Supreme Court to decide whether ISPs must disconnect users accused of piracy
-
This post did not contain any content.
(Donald trump voice)
"We should hold all food companys liable for users violent crimes, this man stabbed another man to death with a spoon! 30 minutes before he ate kraft mac and cheese. It gave him the energy to violently stab this innocent man"Lets hope they got common sense
-
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 hate that you're absolutely correct
-
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.
-
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.
-
ISPs already do that here in the states. The court case is to decide whether they should shut off access.
I believe ISPs do not want to cut people off. All that does is push you to a competitor. They want to be able to hold you liable for damages
-
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.
-
ISPs already do that here in the states. The court case is to decide whether they should shut off access.
I got one then another, then got a VPN...
-
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
-
This post did not contain any content.
In the beginning we used to exchange cassettes. You would have a boombox with two cassettes. You would play one while you recorded on the other. Then you gave the cassette back to your friend. Next was the VCR with the big ass cassettes.
Then you would do the same with floppies, then zip disks. Then one day CD recording was a thing, then DVDs. Then thumb drives and now portable HDDs. Basically the cheapest form or recording is always the most popular way for people to share stuff.
The only ones who don't want us to share are those who want to make millions by never innovating.
-
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.
-
This post did not contain any content.
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.
-
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
They have ways to block / identify VPNs.
-
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.
They will cut off electricity if you do something illegal with it....
-
This post did not contain any content.
So if Meta is convicted of pirating books for AI training, they lose all internet connectivity? 🧐
-
This post did not contain any content.
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.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Like 20 years ago the RAVE Act said venues can be charged if anyone is in possession of illegal drugs inside of them during an event. Similar in some ways
-
So if Meta is convicted of pirating books for AI training, they lose all internet connectivity? 🧐
God willing
-
I recommend AirVPN. Never had a problem w/ them & doesn’t require a special VPN client.
I also use them but I often get blocked from sites when it's on
-
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
