• forkDestroyer@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Aaron Swartz does it for educational journals and gets the hammer brought down on him. Zuck n’ Co do it and get government funding.

    Boo.

  • meowmeowbeanz@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Zuckerberg’s corporate piracy era is peak hypocrisy. Stealth mode torrenting on company hardware while scrubbing traces to avoid accountability? Classic. Meta’s obsession with “data” apparently includes swashbuckling for copyrighted material—just don’t let the plebs do it.

    ”Smallest amount of seeding possible”? Pathetic. Even leechers have standards. But why bother with ethics when you’re a billionaire playing digital privateer? The courts will shrug, the bourgeois judges will yawn, and Zuck’ll sail into the sunset with his ill-gotten datasets.

    Yo bro, maybe invest in a VPN next time. Or just buy a legislature.

  • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    If we (people in general) do it, we’re being filthy thieves and the reason why everything is bad. But when it’s a megacorpo, it’s suddenly a-OK?

    Screw this shit. Information should be like the air, free for everyone. Not free for the GAFAM chaste and paid for us untouchables.

    • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The sad thing is that corporations have more rights (quantitatively) than humans.

      • Can offset tax liability through complex structures
      • While they cannot vote, they can effectively hide their identity behind Super PACs
      • Any criminal liability results in fines, never jail time for anyone in charge
      • in fact, all corporate executives benefit from liability shield, so long as their actions can be tied back to benefit the company in any way
      • Can own just about anything a human can own, with the added benefit that they belong to the company. Digital rights (e.g. books, movies, etc.) legally belong to an entity that cannot die.
  • tenchiken@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Meta also allegedly modified settings “so that the smallest amount of seeding possible could occur,” a Meta executive in charge of project management, Michael Clark, said in a deposition.

    Douchebags.

    • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I think it’s because in the US downloading and owning is by far not as risky as sharing is.
      They get out of liability like that.

        • uis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Depends on country. In Russia only being first seeder is illegal. New peers fall under “technical limitations” clause.

        • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 hours ago

          So, the minimally illegal way to stiff the people sharing with them. They continue to innovate in the age-old field of bastardry.

      • tenchiken@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 hours ago

        After doing terrible crap for so long without much, if any, punishment leads to brazen and absurd tactics…

        Soon I expect something akin to them running their own marketplace scams or similar fraud just because it’s so profitable vs expense/penalty.

        As you say, it’s like a bad caricature of the stereotype.

  • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Meta also allegedly modified settings “so that the smallest amount of seeding possible could occur,”

    Big tech taking without giving back to the community once again.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I think this is still going to be a net benefit to us, though. Meta may not have contributed much bandwidth, which is leeching in the short term, but in the long term they’re now forced to contribute something much more important; lawyer power. Meta is going to have to fight to defend piracy.

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Well, yes, why would you believe something without seeing it? But given how litigious the publishing industry is about this kind of thing I don’t see it as likely that they wouldn’t fight.

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 hours ago

          You think Meta will just roll over and hand out whatever penalties the publishers demand of them?

          Meta isn’t going to be defending us. It’s going to be defending itself. Because it is now one of us.

          • brisk@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            Secret out-of-court settlement is an option.

            Also known as “bribing your way out of the law”

            • FaceDeer@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              They’ll compare the amount the publishers are demanding against how much it would cost them to lawyer up to prevent that and any future payments. Meta’s heavyweight enough that they can use “lobbying their way out of the law, aka changing the law so that they’re not violating it at all” as a strategy.

              If they do simply pay the publishers off, oh well, at least it’s just the status quo. But I don’t see a reason to assume that’s the way this is going to go. Other countries have already carved explicit exceptions to copyright for AI training, Meta would be in favor of that kind of thing.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Good news is that since feds go after individuals sometimes for petty crimes of piracy, they are surely going to dig in very deep to this corporate piracy with massive crippling fines that will set examples for other companies thinking of doing the same. Right?

  • verdigris
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Motherfuckers are actually arguing that seeding a torrent isn’t “distributing” unless they can show an instance of someone downloading a book from their IP… If that flies they better overturn every fucking piracy conviction ever.

  • kwomp2@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Isnt thatvway to much volume for text? I would imagine every book ever written to be judt a few tb. But I also don’t know much about the issue

    • Obelix@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      7 hours ago

      They downloaded the torrents from Annas Archive, which are standing at ~500TB currently. Keep in mind that you’re dealing not only with text, but also with books scanned as images, books with lots of illustrations, scientific articles with illustrations and also comic books.

    • Christian
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 hours ago

      87.1tb of books is very little?? Have I just been downloading the smallest size pdf and djvu files by pure luck?

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        One sci-hub. Very little if we talk about all literature.