• Brickfrog@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      There were no legal issues or threats, it was just some troll with a brand new account from a different instance that tricked admins into blocking those communities. See the other post https://lemmy.world/post/3175920 (if it loads, lemmy.world having uptime issues as usual)

      • krayj@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Most rational people choose to limit their exposure to liability before it happens rather than increase their exposure to liability and wait around to later have to defend themselves.

        Are you suggesting the proper course is to maximize your exposure to liability and then be forced to defend yourself later?

        • Brickfrog@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Most rational people choose to limit their exposure to liability before it happens

          I had a feeling someone was going to reply with the “let’s ban things because they might be problematic in the future” reasoning. What’s interesting with your line of thinking is that there are many more communities that Lemmy.world admins should also consider banning due to possibly being a legal issue later on. In fact Lemmy.world admins haven’t even banned all piracy related/adjacent communities, they literally only considered the select few that were mentioned by the troll account.

          I’d argue with this action Lemmy.world admins have actually put themselves in a more legally dubious position. They are now picking and choosing which sorts of liability to be exposed to. There is now historical precedence that the Lemmy.world admins specifically choose what to keep unblocked on their instance.

          • krayj@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The people who have to fight the battles are the people who ultimately should have the responsibility and the privilege of picking those battles, no?

            Everything you said may be true, but it’s not you that would be responsible for fighting their battles is it?

            They may be completely wrong…and they may be putting themselves in a more legally dubious position…but it is their battle to fight if it comes to that…so the ONLY people who should have a say in what battles they pick to fight are them, not you, not me.

          • gorysubparbagel@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            But it isn’t that it might be problematic in the future, it’s very likely that it will. Look at what happened with RIAA and youtube-dl, reddit and film studios. The movie and music industries are very trigger happy when it comes to suing anyone even remotely related to piracy.

            Also picking and choosing which sorts of liability you’re exposed to is normal, it isn’t an all or nothing situation.

      • MrQuallzin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No legal issues or threats yet. Nothing wrong with proactively protecting themselves from potential legal issues.