272
this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
272 points (99.6% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
59920 readers
119 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
🏴☠️ Other communities
Torrenting/P2P:
Gaming:
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Remember when Aaron Swartz tried to do something similar and received multiple life sentences
And was intimidated so bad by the legal system he killed himself.
What Swartz did was not even close. What he did was absolutely fair use. He downloaded shit from JSTOR while at MIT which is fine because MIT allows students and employees to access JSTOR. There was no evidence that he shared anything.
His real crime is threatening profits of a corporation...
MIT is forever disgraced for their conduct and should be stripped of their tax exempt status.
If they don't respect copyright I don't respect it either
We just need to wait until copyright regulations get killed... Right?
Right?
Right...?
Surely they would...
Copyright lobby begs to differ. 😂
My Mullvad account begs to differ. And it makes my banker happy!
Meta did not immediately respond to Ars' request for comment and has maintained throughout the litigation that AI training on LibGen was "fair use."
When I upload a single half century old photo to Wikipedia, I have to fill out a relatively complicated form proving that it meets "fair use" standards. Internet Archive got legally fucked for allowing people to read their book scans without restriction for a while. And now these absolute cunts have the gall to defer to "fair use"! I really wonder if the same authors and publishing houses who sued IA will do anything about this.
See, Meta is rich and US laws don't seem to apply to American oligarchs.
well the problem here is these laws have no teeth other than fines….
if you’re very rich, a fine is just a cover charge… and cheaper than doing it legally anyways.
That aside, there exist other charges such as jail time however long or short and penalties as a percentage of assets (such as in some Nordic countries)
“Plaintiffs do not plead a single instance in which any part of any book was, in fact, downloaded by a third party from Meta via torrent, much less that Plaintiffs’ books were somehow distributed by Meta,” the company writes.
Another reason to hate Meta, now they're scummy leechers even though they could afford the bandwidth to seed back
Capitalists aren't in the business of sharing.
Parasite's entire MO is to never give back.
Downloading and seeding are very legally different.
Of course they didn't seed. Fucking leeches.
They were leeches without the torrenting.
This doesn’t mean that Meta denies using shadow libraries, its argument is that using such data to train its LLM models constitutes fair use under U.S. copyright law.
Oh wow, I'm very much looking forward to this argument... "We believe pirating the copyrighted commercial works of others en masse to develop our own commercial product constitutes fair use... China bad!"
And they probably never reseeded it afterwards either, the inconsiderate prats
And they should pay for every book they stole :)
did they seed back tho ?
What do you think?
Meta also allegedly modified settings "so that the smallest amount of seeding possible could occur,"
I don't usually like Meta, but here they used that data to produce open weights models available to the public. That sort of thing is what piracy is for so I support it.
That's a lot of Far Side books.