I think this is good, right? Feels like the first time the supreme court has done something I agree with in a while...
this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
85 points (98.9% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
68504 readers
1029 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
FUCK ADOBE!
Torrenting/P2P:
- !seedboxes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !trackers@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !qbittorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !libretorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !soulseek@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Gaming:
- !steamdeckpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !newyuzupiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !switchpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !3dspiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !retropirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's very good, but it's also one of those things where they did the right things (essentially preventing forcing an ISP to be a enforcer of sorts) for the wrong reasons (Cox had more money)
ISP has more money than music industry
Yes
wth does "without intent" mean? Like, ooops my AI accidentally 1.41 TB of books and movies?
Intent meaning they're not an ISP that caters to piracy
E.g. you start an ISP called Pirate Connections, advertise that you cater to piracy and have specific piracy friendly features (optimized for torrents, gang planks, minimal logging etc) is bad