PCOWandre@jauntygoat.net 8 months ago
@snarfed.org @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
If you'd like to use our content, how about paying us for it?
Or at least consider the copyright position of each post/account rather than assuming what we produce is free for you to re-use.
luca@sironi.tk 8 months ago
@PCOWandre @snarfed.org@snarfed.org @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
Andre, you know, this public post you just wrote, has been temporarily cached by my pleroma server. I wonder if you consider that i'm using your content by simply answering you.
PCOWandre@jauntygoat.net 8 months ago
@luca @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews That would be using the content as intended. In the same way that allowing a browser to cache a web page doesn't entitle the browser use to then republish that content under their own domain.
Similarly, owning and using a DVR doesn't grant one the right to sell copies of a TV show.
I can borrow a book from a library, but that doesn't entitle me to photocopy it, rebind it and sell it to another library.
luca@sironi.tk 8 months ago
@PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews so i'm preemptively good person/ server because i use activitypub but you don't trust bluesky the company, because they are using that other AT protocol.
But once they opened their protocol, it's not just their company using it, other no profit actors can use it as well.
There are mastodon servers owned by company already.
PCOWandre@jauntygoat.net 8 months ago
@luca @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews I'm not anti-corporate at all. I have no problem with a large entity implementing native activitypub and interacting natively with the community.
I do not see bridges/gateways that republish content as that at all.
Further, I understand there's a difference between offering someone a beer and having them walk into my house and help themselves to the fridge.