Fediverse

28490 readers

342 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Posts must be on topic.
Be respectful of others.
Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

ruud@lemmy.world

Xylinna@lemmy.world

MrCenny@lemmy.world

TragicNotCute@lemmy.world

automodbeta@lemmy.world

woelkchen@lemmy.world

307

Lemmy's Image Problem (Updated 02-06-2024) (wedistribute.org)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by deadsuperhero@lemmy.world to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

202 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Highlighting the recent report of users and admins being unable to delete images, and how Trust & Safety tooling is currently lacking.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Does them working on the project voluntairly, makes them be able to steal code from non-opensource projects, ignore licenses and do other shit like that? If the answer is no, why does working on the project voluntairly lets them break the law in other ways?

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

steal code from non-opensource projects, ignore licenses and do other shit like that

That's a lot of incorrect assumptions there.

They didn't steal any code. They didn't ignore licenses either. In fact, the only reason they had a judgment ruled against them is because they were taking monetary donations. Which was interpreted as "profiting".

They reverse engineered a process without stealing anything. They didn't even circumvent DRM, which is actually protected by law on the grounds of creating personal backups and data/software preservation.

You're either very ignorant on the subject or you just ate up Nintendo's BS.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I was talking hypothetically. Are they allowed to do that? If not, then they cannot be noncompliant with GDPR, simple as.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Are they allowed to do that?

Actually yes. The people that run afoul of the GDPR are the people who run the instance servers. The code writers are not the ones legally responsible.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, theu are just as legally responsible as admins of instances.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That's going to vary heavily based on regional laws. You cannot make such a blanket statement like that.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yes I can.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Ok, sure. You can. You can also just be completely wrong at the same time.