Earlier, after review, we blocked and removed several communities that were providing assistance to access copyrighted/pirated material, which is currently not allowed per Rule #1 of our Code of Conduct. The communities that were removed due to this decision were:

We took this action to protect lemmy.world, lemmy.world’s users, and lemmy.world staff as the material posted in those communities could be problematic for us, because of potential legal issues around copyrighted material and services that provide access to or assistance in obtaining it.

This decision is about liability and does not mean we are otherwise hostile to any of these communities or their users. As the Lemmyverse grows and instances get big, precautions may happen. We will keep monitoring the situation closely, and if in the future we deem it safe, we would gladly reallow these communities.

The discussions that have happened in various threads on Lemmy make it very clear that removing the communites before we announced our intent to remove them is not the level of transparency the community expects, and that as stewards of this community we need to be extremely transparent before we do this again in the future as well as make sure that we get feedback around what the planned changes are, because lemmy.world is yours as much as it is ours.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
816 points

These communities are not even hosted on lemmy.world, this is an absurdly overreacted response. There were no signs of any legal trouble and I can’t understand how lemmy.world specifically would be the target of such legal action. If you want to host an instance, you should do everything in your power to allow discussions on any topic, while in necessary cases disallowing direct posting/linking of illegal content. Instead, you chose to block a community that has long been known to avoid having any trouble with the moderators.

permalink
report
reply
392 points

And on top of this, the removals were done following the request from a troll account, by a user involved in far more questionable discussions than the legal discussions currently going on in the now-removed communities. Should no attempt be made to differentiate between a legit legal concern and trolling?

permalink
report
parent
reply
207 points
*

Good ol’ Bungiefan_ak, creating troll accounts on any instance that’ll have them to troll all things piracy and post transphobic and hateful shit wherever they go.

permalink
report
parent
reply
121 points

dude is such a piece of shit

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

What is it about Destiny that attracts pieces of shit?

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

If you post to a community that isn’t local, the content of the post is stored on your local server and the remote server just makes a copy. The posters home server is where the illegal content is hosted.

permalink
report
parent
reply
54 points

Yes, so illegal content will end up being stored on both servers. The thing is that the piracy communities don’t allow illegal content to be stored or linked to for the same liability reasons.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

First of all so far as I know lemmy doesn’t actually host anything. A post which links to the actual host probably isn’t illegal most places.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-31 points

The ad hominem criticism is irrelevant. The communities should be removed or not removed based on the server’s policies regardless of who first raised the question.

permalink
report
parent
reply
66 points

It’s not ad hominem to say someone is acting in bad faith.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Preemptive strike

aka shoot and ask questions later

permalink
report
parent
reply
91 points

The great thing is, now you’re 100% empowered to move forward and host the responsibility yourself. Demanding volunteers shoulder potential liability (when you yourself admit you can’t understand how there’s any in the first place) is juvenile.

The moment a volunteer is hit with a DMCA notice or any threat of legal action, you think they have any interest in going through the court system? You can do it first.

permalink
report
parent
reply
65 points

I think you don’t understand what a DMCA notice actually is. The whole point of it is to give you a chance to remove offending content. The “threat” of legal action won’t actually result in anything, provided you comply, and that is exactly why I do not understand the preemptive actions, when there is basically no such thing as immediate legal threat in case of DMCA notices. The copyright holders often do not want to go through the court system either and will gladly accept pre-legal-action compliance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

The power of the panopticon lies not in being able to see and punish all deviant activity, but to encourage self-correction in all potential deviants who must always assume they are being watched.

permalink
report
parent
reply

You seem to know your way around the law then, so please be the change you want to see in this world. Host a piracy instance and show everyone here that we were wrong and that the admins were just overreacting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I think you don’t understand what a DMCA notice actually is. The whole point of it is to give you a chance to remove offending content.

it really isn’t, the whole point is to streamline the capability for copyright holders to remove content they think they have rights to, without a lengthy court cases. it’s still a lot of overhead for any service to manage and also still opens you up to legal action.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

It doesn’t really have anything to do with DMCA (a US law). Lemmy world is hosted in Germany which is even harsher on copyright than the US with much stricter penalties.

The world doesn’t revolve around the US.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points
*

Exactly. Those hosting lemmyworld want to bear the burden of fostering Internet discussion and the institutions pertaining to the Internet therein, but don’t dare get close to anything that could threaten the envisioned unencumbered utopia they want it to be.

Reality: DMCA takedown requests are a part of Internet life and have no legal consequence. - If they are even received in the first place.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

I agree with the point, but US-wise, especially if you aren’t even the site actually as the source of truth for the community, you almost definitely don’t go to court unless you counterclaim. If you get a claim and nuke the offending communities in response (assuming you don’t have tools to block specific posts in the communities, but that would also work), you have protections built in.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Lemmyworld is hosted in Germany, they have agressive anti-piracy laws

permalink
report
parent
reply
83 points

Doesn’t matter if they are hosted here or not. The way federation works is that threads on different instances are cached locally.

We have NO issues with the people at db0 - we are just looking out for ourselves in a ‘better safe than sorry’ fashion while we find out more. As mentioned in the OP we would like to unblock as soon as we know we can not get in any legal trouble.

permalink
report
parent
reply
77 points

“we are just looking out for ourselves in a ‘better safe than sorry’ fashion while we find out more.”

This is an unfortunate aspect of individuals/small groups housing the fediverse vs big companies. Big companies have lawyers and the capital to back them, individuals do not.

If I was in your shoes, I’d do the same thing. I appreciate your wish for thus to be temporary. I hope you will share your findings once you come to a final decision; information like this is relevant to all those managing servers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

What needs to happen for you to be confident you won’t get in legal trouble, and thus unblock them? Change on the db0 side? Lemmy.world admins getting legal representation/advice? Something else? I’m curious how you all see this playing it out in the future.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Highly doubt there’s anything db0 can do. lemmy.world is in Europe, piracy has hefty legal ramifications.

Like you could argue that it isn’t piracy all you want, but if faced with the possibility of your hobby landing you decades in prison and millions in debt, would you do it?

Just create an account at db0, this really isn’t the big deal people make it out to be.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Discussing piracy isn’t illegal. It would be one thing if they were hosting pirated content, but they don’t even link to anything.

If that were to change I’d understand the decision, but this just seems silly to me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

as far as i have seen (as a subscriber to c/piracy) there is no links to pirated content and they are very clear that that is not allowed

the vast majority of the discussion is on morals of piracy, anti piracy measures, etc etc

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I feel like there should be a major distinction between caching remote content and hosting that content yourself. Does Cloudflare get in trouble every time the FBI seizes a site that used Cloudflare routing, CDN, or caching? Not as far as I’m aware.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

We have NO issues with the people at db0 - we are just looking out for ourselves in a ‘better safe than sorry’ fashion while we find out more. As mentioned in the OP we would like to unblock as soon as we know we can not get in any legal trouble.

Words are empty, offers are void in Nebraska. You already took steps against people who simply mostly discuss piracy. What concrete steps can you take now to show that you’d actually unblock “as soon as we know”?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Your argument is that user hosts infringing_song.mp3 on file_host, a community on lemmy.ml has a link to filehost and lemmy.world has a cached copy of the text containing the link to lemmy.ml which has a link to filehost and you think lemmy.world has legal exposure?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Soo ultimately you personally will be the only person determining what people can and can’t see, based on your perception alone. You don’t like something, you’ll ban it. You worry about something, you’ll ban it. And there won’t be a trace without you saying “we banned something”. Which means there are no checks at all to you powertripping in the future. How is this supposed to be free, open and general then? This is even worse than reddit was.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Feel free to contractually agree to pay all their legal fees, in that case.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

It’s their house, you’re just visiting. If they are concerned, there’s no one else to help. If they get in trouble, will you be stepping in to help them? No.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Beehaw doesn’t have downvotes. DOESNT. HAVE. DOWNVOTES!!! HOW CAN THEY GET AWAY WITH TAKING AWAY DOWNVOTES FROM ME… WHAT RIGHT DO THEY HAVE???

It doesn’t affect me at all because I don’t have an account there. But I’m real mad, see…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

You fucking donkey, did you read their comment before you replied to it? They aren’t doing it just because they want to; there are legal implications.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-24 points

Well, caching content is not the same as copying it. The major difference in the court would be that caching is automatic - and as such you are not in complete responsibility of what it is you copied. If you do everything in your power to comply with any DMCA notices, then I couldn’t realistically see lemmy.world being targeted. This is an analogous situation to eg. accidentally opening a website containing illegal content. Sure, your computer did download the contents to the RAM, but what matters is that you acted in good faith and did not attempt to get the contents, it just happened in the process of browsing the web and as such you could not reasonably expect to receive such content.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

In a world where Quad9 is in the middle of a giant lawsuit over simply serving DNS records, I can’t blame anybody for being extra cautious.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Complacency isn’t a legitimate defense against criminal activity and corporations are extremely litigious over piracy. Would you rather lemmy.world spend all their money on fighting lawsuits, or building a better instance?

Any community that is creating questionable content should create their own instance and not seek open federation with the entire fediverse. That kind of behavior is reckless and counterproductive to what we’re trying to do here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Something that’s getting lost in this conversation is the nature of the infringement and what that means to the copyright holder. Memes could be considered a form of infringement, however in practice they often serve as free publicity. The intent is not to deprive the copyright holder of revenue, but use the medium to express themselves. Exposure increases, and so does the likelihood of revenue from the conversion of new fans.

This changes with public conversations of piracy, because the nature of those conversations drift into how to deprive and evade the copyright holder by providing users just enough information to find pirated content. From a legal standpoint this can be used to prove aiding and abetting, a crime that be considered equal or an accessory to depending on the jurisdiction.

The admins are aware of how Lemmy’s content caching works, and now publicly acknowledge the existence of their federation with dbzer0; whose piracy communities are its strongest asset. Any defense of ignorance is out the door. Without banning the communities LW becomes an accessory if dbzer0 becomes liable, as would any other instance who caches dbzer0’s c/piracy.

To those who still disagree, that’s fine. Open your password manager, make some new accounts on other instances, enjoy the lemmyverse. But you have to agree that it is unreasonable to demand you hold the evidence of my crimes because it would inconvenience me otherwise.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Well, caching content is not the same as copying it.

A cache is literally a local copy.

Fighting legal challenges requires lawyers, even if you are in the right. Lawyers are crazy expensive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
52 points

The content is hosted on lemmy.world - that’s how the fediverse works. Each instance pushes updates to other instances and they host it locally for their users. The issue is that the admins here can’t moderate a community not on their instance. So if an instance is located somewhere it is legal, it might not be legal at the location of another instance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I don’t think that’s a fair assessment. It’s a cache. Is Cloudflare liable for hosting lib genesis then? Because cliudflare caches much worse stuff than copyrighted pictures and books.

There’s a lot to talk about but afaik Section 230 that defines every website in US says that host is not responsible for user content and I honestly don’t see how big copyright could prosecute lemmy.world here that’s not even hosting data directly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

It’s actually a “mirror” moreso than a cache. There’s a complete, distinct, URL for each piece of mirrored content, that points a specific server and is indexable by search engines independent of the original. Instances ARE hosting the data directly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

They could unsuccessfully prosecute lemmy.world. Of course it won’t really be unsuccessful if the instance folds from legal fees long before any verdict is reached.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s not true unfortunately. Any user posting on any instance to that community is cached locally and served from .world and the admins can’t do anything about it when the community is hosted on another instance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

What content? You mean the comments generally discussing piracy? Because there’s no actual pirated content being hosted, or even linked to, in that community.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

I have seen you comment in several comment chains. Please just understand that there is risk even if by the letter of the law everything is legal. There are plenty of cases with copyright / fair use where very expensive and long lawsuits were made against parties who did nothing illegal.

LW mods are clearly not comfortable with the risk with their current situation. Respect that, and don’t expect them to take risks beyond their comfort on your behalf. If you want someone who is willing to serve you content at that level of risk, you can create an account with one of the other communities.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

Lemmy.world maintains a local copy of every external community. This is how federation works. Any piracy related posts on those subs will be copied in their entirety to lemmy.world servers, so lemmy.world could potentially be sued for hosting that content. Being the largest instance makes it a target.

It is rare to get advanced notice of legal problems. Usually the first you hear about it is a cease and desist, or a lawsuit. Lawsuits are costly to defend even if you’re doing nothing wrong.

I don’t like this decision. But it is a sensible one to protect the instance. If you care about piracy discussions you can visit those communities directly or on a different instance that made a different decision.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points

There is no suing for that, talking about piracy is perfectly legal. That’s called freedom of speech for your information

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Anyone can sue anyone for anything. All it takes to have a lawsuit is to submit a filing fee to a court, and someone to serve the papers.

There are many lawsuits that are baseless. There are many lawsuits that are frivolous. If your instance is on the receiving end of one of these lawsuits you will have pay for a lawyer to defend yourself regardless of the merits of the case.

Courts don’t proactively decide whether someone can or cannot be sued.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

To encourage and aid in crimes is not covered by free speech in most countries like all of EU. And Lemmy.world is in Finland AFAIK.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

One link in one discussion that slips through is basically enough.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

I enjoyed helping this place grow and doing my part to discuss here but I disagree with this decision and I’m going to evaluate looking for a different home instance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So are reddit mods, does not make this less slimy

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

They probably won’t if it’s individual people, though they are donation funded so if they show their supporters that they don’t care those supporters might stop financially supporting lemmy.world. So telling them they should just leave because you don’t care or handing out petty bans like “let me help you” isn’t going to inspire these people to continue contributing donations.

This website doesn’t make a profit, but that’s all the more reason there should be an effort to not make people hate them, because I don’t know anyone who would enthusiastically donate to support people or an organization they hate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

This is incredibly reasonable and reflects the exactly appropriate amount of urgency and emotional reaction to this happening. 👏🏻

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

What signs of legal trouble are you referring to?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Pre-legal action such as DMCA requests or cease and desist letters

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Did they get any? I mean I have got some and I don’t even host anything at all. I am wondering what they did or did not get in relation to legal action.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

I can’t speak for other’s hosting peoples comments but I would rather avoid getting DMCAs or C&Ds in the first place.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Let’s also not ignore the fact that these communities literally prohibit Links or content from being posted to them. So even if people make the Federation argument about cross-hosting it’s all moot in the end because the community doesn’t allow it in the first place.

Here is a link to the rules of the Piracy community you will notice if you have any form of reading comprehension (or if you actually read it and aren’t just trolling, like many people here) that rule 3 specifically prohibits linking to or hosting files, which many people making the federated hosting argument seem to leave out of the equation, likely because it destroys their argument altogether since their argument is about illegal content being hosted, but no illegal content is hosted in the first place (and any that is usually is removed by the mods for breaking the rules, just like it is here on Lemmy.world).

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I can’t understand how lemmy.world specifically would be the target of such legal action.

Because they’re the largest instance and therefore the biggest target.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

But the content in question isn’t hosted on lemmy.world…?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

It sure is, because that’s how the fediverse works - every community is copied to every other federated instance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

I think the problem is that because of the way that the fediverse, they ARE hosting the content. They effectively copy the content from that community onto their server to distribute it to all the users of their lemmy instance. So from a legal perspective they are hosting the content and they would be held liable for a distributing it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I think the problem is that because of the way that the fediverse, they ARE hosting the content.

And the “content” is discussions about piracy, not piracy.

Come on. Small instance indie devs don’t have the bandwidth and storage to save all seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer in 4K.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah, but that discussion can still be legally problematic.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Lemmy.World Announcements

!lemmyworld@lemmy.world

Create post

This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.

Follow us for server news 🐘

Outages 🔥

https://status.lemmy.world

For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.

Support e-mail

Any support requests are best sent to info@lemmy.world e-mail.

Report contact

Donations 💗

If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.

If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us

Join the team

Community stats

  • 856

    Monthly active users

  • 100

    Posts

  • 12K

    Comments