this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2025
1600 points (99.1% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
56706 readers
643 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 |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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?
You can but you won’t win unless you can prove anything, so good luck with that.
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.
Now we need something like nightshade for text.
That's a far harder problem than it sounds unfortunately.
Yes. I see no feasible solution to this, without impacting the reader experience.
It's possibly classed as fair use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc.
plagiarism is an academic crime, not a civil tort.
It’s a copyright violation to use someone’s work without permission. (Regardless of your feelings about copyright or intellectual property)
plagiarism is neither a civil tort nor a criminal offense.
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.
if you were sued civilly for copyright violations, that's not plagiarism. That's copyright infringement. plagiarism is something else.
Plagiarism is an infringement against copyright.
if I plagiarize The Bible, that has nothing to do with copyright. it's still plagiarism.
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?
you don't seem to know what plagiarism is, so I don't see the point in continuing this conversation.
no it's not. it's an academic crime.