this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2024
421 points (97.7% liked)
Technology
59689 readers
3324 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Talking is irrelevant. It's debatable whether they're actually entitled to even compel the sub to be closed, as they didn't allow links to anything infringing, and discussion is protected. I just ignored that because I don't care.
Nothing there says anything that indicates there is any effort to restrict the information gathering to people actively distributing anything on the relevant platforms. Trying to demand the personal information of participants in discussions without direct, explicit proof that that account actually distributed pirated content makes them bad people. It is not excusable behavior.
There's a distinction between talking about piracy and admitting to committing copyright infringement on a public forum: the former is discussion, and the latter is self-incrimination. It's not going to actually matter unless that person makes themselves worthwhile to go after, but that doesn't make it any less stupid of an idea to admit to it in the first place.
I'm not sure where you got the idea that I'm excusing Nintendo's overreaching demands from. Nowhere in my comment did I claim that Nintendo is entitled to any of the requested information.
No, there isn't. Admission is unconditionally not grounds to gain information.
The literally only way there's any grounds to give them a single bit of information is in response to a direct, clear, action facilitating distribution of specific content Nintendo owns. They could provide direct evidence that they have pirated every piece of content Nintendo has ever made and it would not be excusable for Nintendo to even ask for their information.
As per my previous comment:
And yes, you're correct: they could download every game ever created without paying for it and shout from the rooftops about doing so, and nobody would have a valid claim against them because that's not copyright infringement.
I'm specifically talking about the brilliant geniuses who, in no uncertain terms, state that they have or intend to personally upload, share, or otherwise redistribute in any form, ROMs and other copyrighted works. Only the government has the right to demand Reddit hands over personal information of its users, but if Nintendo asks and Reddit hands it over, I'm not going to feel bad for the subset of them that were stupid enough to paint a giant target on their own backs.
And that was the entire point of my original comment. Not "Nintendo gud", not "pirates bad", and certainly not "Nintendo has an involiable legal right to know the PII of pseudonymous users on another platform". Simply, "play stupid games while expecting Reddit to protect you from the consequences, win stupid prizes."
I'm not talking about downloading.
You can say that you distribute content all you want. It is not actionable unless they can directly connect you to actual evidence of actual distribution. Forum bullshitting is not evidence.
That clarifies things a bit, but I don't quite agree with the premise that it's "not actionable unless they can directly connect you to actual evidence of actual distribution."
Copyright infringement sits in the interesting intersection where it can be persued both criminally and civilly. I agree with your premise in where it applies to criminal cases, but the bar for civil cases (lawsuits) is a lot lower at preponderance of the evidence.
If Infringement Igor dumps and seeds ROMs and BIOS images and talks about the new dumps he's uploading for fellow redditors and didn't take any precautions to mask his identity, he is more likely than not fucked if Reddit hands over his information. Courts have decided an IP address is by itself insufficient as proof that the account holder is the one committing the infrigement, but Nintendo having a matching email and phone number to support their claim is going to make it a lot harder for Igor to convince the judge that he didn't do it.
A lower bar to win a civil case doesn't entitle you to a fishing expedition. Courts have (correctly) thrown out bullshit subpoenas of people actively admitting to infringing activity, with the plaintiff promising not to pursue the infringers themselves, as part of a suit against the ISPs.
Online posts aren't grounds to compel information except in very specific circumstances.
I think we both agree on that part. Don't get me wrong here, I 100% am against Nintendo on this one. They aren't entitled to anything, nor can I think of any good reason why one company should ever be allowed to compel another to provide details on their customers/users.
I have zero faith in Reddit on doing the right thing, though. If Nintendo asked nicely and Steve Huffingpaintman thought it would be more financially beneficial to play ball, I expect they would hand it over gift-wrapped with a pretty bow on top.