Meta’s copyright defense may hinge on court ignorance of torrenting terminology.
  • TheFogan@programming.devEnglish
    0·
    19 days ago

    I mean isn’t that at least some extent technically true to a level.

    I mean if we weren’t talking a shitty corporation to begin with. If this were say, a 20 year old mcdonnalds worker pirating game of thrones.

    IMO the bigger concept is still rather than if they got it… defining whether using that data after the fact is legal. I mean hypothetically speaking lets just say they bought 1 copy of each of the millions of books, or bought used copies, or say had a machine that could scan every book in a library. IMO the issue shouldn’t be whether or not anyone managed to download the books in their pure form afterwards. The focus should be the AI trained on their books, is going to be distributing portions of their book to millions of people, and any potential profits of such will be going to meta and uncredited to the original authors. The idea that meta’s involvement in torrenting may have let little timmy get a copy of his text book 15 seconds faster… shouldn’t be the driving force here.

    • Ulrich@feddit.orgEnglish
      0·
      19 days ago

      I mean isn’t that at least some extent technically true to a level.

      It’s completely true. That’s why a lot of people don’t seed. And why your ISP won’t bother you if you don’t.

  • Singletona082@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    19 days ago

    So where’s the MAFIAA? Here you go guys, literal industrial scale piracy.

    Or are you afraid to go after someone that isn’t a teenager in their parent’s back room?

      • Singletona082@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        19 days ago

        I am aware. I was simply demonstrating they were never about money, simply bullying people who couldn’t fight back.

        • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          19 days ago

          Especially since in the height of my pirating years during teenagerdom, no amount of cajoling or coercion could get me to pay for whatever it was because I didn’t have any money. Which not at all coincidentally was why I was pirating it in the first place.

  • distortwave@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    18 days ago

    Well, at least they released llama for free, But honestly, their hypocrisy is so pathetic.

    Hey, who knows? Maybe now they’re gonna like start funding legal defense funds for people torrenting. Part of their whole corporate social responsibility, If they feel so strongly about it… right? /s

  • JackbyDev@programming.devEnglish
    0·
    18 days ago

    This is why I try to find legitimate sites offering direct downloads instead of illegally uploading during torrenting. There are many sites offering direct downloads, but I often have trouble finding them.

  • Jack@slrpnk.netOPEnglish
    0·
    19 days ago

    Also I love how they they don’t say they didn’t seed, just say there is no proof

    • FireTower@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      19 days ago

      This is a motion to dismiss not an answer. That’s how those work. It is linked to by the journalist in the article.

  • hperrin@lemmy.caEnglish
    0·
    19 days ago

    According to the law (the thing that determines if something is or isn’t illegal) it’s illegal. Zuck is a criminal.

  • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.comEnglish
    0·
    18 days ago

    This is honestly a win-win. Either the courts recognize that the LLM uses stolen copyrighted content, or they recognize that torrenting is legal by default.

    Though with the way courts have been bending case law into knots recently, I wouldn’t be surprised if they somehow word the ruling in a way that favors Meta and makes torrenting outright illegal.

    • Wren@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      18 days ago

      Ahh, but you’re forgetting the Rules for Thee clause that protects any and all wealthy, white, corporate gremlins from facing the same or similar consequences that any of the poors might face for the same infraction.

  • spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    19 days ago

    Another example of Republican principles. Corporations are protected by laws but not bound by them, while the average citizen is bound by laws but not protected by them.