- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
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.
Because of fucking course there is
Were talking about Jesusland after all
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
Gonna be a lot of issues that come from this. Legally speaking. It’s already on the books that an IP address doesn’t represent a single person… so I’m not terribly clear on how they plan to enforce this even if it were to pass.
You assume precedent, consistency, or ethics matter to the current people in power in the US.
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
Net neutrality is why your online jokes were censored under Biden
– John McRacist, Republican congressman, former CFO of Evil Inc., former lawyer of Vile Ltd., member of Christofascism Society and Roman Salutes to Jesus
Not even piracy. Accusations thereof.
I’m pretty sure this supreme court would rule that people don’t have a right to electricity, or even water. They’ll probably be totally ok with people losing internet access as punishment for crossing media owners.
or even water
We never stopped the “lol treaties with Native American tribes don’t count” bullshit.
Besides your point but this is the aspect about Gorsuch that I can’t seem to make internally consistent. He almost always rules in terms of native rights – even when, I think, it stretches his supposed originalist guiding principle – yet is more than happy to rule as a conservative on all other times and support “industry” and big business (even when it stretches his supposed originalist guiding principle).
I know that nothing necessitates a person to act logically and most act from emotion, more than anything, but most people, I find, have a relative reason they think they’re being logically consistent but I can’t seem to suss even that out, with regards to him.
to be fair the treaty never specified anything about water, and the Navajo nations should have had better lawyers or better guerilla warfare tactics if they wanted more negotiating power.
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…
They could even be totally innocent, the mere accusation is enough, wtf?
USCIS can deport a non-citizen for accusations of drug use, including weed.
Let that sink in.
That sink is a vampire, don’t let it in
deleted by creator
Due process seems to just be a recommendation.
Recommendation???
No.
It’s a luxury you can try but only if you can afford it.
Inb4 palantir cuts off your electric and water because you had 15% eye distraction during the mandatory 3hr nightly fox news viewing.
bottle water companies would love this, as would the oil giants
accused piracy, too. Not proven. Not convicted. Just “pirate go bye bye.”
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.
Cut off for sharing, or cut off for running illegal/unsafe/unlicensed wiring and plumbing connections?
For straight up running a hose or an extension cord so they’re not completely doa.
more importantly because of accused. Just accused.
I’m not a United Statesian so I have no clue anymore how it works there, but other places have been making the case that the Internet is an essential service and that access to it is a basic right. So to leapfrog off your question, is that like a poor person stealing a loaf of bread being cut off from food because they didn’t food responsibly enough?
Unfortunately the country I was born in, the USA, is also one that voted against the international resolution to define food as a human right. 😕
didn’t many European countries remove People’s hand for theft a few centuries ago?
They will cut off electricity if you do something illegal with it…
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.
This also sounds like SOPA reborn.
Oh, so like they do in the uncivilized middle-east?
NaaaahGiven the US is ran by the New Fuhrer? I could see this being used against criticism of leadership or anything else resembling free will and not just piracy. I also find it sad that the day the US will probably die as a free country and turn into a dictatorship, is the same day it gained its independence in the first place.
Is ran?
Their uncivilized censorship regime vs. our civilized online child protection and anti-terror laws.
So you bought into the think of the children argument?
You know that’s a red-herring, right? It’s really about eroding privacy.It was supposed to be a reference to a meme making fun of “us vs. them” mentalities. I know enough about the think of the children argument.
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.
Supreme Court: “One of us! One of us!”
Pretty sure they’ve already done that by not regulating social media better
give it a few months, they’re working up to it.
I’m not doing piracy, I am merely training my AI!
The recent judgement did not, in fact, say that pirating was legal if you use the pirated material to train AI.
Call me when all these LLM get their internet cut off then.
Rich people skirting the law is nothing new.
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
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!
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.
The US is such a silly place. Everything is so wrong.
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 😀
so then individuals could just train a model locally on the shittiest hardware they have
deleted by creator
Here i am again doing my duty https://mullvad.net/en/why-privacy-matters
Protip for anyone unfamiliar: Mullvad really is the gold standard for a private VPN. If you just want to pirate shit and not get angry letters from your ISP, Nord or PIA will accomplish that. But if you REALLY want privacy, Mullvad is it.
⬆️
deleted by creator
That mask almost fell but he’ll make sure it doesn’t slip again
We all wear masks
*it has come to my attention that my joke was not funny, that is all
Idk why but the simplicity of it has me convinced and so far it works well.
But if you need to pay for a „Media Flatrate“ anyway, and you have those 5€ a month, why not spend it for a good cause?
(Also PIA and nord cost 12€ a month unless you sign their predatory 2 year contracts [which are even then just like 1€ per month cheaper], so mullvad is just way better in that regard too)
Also features like UDPoTCP let you bypass local network restrictions, and the ability to pay with cash and Crypto is great if you dont want want to/ cant use paypal or a bank account for any reason
“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.
Exactly, sure disconnect customers from the Internet if they use it for entertainment… but once they use it to earn the income that pays their bills, it becomes questionable… and once it is in practice required to be a citizen, at the local, national or supra national level then it becomes a totally different question, to which the answer is basically no, you can’t disconnect someone otherwise you remove their citizenship.
This is how you get a new darknet.
Yep there is no way they can block I2P, they have to block all of it.
In Germany and no doubt some other countries, private law firms can (on behalf of the copyright holders) request people’s identity based on residential IP addresses and then send extortionist legal threats. Apparently an IP appearing on a public tracker can be enough to trigger it, without any confirmed data transfer.
VPNs are common and usually sufficient.
they try that in the US, using mass litigation, but it doesnt work, its usually designed to scare indivudal IP users to “turn them self in”
Don’t public trackers add random IPs?
They could. The protocol also supports IP spoofing, so doxing could also be a thing.
For individuals, it is a time consuming and costly legal process, whether justified or not. For the law firm, it costs a few cents per letter, but they get a few hundred (or more) euros when some sucker pays.
A boy downloaded a movie via torrent without using a VPN.
He died.
Good night! 😴
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),
Ok so now I’m confused entirely. Does that mean leeching I don’t need to do a port forward, but seeding I do?
Which means if I want to leech to get the file then seed when I’m not heavily using my network I’m sort of out of luck?
If you’re purelly seeding (as in starting to seed a torrent from scratch never having downloaded it from the bittorrent client you’re using or having done it a long time ago - days, weeks or longer), without port-forwarding it will simply not work and nobody can connect to your machine and downloade anything for that torrent because all those remote machines that are trying to connect to your client have no association with your machine on the Mullvad Router doing NAT translation.
If you’re downloading a torrent and then leave it seeding for a while after the download phase is over, then it will usually work fine because the Mullvad Router doing NAT Translation still remembers the various remote machines that your machine connected to in the swarm for that torrent during the download stage, hence when those remote machines connect back trying to themselves download stuff from yours, it will know that’s related your machine and thus accept those remote connection and forward them to your machine.
In practice this means that it if you leave your torrents seeding AFTER DOWNLOADING is over, usually (but not always as for torrents with very few peers the swarm is either too small or changes too fast) you can upload more than you downloaded, hence you’re not leeching.
So if you use Mullvad and don’t want to be a leecher, always leave your torrents active and uploading after you’ve downloaded them.
Personally I have mine set to 1.5 upload to download ratio and only seldom does it fail to reach it.
i just use mullvad on my router and port forward directly there
And how do users connect to your port if your VPN-WAN doesnt have a port forward?
Same problem at a different point in the connection.deleted by creator
That still won’t work. Either the forwarded port is getting blocked by Mullvad (which is bad) or you’re bypassing Mullvad to use the forwarded port (which is really bad). You’ve essentially roped yourself into a double-NAT situation, where your router has a forwarded port but the router behind yours (the VPN server, which you have no control over) doesn’t.
Best alternative is a seedbox. Preferably in the Netherlands.
I keep my seedbox in the planter at the coffee shop down the road with free WiFi.
Epic lol
Corporate America over here committing piracy en masse.
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.
I recommend AirVPN. Never had a problem w/ them & doesn’t require a special VPN client.
Ditto.
I also use them but I often get blocked from sites when it’s on
Pirate everything, death to the capitalists.
Get to the point that you don’t want their products. Consuming their stuff at all is like sporting brand name cloths and covering the logo.
Once you do this you will find you don’t need most of it and it’s just a waste of time anyway. The stuff that is authentic and that you genuinely need you can support.
It’s honestly like quitting drugs.
Dude - this is the truth. Thanks for giving me something to work towards.
The mere accusation causing someone to lose the Internet, which is vital to modern life, would be insane.
Additionally, it would do little to nothing to stop piracy.
they actually do think that if you stop piracy people will flock back to streaming services when in reality all that will happen is i’ll just watch more twitch.
i’d just go to a local fast food resturant and bring my portable piracy machine
Then they’ll lobby against public WiFi. I was in China recently and (depending on the province) you need a phone number to access public WiFi so that they know who you are.
I hope that this doesn’t come to the US. Even now, a lot of the available Wifi hotspots are from cable companies (which require their account logins, so they definitely will know who you are).
Would giving a throwaway VOIP number that’s untraceable to someone fool that kind of service, I wonder? Unless caught right away, they would probably have to get their identity on an individual basis.
In China there is no such thing as a throwaway number (at least outside of black markets). All numbers require ID to acquire.
For the US it would be a bit different. VOIP numbers do exist but they are often also blocked by services (this isn’t black and white but there are services that will quite accurately map numbers into ranges like home/cell/business/VoIP).
But of course the assumption would be that if they start requiring phone numbers for WiFi access the logical next step would be to make all numbers traceable to humans.
i imagine you in a mcdonalds with an 80’s era easy bake oven plugged into an outlet in a booth with a sign saying “free cookies.”
I just watch free shit like Tubi, Pluto, Roku, YouTube, Vimeo, Peertube, DailyMotion, etc.
You wouldn’t be able to access twitch. You’d have to buy cable TV or an antenna for the free channels. Either way media wins via commercials.
