this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
47 points (91.2% liked)
libgen
357 readers
1 users here now
Library Genesis (LibGen) is the largest free library in history: giving the world free access to 84 million scholarly journal articles, 6.6 million academic and general-interest books, 2.2 million comics, and 381 thousand magazines.
Telegram: https://t.me/s/nexus_search
Web: https://libgen.rs https://libgen.fun/
Related: https://annas-archive.org/
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
Yeah fuck those instance owners for not taking on legal risk! We don't pay them and they should pay for our legal fees out of respect for the content we generate (which is copywritten and could get the instance owner in legal trouble)!
Edit: typos. Also, to explain: I just want y'all to consider the folks who keep the instances running and the legal risk they take. Some instances don't want to take on the risk. It's not a left/right thing, it's a risk-assesment thing. Removing content that might get them in legal trouble doesn't mean that the instance is taking a political, ethical or moral stance on the topic. It's really weird to think otherwise. My point was that when the instance owners get a dmca takedown notice (doesn't really matter what country, doesn't really matter if theh own the rights to that content or not), they are faced with a choice: do nothing and get sued, possibly needing to shut down the free service as a result. Or, they can choose to remove the content.
Conversational forums like lemmy are still places where links to pirated content can exist. I know people just talk about pirated content and that it's moderated but hear me out: sometimes people get busy and fall behind. They could then end up with a lawsuit.
To avoid this, a reasonable policy might be to just avoid the topic altogether. But that doesn't make them right or left wing, it just makes them regular site admins without an unlimited amount of money or the desire to go off grid and on the run. Yeah, that's the worst case scenario, my point simply being "free service run for long time if rules prevent legal threats to the service's livelyhood" see: napster.
Underlining how worthless your hot take is. You know less than nothing.
Ah, toxicity is always the best way to win arguments.
Did you see the bullshit I'm responding to?
You mispelled trying. You were trying to respond.
No, trying is what you're doing, with this weak trolling. I told someone railing about laws that they can't even spell their name.
This thread's subject is about three steps removed from the subject of copyright law, and no worthwhile discussion is going to emerge from someone smugging it up about that subject when they literally do not know the first thing about that subject.
Oof
There's always the delete button.
Isn't it a shame when someone doesn't take their own advice?
Eh doesn't bother me much either way. I've gotten over their embarrassment for the most part.
Does it bother you in the slightest that this accusation has no basis whatsoever?
What are you on about now?
Were you going to try to make an argument, sweetheart?
'Sorry sweaty, I don't care!' Four hours later: 'Hey just checking in, do continue spoon-feeding me basic reading comprehension.'
You keep declaring I'm embarrassed by any of this interaction. Why.
Sorry kid, Copyright law still exists, even if you want to try arguing that it doesn’t. Are you done yet?
You’re cruisin’ for a reportin’ you know that right?
Oh my god, you think that's a threat. Go right ahead. Do it. I fucking dare you. Say the worst things you can imagine about me - your imagination is sorely lacking.
What a perfect cap to this inability to imagine anything but the status quo. On being asked why you're lying to me, about me, you think you can threaten to run and tattle. To whom, fucknuts? The mod of this community is one of the people whose behavior you're incapable of understanding. The admins don't give a damn about sufficiently polite efforts to drag sense out of you.
That you pair this with once again dismissively calling someone "kid" is masterful stupidity. It's dumber than what I'd make up, as a joke. Bravissimo. You perfect fool.
I'm not convinced you understand reality beyond the level of posturing. Like if you repeat "HOW EMBARRASSING!" loud enough, that will become real.
Which is delightfully ironic when you just spat the word "toxicity" over a mistake you then repeated, four straight times.
What you're doing is trolling and you're not very good at it.
When did I say the word "toxicity"? I think you are mixing me up with another commenter.
Right, sorry, you just agreed with them. That's totally different.
TIL:
Got any more? These are quite good.
Today you ignored detailed explanations against your argument, after needing three takes just to see that basic tiny error.
You latched onto it. I moved on. You have no counter beyond that, except pretending I must be emotionally compromised after your unimpressive efforts to counter-sneer.
I also immediately acknowledged you aren't who said that, when you pointed it out. But you plainly think the same thing - as evidenced by, for example, telling me to delete a comment.
I wish you cared what words mean.
I am sorry kid but my argument still stands. Copyright law is still a thing. Did you think you disproved its existence or something?
When a word is mispelled, even mispelled multiple times, it does not summon the thing it is mispelling out of existence. Have you gained object permanence yet? Do you freak out every time you close lemmy, worrying it now vanished?
To the surprise of literally nobody.
And yet - there is discussion. Maybe, just maybe, those conversations don't hinge on 'but what if nuh-uh?'
I'm not sure you have an argument beyond that. Unless you think attacking my character counts.
You keep shuffling through essentialist insults with no justification, and it's not impressive or funny or infuriating; it is simply dull. You don't seem to notice or care that I keep talking about your awful behavior without needing to expand that into some psychological profile. I don't think you're incompetent. I think you're being an asshole. And the key word in that sentence is "being." As in: whenever you like, you can stop.
You can stop pounding the table for copyright law, like anyone involved supports it, in this context.
You can stop scoffing at expectations that this leftist-adjacent site, with rampant civil disobedience, would be expected to tolerate... tangential discussion of an external website containing PDFs. Nonfiction papers ostensibly available to any university student. A subject, in fact, kind of important to the history of reddit, in a way that is a big reason Lemmy came to exist.
You can obviously stop trying to land hits like I give two fucks for your opinion of me personally. Ask nicely and I'll insult myself more accurately and more damningly than you can apparently manage. I'd do it even if we had an audience. We do not. Which makes the ineffectual troll behavior all the more disappointing.
You can stop insisting you have a rock-solid point besides, and then failing to distinguish it in any way from gesturing loosely toward the laaaw and assuming that justifies erasing this tiny defiant forum while other similar defiance remains prominent.
But I'm gonna bet you won't.
So, you’re actually having an issue with my statement that US copyright law exists? Ok. Now you’re trolling. This was my only argument and I had a link to back it up.
If your only argument is acknowledged in the first sentence, maybe you never understood the conversation.
Copyright laws exist. No kidding. What next? What's the rest of your point?
People saying they shouldn't exist, are not ignorant.
People saying they don't care, are not ignorant.
Neither position is challenged by some rando parroting 'but laws.' Do you understand that laws can be changed? Do you understand how and why that starts? Do you speak English?
I didn’t have an argument, bro. Your argument was that I didn’t know anything about the topic because I mispelled it.
"My argument still stands."
"That was my only argument."
"I didn't have an argument, bro."
Yeah, you're just an asshole. You don't care what words mean.
You don't care about anything I've said past mocking your surface-level ignorance. You are stuck on that. I have been talking about everything but.
What you're doing is trolling and you're not very good at it.
Sorry kid, but Copyright law is still the law, even if you want to somehow disprove it by yelling words at me. Are you done?
'We're deliberately rejecting this law.'
'But the law!'
'Laws can be changed.'
'But the law!'
'This law is bad.'
'But the law!'
'Civil disobedience is strategic.'
'But the law!'
'Do you speak English?'
'But the law!'
Alongside the finger-wag to oooh-so-scary report me, yeah, I'm about done humoring you. You know less than nothing, you patience vampire. Next time try to act less stupid.
My argument: “the law exists”. My argument isn’t about the ethics of what you should or shouldn’t do. I’m saying there is a law, and that it exists. I win this argument, unless you are denying that the law doesn’t exist.
Your argument: I don’t know anything because I can’t spell. You’ve yet to back up your claims for this, once.
'But the laaaaaaaw!'
Ignoring ethics is why you're wrong about this. Nobody's arguing non-existence - and you can't win an argument against nobody. The issue is something else, as I've repeatedly explained to you, but alas, you are functionally illiterate.