Is allowing access to piracy resources the same as hosting piracy resources? Is Comcast at risk of being shut down because they didn't block everyone's access to RARBG? This is largely rhetorical; the answer is "no". lemmy.world's admins are not being honest.
How does it make sense? Did Comcast have to/did they block my access to RARBG while it still existed? No. I get removing piracy content on their own instance, but blocking other instances is not necessary.
The problem is that the admins are all just volunteers and the instance doesn't exist to make money. If a big company decides to sue them, even if they are in the right, they will be drowned in legal fees.
Not to mention, legality doesn't need to be a question if the admins of Lemmy.world get drowned in legal fees before even having to appear in a court. The rich don't exist by our laws and idk why anybody expects differently at this point.
Can someone transcribe this for those of us using screen readers? As a server in Canada, We're also worried about the hosting risk of the piracy community and considering blocking it. I'd love to read the LW statement.
Earlier today, after review, we blocked and removed several communities that were providing assistance to access copyrighted/pirated material, which is currently not allowed per Rule #1 of our Code of Conduct.
We took this action to protect lemmy.world, lemmy.world's users, and lemmy.world staff as the material posted in those communities could be problematic for us, because of potential legal issues around copyrighted material and services that provide access to or assitance in obtaining it.
Thanks! I didn't realize there was an announcement on Lemmy, or I would have searched. Unfortunately screenshots are kind of the only way to share posts on Discord, because you can't link someone to a Discord message on a server they're not a member of, so I can't blame you for a screenshot there. However, it is possible to add alt-text on images you post to Lemmy. :-)