Actually, they said they sounded like a fucking moron. And they do they do: there is no actual legitimacy to their claim. They are repeating a horseshit corpo claim without applying any sort of critical thought to it. Which can be reasonably considered “fucking moronic”.

Your seedbox should have it’s torrent traffic routed through a VPN, so that copyright complaints are delivered to (and ignored by) the VPN provider.

You do not need a VPN between you and the seedbox.

The best time to leave Pinterest was 2010.

The second best time is now.

need to have the highbeams on just to be able to see anything when there’s oncoming traffic.

Let me get this straight: you are turning on your brights when there is oncoming traffic?

Oh, there is a reason, and it’s the fucking NHTSA. Those absolute fuckrockets mandate proportionally stricter emissions standards on smaller cars than larger cars. They base it on the area of the rectangle formed by where the tires touch the pavement.

If your car can’t quite pass emission standards, just make it a little wider, a little longer, and you get a looser standard.

Repeat the process for a few model years, and now 2025 subcompacts are larger than 1995 sedans.

Fuck the NHTSA with a rusty bayonet.

Which wouldn’t be so bad if they actually had shit that people wanted to buy. But all the guillotine shops are out of stock, with expected ship dates after December 4th.

You can even add a search plugin directly in the client.

Huh. Well, that’ll make things easier.

The helicopters and personal assistants and private jets and staffed mansions aren’t the problem. With all of those, money is moving from the rich person to pilots, crew, maintenance staff, laborers, builders. Workers are making a living, earning paychecks from all these expenditures. Their lavish lifestyles are not the problem.

The problem is their stock portfolios. They aren’t converting their wealth into worker paychecks. They are leveraging their wealth to take more and more wealth from workers throughout the economy.

steam cools back to water

That one. The most common methods of condensing that steam rely on large bodies of water acting as heat sinks. Water in those large reservoirs is lost to evaporation, which is exacerbated by the additional heat.

The water in that reservoir must be reserved for the nuclear plant; a drought that drains the reservoir will knock the plant offline.

Air-cooled condensers are possible, but at significantly reduced efficiency, especially in already hot environments.

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Did you know you can just buy shoe polish? You don’t have to find a boot to lick it off.

Prime is garbage. Even if it’s free on Prime, I hoist a sail.

Then you should be able to cite a case where this has happened.

What actually happens when you are found with a bunch of pirated material is… Nothing. Because it is not illegal to merely receive an unauthorized copy.

nothing about making/distributing copies or uploading or whatever you think you’re talking about

Got it. From the OP article:

Last month, the authors filed an amended complaint which added these BitTorrent-related allegations to their existing claims. The plaintiffs pointed out that BitTorrent users typically upload content to third parties and suggest that Meta did the same here.

The article and conversation is not about the contract law that would apply with licensing. They aren’t about the fair use exemption which has a commercial usage factors. The article and conversation are talking about simple copyright law: copying and distribution.

Your very first comment in this thread was completely off topic. I apologize that it’s taken me this long to figure out where you’re coming from.

Galaxy S Relay

5 line keyboard!

Why does the customer/user matter at all here when they’re not party to the lawsuit?

This conversation is about the legality of downloading without uploading.

Anthropic is not accused of downloading without uploading. Anthropic is accused of creating copies and distributing those copies to customers. They are being accused of violating copyright by uploading, not downloading.

The Anthropic lawsuit is completely irrelevant to the issue of “downloading only”. Rather than throw out your example entirely, I showed a relationship within your example that actually does relate to the topic under discussion.

• Anthropic is accused of creating and distributing unauthorized copies. (Those are partial copies, rather than complete, but they are still copies, and still infringing.)

• There are entities in your scenario who are receiving those copies, without creating additional copies, or distributing the copies they received. They are, effectively, “downloading only”.

So, tell me about those customers: When they ask Anthropic’s AI for an unauthorized copy of a copyrighted work, and Anthropic provides them an unauthorized copy of a copyrighted work, is the customer infringing on the copyright?

Fuck meta, this isn’t about meta, this is about the legal fact that downloading is not infringement. Just because you don’t like this particular downloader does not mean we have to set the precedent that downloading is infringement.

Anthropic was returning substantial parts of the actual work to users. They were creating additional copies of the work. Creating unauthorized copies is infringement.

You would have to argue that the users who received those substantial parts were also infringing on copyright. My point is made when you acknowledge that those users did not infringe by receiving those substantial parts, even if they specifically requested those substantial parts from Anthropic.

when downloading something, you are making a copy.

No, you are not. The uploader is the only entity capable of making the copy. You can’t make a copy of something you do not possess.

When I send you a file, two copies come to exist. The copy on my computer, and the copy I created and sent to you. I made the copy, and I distributed it. You simply received it.

The copy you received is, indeed, unauthorized, but the infringing party is me, not you. I am the one who created and distributed the copy.

Receiving an unauthorized copy is not a copyright violation. A bootleg DVD is illegal to sell; it is not illegal to buy or to own.

Thomas Paine said that he who would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression, lest he set a precedent that will reach back to himself.

Your argument here seems to be “fuck meta”. Does you opposition remain when it us an actual pirate bring accused? If so, fuck you. If not, why are you trying to lose this for the rest of us?