Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54565 readers

440 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):

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com

sunbrothersco@lemmy.dbzer0.com

dataprolet@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com

RandomLegend@lemmy.dbzer0.com

468

[HN] Will Browsers Be Required by Law to Stop You from Visiting Infringing Sites? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

110 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In a well-intentioned yet dangerous move to fight online fraud, France is on the verge of forcing browsers to create a dystopian technical capability. Article 6 (para II and III) of the SREN Bill would force browser providers to create the means to mandatorily block websites present on a government provided list.

I don't agree that it's "well-intentioned" at all but the article goes on to point out the potential for abuse by copyright holders.

cross-posted from: https://radiation.party/post/64123

[ comments | sourced from HackerNews ]

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

[–] acastcandream@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

spoiler

asdfasdfsadfasfasdf

[–] roofuskit@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

It wouldn't make it too SCOTUS, they'd decline the appeal after lower courts ruled it unconstitutional.