this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2025
1706 points (99.1% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

56776 readers
426 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):

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

Torrenting:

Gaming:


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Babalugats@lemmy.ml 22 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Is it safe to assume that every single author (apart from the ones that cannot prove their works were in any of those archives at the time) can sue meta for plagiarism and theft?

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 24 points 4 days ago (2 children)

You can but you won’t win unless you can prove anything, so good luck with that.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 36 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Even if you can, you're fighting against a company that has annual revenue similar to some country's GDP.

No company should be allowed to get this big.

*unless it's product is collectively owned by the public and for the public as a civil service.

[–] nichtburningturtle@feddit.org 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Now we need something like nightshade for text.

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That's a far harder problem than it sounds unfortunately.

[–] nichtburningturtle@feddit.org 2 points 3 days ago

Yes. I see no feasible solution to this, without impacting the reader experience.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)
[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

plagiarism is an academic crime, not a civil tort.

[–] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It’s a copyright violation to use someone’s work without permission. (Regardless of your feelings about copyright or intellectual property)

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

plagiarism is neither a civil tort nor a criminal offense.

[–] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Back when I worked as a designer, using work without paying for usage rights leads to exposure of being civilly sued for copyright violations.

You’re wrong. Confidently wrong.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

if you were sued civilly for copyright violations, that's not plagiarism. That's copyright infringement. plagiarism is something else.

[–] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Plagiarism is an infringement against copyright.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

if I plagiarize The Bible, that has nothing to do with copyright. it's still plagiarism.

[–] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The Bible is well past the copyright period which IIRC is 70 years in America. The Bible is free use at this point. No different than the original Mickey Mouse which is also out of copyright protection. Or the Mona Lisa.

The fact that you reference the Bible of all books shows how unbelievably confidently incorrect you are. Are you chatgpt?

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 days ago

you don't seem to know what plagiarism is, so I don't see the point in continuing this conversation.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 days ago

no it's not. it's an academic crime.