FediLore + Fedidrama

3030 readers

1 users here now

Rules

Any drama must be posted as an observer, you cannot post drama that you are involved with.
When posting screenshots of drama, you must obscure the identity of all the participants.
The poster must have a credible post and comment history before submitting a piece of history. This is to avoid sock-puppetry and witch hunts.

The usual instance-wide rules also apply.

Chronicle the life and tale of the fediverse (+ matrix)

Largely a sublemmy about capturing drama, from fediverse spanning drama to just lemmy drama.

Includes lore like how a instance got it's name, how an instance got defederated, how an admin got doxxed, fedihistory etc

(New) This sub's intentions is to an archive/newspaper, as in preferably don't get into fights with each other or the ppl featured in the drama

Tags: fediverse news, lemmy news, lemmyverse

Partners:

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

sexy_peach@feddit.org

-35

DBZer0 has begun banning people simply for believing in the concept of copyright (archive.ph)

submitted 1 week ago by CraigOhMyEggoAlt@lemmy.wtf to c/fediverselore@lemmy.ca

85 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Advocating piracy is one thing, but now banning people for believing in copyright? That's like banning people for following the law. That is banning people for following the law. What gives? And to think a while ago I declared I wouldn't have any reason to not take their bans (or the motives behind them) seriously.

Are we trying to get world governments to ban Lemmy (or, worse, the fediverse)? Love the administrative decisions or hate them, such decisions will drag down the whole fediverse. Typically sites are defederated to protect the sites defederating them from liability. Will this be an example, or does this, out of convenience, not apply? Are we forgetting a large portion of the fediverse's demographics consist of artists trying to make a damn living?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

but why would you care about copyright when your music makes no money?

Because it makes sampling extremely legally treacherous.

your music apparently has no monetary value

Almost correct. Strictly speaking, people have paid for my music. Also...last time I checked, Bandcamp had a policy where I was only allowed to offer a limited amount of free downloads and then I would have to pay them to offer my work for free. So I think it is behind the minimum paywall right now, which means it has nonzero monetary value. Which makes me a hypocrite. Shock-horror. But more than a hypocrite... I've just been too busy to check on my Bandcamp account since I went back to school. If anyone knows of a free and federated alternative to Bandcamp, please let me know.

Music, like all art and information, should be free for anyone to use and consume. Simultaneously, musicians should be compensated for their work, and I provided other ways that musicians are currently compensated for their work (merch and live shows) in the current system. Frankly , these are much more robust ways to make money.

But more accurately, everyone should have access to the resources they need to survive by virtue of being human, regardless of their success in their chosen field. Full stop.