• conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    I’m not talking about downloading.

    You can say that you distribute content all you want. It is not actionable unless they can directly connect you to actual evidence of actual distribution. Forum bullshitting is not evidence.

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 days ago

      That clarifies things a bit, but I don’t quite agree with the premise that it’s “not actionable unless they can directly connect you to actual evidence of actual distribution.”

      Copyright infringement sits in the interesting intersection where it can be persued both criminally and civilly. I agree with your premise in where it applies to criminal cases, but the bar for civil cases (lawsuits) is a lot lower at preponderance of the evidence.

      If Infringement Igor dumps and seeds ROMs and BIOS images and talks about the new dumps he’s uploading for fellow redditors and didn’t take any precautions to mask his identity, he is more likely than not fucked if Reddit hands over his information. Courts have decided an IP address is by itself insufficient as proof that the account holder is the one committing the infrigement, but Nintendo having a matching email and phone number to support their claim is going to make it a lot harder for Igor to convince the judge that he didn’t do it.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 days ago

        A lower bar to win a civil case doesn’t entitle you to a fishing expedition. Courts have (correctly) thrown out bullshit subpoenas of people actively admitting to infringing activity, with the plaintiff promising not to pursue the infringers themselves, as part of a suit against the ISPs.

        Online posts aren’t grounds to compel information except in very specific circumstances.

        • pivot_root@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          22 days ago

          I think we both agree on that part. Don’t get me wrong here, I 100% am against Nintendo on this one. They aren’t entitled to anything, nor can I think of any good reason why one company should ever be allowed to compel another to provide details on their customers/users.

          I have zero faith in Reddit on doing the right thing, though. If Nintendo asked nicely and Steve Huffingpaintman thought it would be more financially beneficial to play ball, I expect they would hand it over gift-wrapped with a pretty bow on top.