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
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
Is it 100% confirmed now that the DMCA is from Nintendo themselves? I find it weird that they'd go after (initially small) forks when Ryujinx exists.
The Suyu team also hosts their code under https://git.suyu.dev, so I wouldn't exactly call it dead (yet).
There is no confirmation that this came from Nintendo, nor does it list the actual infringing parts like a normal takedown request should.
I mean, if you're going to scream "I'm doing this!" as loud as you can, it's not a surprise when you get noticed.
Now I need to consider Gitea and Codeberg. Thanks for the reminder GitLab.
Don't use Gitea, use Forgejo - it's a hard fork of Gitea after Gitea became a for-profit venture (and started gating their features behind a paywall).
Codeberg has switched to Forgejo as well.
Also, there's some promising progress being made towards ActivityPub federation in Forgejo! Imagine a world where you can comment on issues and send/receive pull requests on other people's projects, all from the comfort of a small homeserver.
ActivityPub integration on git remote repos sounds very interesting. Thanks for sharing that, I'll definetely take a look at Codeberg/Forgejo.
Can't wait for forge federation, it's super annoying that I need an account for each individual instance just to report a bug
What features are paywalled?
From here:
None?
If you need action runners you have to ask for them which is fair as it's expensive.
If you self host it's all free.
This sadly isn't true anymore - they now have Gitea Enterprise, which contains additional features not available in the open source version.
They're required to take down content following a DMCA takedown request. It's up to the uploader to counterclaim if they're so inclined, at which point they're able to put it back up.
Just torrented it out of spite. I don't even care about the system...I own one and I don't play it because they got the A and B buttons backwards (that's a joke)
Edit: also, everyone should see this.
they got the A and B buttons backward
I can't tell if you're joking or what
I have permanent Xbox brain, so I'd say they made an oopsie daisy even though I grew up on SNES
What is arguably even more egregious is having X/Y backwards. On a graph, X is the horizontal axis, Y is the vertical axis. Xbox got it right.
Why TF would you put it on gitlab instead of hosting your own forejo instance?
I swear, some people are just too eager to get in headlines rather than thinking things through.
if you put it on gitlab, you're not the one getting sued when they take it down
I am more saying it's not surprising Gitlab would take it down.
For example. With yt-dl /github they immediately went to a self hosted Gitlab instance. It wasn't simply a hasty move to the public Gitlab instance.
For all the free publicity when it gets taken down. They were probably hosting it six different ways already
No one wants Nintendo's wrath. Who can blame them.
Codeberg next?
They already have their own Forgejo instance at git.suyu.dev
Not too surprising but still disappointing regardless. Self-hosting is the only way to go for this.
Another, even better way is IPFS.
Regulators can take down your self hosted site. They cannot take it down if everyone has a piece of it (IPFS).
Works just like torrents do. Spread it out, and no one can stop it.
Still selfhosted, kind of, but by everyone.
If someone needs the name of the next fork, I'd suggest "Yutu". (or Ettu)
Assholes.
Still mad it isn't named 2zu
At least it seems suyu has devs now though
So uhhh, what now
another one will rise no doubt, either they use a platform that doesn't care for DMCA's or they play the whack-a-mole game with the enforcers
it's hosted elsewhere
Hail hydra
We need federation of sourceforges FFS.
I've been seeing for a while comments like yours that put a license link at the end of the comment. Can you explain to me the benefits of doing that or is it makes any difference? If I'm not mistaken the content posted on a Lemmy instace adheres to the license that the instance is using.
It's purely for commercial AI on my end. Researchers have gotten LLMs to spit out their training data: street addresses, medical data, entire comments, and of course licenses.
Some countries are still deciding whether commercial LLMs are infringing on copyright by training on copyrighted material without approval, others have already decided. I think the major economical zones that will impact legality will be the USA, EU, and China.
Until a decision has been made, I'll continue adding the "free for all except commercial use" license.
Also, copyright is very complicated. If you copy an entire article from a newspaper and paste it into a post on a lemmy instance, which license does it have? That of the newspaper or that of the lemmy instance? If it's the former, then what's the difference if it comes from your brain and not a newspaper? Would it make a difference if the comment were written first on a blog and then copied to lemmy? If it's the latter, then what's the point point of the newspaper or the author ever copyrighting it somewhere else if it can just be overridden?
Next question regarding copyright, since comments are copied and stored on different servers, who would then own the copyright? The lemmy instance sending the comment or the one receiving it?
I'm not a lawyer and probably things aren't clear cut. Might be one in one country and a different thing in another.
My understanding of the Creative Commons licenses is that they are for providing permission to people to use something that they wouldn't be able to otherwise, due to copyright or other issues. I don't think the licenses are capable of limiting what people can do with something if it's already the wild west, or do I have that wrong?