this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
695 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

72360 readers
2987 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
695
Supreme Court to decide whether ISPs must disconnect users accused of piracy (arstechnica.com)
submitted 4 days ago by tonytins@pawb.social to c/technology@lemmy.world
181 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PanaX@lemmy.world 270 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Based on that logic, ammunition and arms manufacturers should be held liable for damages as well.

[–] compostgoblin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 161 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yes, but that would mean that logic has any bearing on what the Supreme Court decides to do

[–] huquad@lemmy.ml 50 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I hate that you're absolutely correct

[–] ryper@lemmy.ca 34 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The US has a law to limit the liability of gun manufacturers.

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a U.S law, passed in 2005, that protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. Both arms manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible. However, they may be held liable for negligent entrustment if it is found that they had reason to believe a firearm was intended for use in a crime.

[–] Luffy879@lemmy.ml 15 points 3 days ago

Because of fucking course there is

Were talking about Jesusland after all

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 22 points 4 days ago (2 children)

More like, if you steal something you are banned from using roads and sidewalks and doors.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Yeah, sure but to "steal something" is to imply that you're depriving the original owner use of the thing you stole. This is more like making an exact copy depriving nobody of use of the original thing.

it's more like depriving someone use of roads, sidewalks, and doors because they got caught walking out of Kinkos

[–] yggstyle@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Gonna be a lot of issues that come from this. Legally speaking. It's already on the books that an IP address doesn't represent a single person... so I'm not terribly clear on how they plan to enforce this even if it were to pass.

[–] projectmoon@forum.agnos.is 1 points 1 day ago

You assume precedent, consistency, or ethics matter to the current people in power in the US.