This has happened once before and they reversed it. But they said this last time too:

The discussions that have happened in various threads on Lemmy make it very clear that removing the communites before we announced our intent to remove them is not the level of transparency the community expects, and that as stewards of this community we need to be extremely transparent before we do this again in the future as well as make sure that we get feedback around what the planned changes are, because lemmy.world is yours as much as it is ours.

https://lemmy.world/post/3234363

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      426·
      9 months ago

      Yeah people are really weird about this. They want a free distributed forum hosted by small admins, but don’t want those individuals to take basic legal precautions? Piracy might be moral, but it’s a liability which will absolutely impact the viability of servers in many places. Grow up.

    • nutsack@lemmy.worldEnglish
      142·
      9 months ago

      The Lemmy instance doesn’t actually host pirated content, does it? It’s just information about pirated content and where to find it, right? Who the fuck cares about this

        • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.worldEnglish
          74·
          9 months ago

          I guess the question is: if you host a public forum, are you liable for things posted on it, or on separate but linked forums?

            • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.worldEnglish
              54·
              9 months ago

              Comments like this sound like the “they write it off on tax” comments, where there’s this assumption about how complex things must work, but it can’t work exactly that way otherwise we would see it happening all the time.

            • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              9 months ago

              It doesn’t matter if you don’t have limitless money to pay lawyers

              Since anyone can spin up a Lemmy server, at some point a rich person/persons will do so, which makes this a relevant question to ask.

          • castlebravo404@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
            52·
            9 months ago

            You might not have to pay damages. But you’re probably going to have to pay a hefty legal fee not to pay damages.

            • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.worldEnglish
              106·
              9 months ago

              Copyright laws are actually very difficult to enforce when it comes to digital piracy. You have to prove loss of profit among other things.

              Then, who do you sue? The person downloading the product? The person hosting the product? The person providing a link to the hosted data? The person providing a platform for people to link things? The person who allows their platform to federate with another platform that does?

              If we’re talking about P2P sharing, then in a way no one is hosting the data.

              In Australia when the Dallas Buyers Club case was being looked at, the studio was asking for a lot of money. Basically a big fat fine to be paid. The judge threw it out saying that the only reasonable damages for one person to pay would be the cost of the DVD because that was the value of the “theft”.

              • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.worldEnglish
                10·
                9 months ago

                You dont have to enforce it.

                You just have to drown people in legal bills and force them into compliance with risk of bankruptcy.

                • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  41·
                  9 months ago

                  I don’t know enough about law to know how that does or does not work, but it that’s possible then any entity with enough money can actively bankrupt anyone they want, and it won’t have anything to do with why. If that’s true could you not just sue someone by making stuff up and force them to prove you made it up?

                  • Draconic NEO@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    1·
                    9 months ago

                    Yup corrupt companies likely do it all the time. Technically it’s perjury to lie in a court but outside of being caught or going to hell it’s not much of a deterrent.

                    There isn’t much recourse against that other than trying to skirt detection by these companies (not possible or feasible in the long term) or to be in a country that is strongly against or an enemy of the one(s) those companies are in or allied with.

                  • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    41·
                    9 months ago

                    Ah yes, the pirate bay, the first stop for anyone wanting to download a file thats probably a virus.

                    Also they have lost lawsuits in the past and had fines levied against them and had property seized, so they arent as immune as you think.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            9 months ago

            I guess the question is: if you host a public forum, are you liable for things posted on it, or on separate but linked forums?

            I was thinking the same thing, as a legal question.

            In the Fediverse, who’s the source/target for the law to look at, the originator, or all the cached copies on other servers?

            Edit: Basically, what this comment describes…

            Then, who do you sue? The person downloading the product? The person hosting the product? The person providing a link to the hosted data? The person providing a platform for people to link things? The person who allows their platform to federate with another platform that does?

            If we’re talking about P2P sharing, then in a way no one is hosting the data.