131
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
131 points (97.1% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54539 readers
158 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):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
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
So now copyright infringement is both consuming media and refusing to consume media, based on the arbitrary intent of the copyright holder?
Also if, according to this lawsuit, it's illegal to be "meddling with the appearance of the publisher’s website in users’ browsers", then wouldn't that make it illegal for Netflix to drop to a lower resolution when bandwidth gets low? After all, if the publisher gives them a 4K source file and Netflix drops it to 720p, isn't that meddling with the appearance in user's browsers?
Yes, but we live in a tiered justice system. If YOU want to block ads it's "wrong". If a corporation wants to censor or block something it's "freedom".