• DemigodrickA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    At what point did the user “access” lemmy.world? Did their device connect to lemmy.world at any point during them making their posts? No. It did not. That’s not how federation works.

    It’s relevant because it shows that lemmy.world has no ownership or control over the original, which is where the barrier for a service would be. I’m not sure how i can make that any clearer.

    Again, I have no idea what you’re on about with the dick sucking. Saying I have no idea of the law while spouting totally irrelevant arguments is a touch disingenuous.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      At what point did the user “access” lemmy.world? Did their device connect to lemmy.world at any point during them making their posts? No. It did not. That’s not how federation works.

      Why is ‘their device’ the magic piece of the puzzle for you? If you use a proxy, are you free from all ToS?

      They submitted content to Lemmy.world. Fuck’s sake.

      It’s relevant because it shows that lemmy.world has no ownership or control over the original, which is where the barrier for a service would be. I’m not sure how i can make that any clearer.

      You can’t make it any clearer. Your position is clear. It’s also nonsensical.

      Again, I have no idea what you’re on about with the dick sucking. Saying I have no idea of the law while spouting totally irrelevant arguments is a touch disingenuous.

      “Giving examples of services you haven’t provided does not preclude what you have provided from being a service as well.

      • DemigodrickA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Federation isn’t a proxy. You’re conflating two different things here. If you use a proxy to access a website, you yourself have still accessed that website.

        If I access a lemmy community on a remote server, I am not accessing that remote community directly, I am still on my home instance, accessing a local copy. For example, I am still subscribed to [email protected]. I could go create a post there. But guess what. Feddit.de doesn’t exist anymore. The only place that post will go is lemmy.zip because feddit.de is not there to federate it out. Is feddit.de suddenly providing me a service? No! It doesn’t exist anymore! I am interacting with lemmy.zips local copy of that community.

        It’s exactly the same for a live instance. I am not submitting anything directly to the other instance. Instead I am submitting it to my home server, which is letting the remote server know about it. The user has at no point interacted with, accessed, shared any information with, or directly in any way had anything to do with the remote server.

        That is a simple fact about how federation works. Can you tell me at what point that user has interacted with lemmy.world’s website?

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          2 days ago

          Federation isn’t a proxy. You’re conflating two different things here. If you use a proxy to access a website, you yourself have still accessed that website.

          If I access a lemmy community on a remote server, I am not accessing that remote community directly, I am still on my home instance, accessing a local copy. For example, I am still subscribed to [email protected]. I could go create a post there. But guess what. Feddit.de doesn’t exist anymore. The only place that post will go is lemmy.zip because feddit.de is not there to federate it out. Is feddit.de suddenly providing me a service? No! It doesn’t exist anymore! I am interacting with lemmy.zips local copy of that community.

          It’s exactly the same for a live instance. I am not submitting anything directly to the other instance. Instead I am submitting it to my home server, which is letting the remote server know about it.

          You’re literally just describing submitting content by proxy. Like, it cannot get any simpler. The only way this would not be submitting content by proxy would be if the home server you were submitting to had no connection to .world whatsoever, and the transfer of content to .world was done without the posting user’s knowledge.

          That is a simple fact about how federation works. Can you tell me at what point that user has interacted with lemmy.world’s website?

          The moment they submitted content to a comm whose instance is Lemmy.world. “It went through their home instance first” is literally arguing that submitting content by proxy excuses one from ToS, which…

          Fuck man, really, consult a lawyer. Or articles on Mastodon legal issues for instance hosts.

          • DemigodrickA
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’ve let you drag me off track, that’s my own fault. I actually kind of get your point about a proxy service, but we’re obviously both looking at this in different ways. In your way, that would automatically mean that every post you make, even locally on lemmy.world, as it is sent to every single server that lemmy.world federates with, makes you subject to every single ToS for those servers. That’s just not true though. That’s not how it works.

            Importantly, back to the key point, the ToS for lemmy.world say:

            No one under 18 years of age or under the regulated minimum age defined by your local law (whichever is higher), is allowed to use or access the website.

            They are not using nor are they accessing the “website”. Is their message being sent between servers? Sure, that’s federation. Did the user use or access the website? No.

            If that’s the line lemmy.world wants to take, they need to update their ToS to reflect that federated users are also subject to that rule and it applies to federated traffic. At least they’d have a leg to stand on then.

            As it stands, they’ve incorrectly interpreted their own ToS. Again, this is analogous to email. Sending an email does not automatically make you subject to an agreement with the receiving company, with a document you’ve not had sight of. They can still moderate that email as they see fit, but the receiving party isn’t providing a service.

            Anyway I’ve said all there is to say. I’m sure we’ll continue to disagree.