• rglullis@communick.news
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    No. There is a difference in context and intent.

    Bottom line is, if people are concerned of having their conversation and content distributed out of their intended audiences, we’ll all have to move to a fully encrypted network, where every message can only be decoded by the intended recipients. Getting upset because other people are not agreeing to your expectations of privacy is pointless.

    • sabreW4K3@lemmy.tf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that platforms you’re not a member don’t host content you create in order to make it look at though their platform is more popular and vibrant than it is, thus generating revenue of which you’re not going to get a share of.

      • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Assuming you hold rights to your content in the legal system you’d be claiming the damages in, you are of course free to file a lawsuit.

        • sabreW4K3@lemmy.tf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          That raises a point, what is the process regarding DMCA and GDPR? There’s no mechanism to delete posts via scraped content.

          • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            And neither via federation like in AP. It’s a bit of a hole that should the technology get truly big will eventually come to a head.

            We already had lawsuits in Germany related to linking to copyright infringing content, it’s not a big stretch that if you scrape or federate a link that could infringe, you are in turn infringing.

      • nutomic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Where exactly does a “platform” end? Is it only lemmy.tf, or all Lemmy instances? Either way Mastodon or Peertube can hardly be considered to be the same platform as Lemmy. Activitypub is a protocol and definitely not a platform. Or would you consider threads.net part of your “platform” once it implements Activitypub?

        • sabreW4K3@lemmy.tf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          That’s a good question. We have the Lemmy platform, but that’s built on the wider ActivityPub platform. So I would consider threads part of the platform.

      • rglullis@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        their platform

        Can we please get out of this tribal mindset? The thing about decentralized systems is that it lets everyone where they want to be without being forced into a walled garden. Why should I care about the platform that other people are using, if I can reach them just the same?

        Who cares if Bluesky or Nostr become more popular than ActivityPub? As long as the “platform” is open source and not actively working to hold its users as hostages, we should praise and hope they get to grow as large as possible. We should be fighting against the big corporations, not the small independent developers. There are almost 3 billion people using Twitter/Facebook/Reddit/TikTok. They are the ones that we should be actively engaging and trying to win them over to our side.