to allow “call back”.
This is why at the end of downloading a torrent behind a Mullvad VPN will keep on uploading but if one restarts a torrent which was stopped hours or days ago (i.e. purelly seeds), it never uploads anything to anybody - in the first case that NAT translation router associated all machines your client connected to during download to your machine, so when they connect back to download stuff from you it correctly forwards those connections to your machine, but in the second case it’s just getting connections from unknown remote machines hitting one of its ports and in the absence of a “port-forwarding” static rule or a record of your machine having connected to those remote machines, it doesn’t know which of the machines behind it is the one that should receive those connection so nothing gets forwarded.
So it’s perfectly possible to share back when behind a Mullvad VPN but you have to leave the torrent client keep on seeding immediatly after downloading and it will only ever upload to machines which were in the swarm when the client was downloading (they need not have been clients it downloaded from, merelly clients it connected to, for example to check their availability of blocks to download, which give how bittorrent works normally means pretty much the whole swarm)
It is however not at all possible to just start seeding a torrent previously downloaded unless the download wasn’t that long ago (how long is “too long” depends on how long the NAT Translation Router of Mullvad keeps those recorded associations I mentioned above, since those things are temporary and get automatically cleaned if not used),
They have ways to block / identify VPNs.
I think the point is that they can’t easilly track back to a specific client of a specific ISP instances of unlicensed downloading of copyrighted materials if they’re done behind a VPN.
Mind you, they can still easilly track it back to the VPN, so make sure you’re using a provider that puts privacy above all an is not based in countries like the US or UK.
That said, if they just throw an unsupported accusation at you and the ISP cuts you out, using a VPN or not makes no difference.
See you guys in I2P :)
I’m not doing piracy, I’m just trading a lot of data packets with a Proton Server in Switzerland, nothing to see here 😉
“the internet” is a necessity and requirement to function in society. You can’t be denied access to it anymore, it would be disproportionate.
Pretty sure I have read somewhere that it is now also an official necessity in Germany
I think in Finland it is a basic utility like power and water. It is certainly priced like that.
ha. all of my traffic is encrypted and routed through 3 countries. good fucking luck.
lol, they’ll have no customers! ISPs used to send ‘warning’ letters to customers in England but that’s all.
Same in the US.
I got one once from something I know for sure I didn’t download. I always assumed it was a friend of mine staying with us that was torrenting “Boss’s Daughter Big Booty XXX” or whatever it was, but I never really wanted to ask.
Here i am again doing my duty https://mullvad.net/en/why-privacy-matters
