this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2025
328 points (99.7% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
57305 readers
301 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
It's a weak defense because the clients still exchanged metadata with other clients, plus there's the big issue of using the copyrighted works for their own profit, and not just archiving/preservation/personal use
It's a solid defense, since the lawsuit's about the sharing of the books. The metadata of the torrents isn't part of the relevant IP, and how they used the content they downloaded is a separate issue.
Exchanging metadata does not violate copyright. I can stand on the sidewalk in front of MPAA headquarters, asking people to provide me with a copy of the latest blockbuster without infringing on anyone's copyright. I can even offer to buy it.
So long as they are not further copying or distributing the work, they are not infringing on copyright.
Using it for their own profit is only an issue if they are claiming a fair use exemption. They aren't claiming fair use. They don't need to claim fair use, because requesting and receiving works is not a prohibited act under copyright law. The prohibited acts are copying and distribution, which can only be performed by the sender, not the receiver.