• Snot Flickerman
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

      This might be funnier than all those Facebook accounts with warnings about “I do not authorize anyone to use my photos!”

      Because they’re trying to copyright an internet comment that they posted on a service hosted by someone else, with a creative commons license attached. It’s like a step up in knowing how shit works, but still not knowing enough.

      If you really want ownership over what you say… don’t post it on the fucking internet.

      • @leopold
        link
        English
        2011 months ago

        I mean, not really. You own the stuff you create regardless of who’s hosting it. Microsoft doesn’t own the copyright for the millions of projects hosted on GitHub either.

        • Snot Flickerman
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1311 months ago

          I use pigeons and let the wind tell me where to send them.

          So is other guy gonna sue me now and win because I just copy and pasted what they said? This is a joke.

          • @leopold
            link
            English
            1611 months ago

            I mean, probably not. That’s such a short post, chances are courts wouldn’t find it copyrightable. And obviously attaching a license at the end of your comments is useless in practice, because no one on the internet actually properly engages with copyright law. Plus suing over copy-pasting someone’s social media post is dumb as hell and no one does that, tho I do think you could technically do it and win, because current copyright laws make zero sense if you actually stop and think about it for any amount of time.

            • Snot Flickerman
              link
              fedilink
              English
              811 months ago

              current copyright laws make zero sense if you actually stop and think about it for any amount of time.

              So true.

              • kbal
                link
                fedilink
                1111 months ago

                My lawyers will argue that this willful infringement of my rights as the orignal author of the famous 1997 Internet comment “So true” means that you now owe me $4000000 in damages, but I’ll settle for one bitcoin.

        • lemmyvore
          link
          fedilink
          English
          611 months ago

          And yet Microsoft made Copilot, and there are currently lots of clueless programmers out there using it to inject code with god knows what licenses into their company’s software.

          • @leopold
            link
            English
            511 months ago

            Which hasn’t been free of legal challenges. Current copyright law doesn’t account for machine learning, which is what allows them to do this. This could soon change.

        • lemmyvore
          link
          fedilink
          English
          411 months ago

          You own the original, which you’ve written on your pc or phone. But the one that ends up on the website is a copy, on which you’ve granted the website owner a non-revokable license to do with as they please ie. a copy-right.

          • @leopold
            link
            English
            511 months ago

            Not really. You’ve granted the owner some rights, such as the right to host your content and present it to any user on the platform, but they don’t own it. Twitter can’t start using any art hosted on their platform for their branding, because it’s no theirs.

            • lemmyvore
              link
              fedilink
              English
              311 months ago

              They can if the license you granted them says they can. Read it. These platforms usually make you grant then extensive rights. Yes they don’t own the content but given such broad permissions it makes very little practical difference.

      • @averyminya@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        1211 months ago

        Wait lol are people posting that to their comments to use it as claimed ownership? I did not realize that was the intent there