this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
1569 points (97.7% liked)
Technology
59192 readers
2730 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If a company cannot do business without breaking the law it simply is a criminal organisation. RICO act, anyone?
The law they're breaking is civil, so they can only get sued; this is basically Napster. Also this case is is Britain, so RICO doesn't apply.
If this is OK, downloading a movie to watch it, not to make any profit, is OK, right? If it isn't, will they get fined proportionally to the people who get fined for downloading a movie?
They do want to make a profit though...
some countries this is actually legal, it's just the redistributing part that is illegal
note: I'm oversimplifying here, the countries that allow for downloading aren't actually letting you have it for free, it's under the basis that you've already purchased one form of the movie and you are downloading it so you can preserve what you have purchased already
...then it doesn't deserve to be in business.
I mean, which law? If Altman was selling shrooms or some blow that hasn't been stepped on a dozen times, I might be willing to cut him some slack. At least that wouldn't add a few million tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere.