this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
750 points (99.6% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53958 readers
716 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


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

One thing that leaps out at me about this ruling is that courts understand the internet a lot better nowadays. A decade or so ago Sony would have probably gotten away with the argument that Cox profited from the users' piracy; nowadays judges themselves use the internet and are going to go "lolno, they probably would have been Cox customers anyway. It's not like anyone pays for internet connection solely to pirate. And in most areas people don't even have a choice of provider, so how is Cox profiting from this?"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works -2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Just use a debrid service. 10x better.

[–] Mr_Blott@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Am I right in thinking though, if everyone used a debrib service, nobody would be seeding the torrents and it would all fall to bits?

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Yup. Debrid is a superleecher service. It doesn’t actually seed anything, so it contributes nothing back to the torrents. If everyone used debrid, there would be nothing to torrent as there would be no seeders.

[–] crispy_kilt@feddit.de 10 points 7 months ago

Please don't follow this advice. These services don't seed, if they get popular it will kill bittorrent.