this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2025
394 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

63082 readers
3598 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 54 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

So not just they pirated them, which may or may not be a crime and where I may or may not be impartial, but they are also leeches who would be banned on any decent torrent tracker of the olden days.

[–] Podunk@lemmy.world 24 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Truly despicable. Seeding to at least 1 to 1 is the bare minimum of courtesy and humanity. If you dont, its unethical

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 7 minutes ago

Hey now some of us just have wildly shit upload speeds and couldn't hope to reach 1:1 without spending an entire year seeding a single movie.

[–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

Seeding shouldn't be done on ratios - being the only one seeding 10 seasons of a tv show and getting it to 0.4:1 is way more helpful than seeding the same movie as everyone else and getting to 20:1, you're noy contributing anything there other than decreasing your bandwidth for things that aren't already at 100,000% availability

[–] Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I'd you are the only one seeding it and get to 0.4, you just left others hanging with incomplete downloads.

However I do agree in general

[–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 hours ago

That's what I'm saying

It's better to not even half-way seed a torrent with low availability than it is to seed one that everyone else is seeding, regardless of how high your ratio goes - it's a point on how pointless it really is to waste your resources seeding something like that

[–] Fedegenerate@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Seeding to ratios is self correcting, in my inexperienced opinion as I only share ISOs.

Unpopular thing sits on someone's computer (not mine) for ages just happily waiting until it's useful. Popular thing is in and out. Purely for files intended to be churned; try a distro (in facebook's case a book), use it, and delete it.

1:3 could be said to be a minimum (1 for to pay back, 1 to pay forward, and 1 to pay for a leecher)

Things that are going to be archived can be set as limitless as long as strain on hardware can be tolerated.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 39 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

This is irrelevant because Meta should not be tried for this the same as a private individual would be.

The case for torrenting being illegal for private individuals is one or both of:

  1. Downloading in of itself is stealing.
  2. Uploading is giving unauthorized access to someone else who otherwise might have had a harder time finding it. Anything else, such as watching, reading, listening, learning, etc. is not illegal (or does not make sense to make illegal). The exception might be publishing. This is rare for private individuals (e.g. using pirated FL studio to make a commercial song).

For corporations, a lot change. Firstly, a corporation downloading a torrent is necessarily making unauthorized material available for some people of the company. It's like a group of 20 friends all downloaded and uploaded to each other. Secondly, they used this copyrighted material commercially (like playing pirated music in a public night club). Both should be illegal.

However, all of this is still a distraction. The real issue is using copyrighted materials to train commercial AI. Does Meta require permission from copyright holders to make AI based on their work? The law is grey on this, and desperately needs regulations.

Just my thoughts.

[–] Geodad@lemm.ee 11 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

AI has already stolen everyone’s work. The internet is officially a free for all.

[–] aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

just like back in the good ol' days.

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Except in the good ol' days just about everything on the 'net benefited most of us in some way ... and it was free. Now it sure as hell ain't free and it's been co-opted to benefit billionaires only.

I started torrenting 23 years ago and it was easy. Just a client, no VPN required. Now I need not only a VPN, but a good router that I can flash with firmware, hours of working out how best to set up the router with wireguard etc, then scroll through dozens of links to try and find a stable stream to watch hockey.

It's fucking exhausting.

[–] molten@lemmy.world 38 points 20 hours ago

Of course that fuck isn't a good seeder. Leech.

[–] latenightnoir@lemmy.world 138 points 1 day ago (3 children)

So, piracy is legal if you don't distribute? What the fuck is Zuck smoking?

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 75 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Well, that's how it tends to be in most places.
You don't get caught for downloading; you get caught for uploading.

Using a similar logic to distribution via DVDs. Only the seller gets into trouble. The buyer does not.

[–] umami_wasbi@lemmy.ml 32 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The buyers/downloaders don't get caught is just because there are too many of them and going after the distributor is an easy target.

[–] gon@lemm.ee 22 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Not the case, necessarily.

In Portugal, for example, it's legal to download pirated content. It's not a matter of not pursuing it because it's hard or being difficult to catch or distributors are an easier target, it's just that, legally, you're not doing anything wrong.

[–] OwlPaste@lemmy.world 11 points 23 hours ago

sooooo.... vpn should point to Portugal...

[–] umami_wasbi@lemmy.ml 4 points 23 hours ago

Oh for real? Learn something new today.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 13 points 23 hours ago

In Canada it’s legal to download and watch content for personal use, so it’s when it’s shared that it becomes an issue.

Just like you could record anything with a vcr, you just couldn’t share it with your friends.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago

Is it not also because it was easier to feign ignorance for the time the laws were passed?
And that nobody thought of Tor, while at the same time, leechers who don't seed are actually being worse for the Torrent?

[–] latenightnoir@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Eh. Makes sense from the perspective of protecting profits, I guess, because the actual thing which bothers them is the volume of lost potential customers....

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 17 points 22 hours ago

Elitism. He is of the belief that he is better than you, and doesn't live in the same world as you.

[–] regrub@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

And the copyright owners have no problem with them profiting from derived works that were made using pirated content?

[–] rain_worl@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

you can download it, but you can't use it. so restrictive :(

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 75 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Another example of Republican principles. Corporations are protected by laws but not bound by them, while the average citizen is bound by laws but not protected by them.

[–] EmptySlime@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

In group and out group baybee!

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 4 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

I want to know how to switch groups.

[–] aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 16 hours ago

pull yourself up by your bootstraps and become rich. pretty simple, no?

[–] dabaldeagul@feddit.nl 6 points 19 hours ago

Too late, you should've been born with lots of money. Actually, you could marry someone who's rich I guess..

[–] daikiki@lemmy.world 29 points 20 hours ago

It's not illegal to download books without yourself offering them for upload. What's illegal is when you feed those books into your reality devouring content monster and it outputs all that copyrighted content in a slightly different order and you profit off that content vomit.

[–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 37 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Also I love how they they don't say they didn't seed, just say there is no proof

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 10 points 20 hours ago

This is a motion to dismiss not an answer. That's how those work. It is linked to by the journalist in the article.

[–] singletona@lemmy.world 50 points 1 day ago (2 children)

So where's the MAFIAA? Here you go guys, literal industrial scale piracy.

Or are you afraid to go after someone that isn't a teenager in their parent's back room?

[–] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

The real shit deal is if there was a ruling against Meta in this, it would still be worse for everyone because there would be precedent to litigate against people who only consume pirated content (which has been tried in several countries and found to be legal)

[–] singletona@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

....Oh god...

you described a situation where i want Meta to win.....

[–] Eezyville@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Fighting Meta will cost easy more money than fighting a teenager.

[–] singletona@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I am aware. I was simply demonstrating they were never about money, simply bullying people who couldn't fight back.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 18 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Especially since in the height of my pirating years during teenagerdom, no amount of cajoling or coercion could get me to pay for whatever it was because I didn't have any money. Which not at all coincidentally was why I was pirating it in the first place.

These dweebs always operate from the frankly invalid preconception that if the pirate had not pirated the media they would have paid for it and therefore they're "owed" a sale, but that's not how it works. I imagine that if the vast majority of people were unable to pirate their thing, they simply would not watch/listen/read/play/consume the thing at all.

[–] brightandshinyobject@lemmy.world 15 points 22 hours ago

So it's okay if we download content from well known online repositories?

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean isn't that at least some extent technically true to a level.

I mean if we weren't talking a shitty corporation to begin with. If this were say, a 20 year old mcdonnalds worker pirating game of thrones.

IMO the bigger concept is still rather than if they got it... defining whether using that data after the fact is legal. I mean hypothetically speaking lets just say they bought 1 copy of each of the millions of books, or bought used copies, or say had a machine that could scan every book in a library. IMO the issue shouldn't be whether or not anyone managed to download the books in their pure form afterwards. The focus should be the AI trained on their books, is going to be distributing portions of their book to millions of people, and any potential profits of such will be going to meta and uncredited to the original authors. The idea that meta's involvement in torrenting may have let little timmy get a copy of his text book 15 seconds faster... shouldn't be the driving force here.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 11 points 1 day ago

I mean isn't that at least some extent technically true to a level.

It's completely true. That's why a lot of people don't seed. And why your ISP won't bother you if you don't.

[–] phillycodehound@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago

Double Standard!

[–] b3an@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

Rules for thee and not for me, plus we PROFIT off of it to boot. But none of you guys can do that. Only for Richys.

[–] kingblaaak@lemmy.world 8 points 23 hours ago

You wouldn't download car....and then upload its stats to a centralised system

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Well good news if they are successful in their arguments it can set precedent to make piracy legal.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 2 points 17 hours ago

That’s what I’m saying. Let the Zuck cook.

[–] plaineatin@lemmy.today 1 points 17 hours ago

That's true, it's not really your problem in most areas if you don't seed, basically scraping them. If a legal person comes your way it's not good but for facebook they have lawyers. They will just say not our problem, we never hosted it, just scraped it. not many people would decide to go against facebook lawyers bc they can pay to drain you.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

Facebook got FBI_README.txt at the root of their DC++ share.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.ca 1 points 23 hours ago

According to the law (the thing that determines if something is or isn’t illegal) it’s illegal. Zuck is a criminal.