Comment on ISPs tell Supreme Court they don’t want to disconnect users accused of piracy

• General_Effort@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  You have a corporation that doesn’t want to spend money to care for individual copyrights, or even lose customers over it. That describes ISPs. Still, people side with the corporation.

  When you say individual rights, you, of course, mean copyrights; intellectual property rights. Giving property such a high priority is such a clash to the otherwise anti-capitalist attitudes here. It’s not just pro capitalist. It’s pro conservative capitalist.

  source

  • KaiReeve@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I don’t think anybody here is siding with ISPs. We’re just happy to hear that they’re having difficulties policing piracy.

    When I say individual rights I mean any and all rights an individual has or should have. In the case of piracy, an individual should have a right to entertainment media at a reasonable cost. The more corporations increase the cost of media access, the more piracy proliferates. In the case of AI, an individual should have the right to earn a living. Corporations are using the works of individuals to ultimately increase their own profits without due compensation to the individual.

    I don’t know how you got to pro conservative capitalism from a single anti-corporatist statement, but it likely took you several leaps of logic that I’m not going to even try to follow.

    source

    • General_Effort@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      I see how I misunderstood.

      This conception of individual rights seems rather ad hoc. I don’t think I could have guessed that that’s what you meant, rather than copyrights.

      I don’t see the connection to copyright, in any case. How does fair use interfere with anyone’s right to earn a living? And if it does, why support the Internet Archive?

      source