this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
419 points (98.4% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
55056 readers
178 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):
💰 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
Not sure I understand. I should be able to fork a public repo across instances, no? Why bother otherwise?
Federation has nothing to do with that capability.
git cloneexists since the beginning of git.hmmmm... I see your point. Maybe I wasnt explaining my point clear enough. Right now, I cant see someones fork of some software if I'm on some gitlab which is not federated afaik. I should have said discoverability I guess. Does that make more sense?
I mean, not saying anyone should, because evading copyright is bad. But technically, you could run say forgejo as an onion service. Connecting git to clone from it would take some extra steps but, if hidden well it'd make it somewhat harder to take down.
My man, you're commenting on the piracy community, in the piracy instance, run by a former /r/piracy mod.
Evading oppressive mechanics is always a great idea imho but I digress.
I'm not really talking about making it unable to be taken down, which is already what happens when you put it in a non public repo. I'm talking about exhausting the corpo and damaging their image for going after people using software to play their bought games on their pc. It could kick off a trend of peeps shaming corpos (especially nintendo) for going after legit players who want control of their devices and property. (whoever feels like pointing out that "technically you just own a license", just dont).
Well, I run forgejo for my own stuff. So, let's say I decided to host something that is subject to a copyright complaint. As soon as people start using your repo and their lawyers get a whiff of it, they'll just take the IP of your server and DMCA the owner of the IP. Whether it be me, or the host. It's an entity they can go after and will need to yield to appropriate law. The effect would be the same as the DMCA going to Github.
But on tor, it hides the entity operating and running the server. Making it a lot harder to find the person to even send the DMCA to, let alone start the legal wheels turning, if it were ignored.
Thats pretty awesome, ngl. Definitely something to keep in mind.
But think about 10.000 forks and 10.000 letters to 10.000 ips. This would create so much damage its not even funny. :)
Like a tiktok trend. „go to againstcyberoppression.com and download this hardcoded, federated forgejo instance with this repo to give nintendos lawyers something to choke on“
I bet they would give up if this goes viral!
All you'll be exhausting is an AI. They're using AIs now to write the DMCA requests, which actually does lead me to wonder if such takedown requests are even legal (an AI can't, to my knowledge, legally represent the interests of a legal person). But the point is, if you're thinking of "exhausting a corpo" you're thinking it wrong.
Please tell me more why my thinking is wrong /s
Because you are not exhausting parts that actually get exhausted, nor that can actually get a harm to reputation in their industry due to association to the corpo. If you want to go after a corpo, you go after the employees, the physical facilities (they cost money and time to rebuild / migrate) and, if possible, the jobhunters.