If Meta can do it, you can rule it.

Fun Fact: The watermark is from this depiction of a pirate flag from the 1700's.

another fun fact, today is international talk like a pirate day!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Talk_Like_a_Pirate_Day
- Ar it do be that
- AVAST, ME MATEYS! There's booty to be had!
- Me remembering that yesterday was talk like a pirate day and I forgot

I just like stealing from corporations I don't need a reason

If they still have it after you take it, you didn't steal anything.
Also Disney specifically, for having for decades bought politicians to get Copyright extended progressively from the original 25 years to the present day Death Of Author + 75 years (in practice that's around 125 years in average), has taken more from the Public Domain (which is were works end after Copyright is over) which is owned by all of us, than anybody could possibly "take" from them by refraining to obey the copyrights of their works and just copying their shit without paying them.
It's a fucking Moral Duty to not obey Copyright Legislation when it comes to the likes of Disney.
- That's why I steal physical goods from stores as well as seeding torrents. Been uploading around 25TB a year for the past 5 years. And I'm super clumsy when using self checkout at stores and often forget to scan some of the more expensive items I'm buying. Ooopsy

!piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

That link didn't work for some reason
- .world blocks it. One of the reasons I left it.
- Really? I've tried it and it works for me. Maybe because I'm on that instance. Maybe you're instance in blocking that idk

*There is no ethical consumption under whatever you wanna call the current mode of production

I hate this response, as it implies all choices are equivalent.
If I know a product is made with literal child slavery, it is still more ethical to avoid than product than to spout that platitude
- I think a better one is "don't let perfect be the enemy of good"
  Make the choices that are within your remit to control but cut yourself some slack for not being able to entirely subvert the current world order as one person. We need to be better organised for that.
  And, like you said, don't buy products made with child slavery.

When I see a call to boycott some company almost every time I'm already not buying it.

fr having jellyfin for music and also shows and just pirating them is great :)

Genuine question from an android and Linux user -

What did Apple do? Haven't they historically been super pro-privacy? I remember several times they've refused to unlock phones for feds investigating crimes, regardless of the crime, as well as having some of the best privacy features on their phone

Tim Apple gave trump a 24 karat gold plaque as a sign of 'investing in US manufacturing' so that's probably why Apple is included
- Hey, can you please not use asterisks in the middle of words like that? Some of us have certain words filtered for a reason, and bypassing filters like that is just unkind. Thanks :)
https://www.classaction.org/apple-privacy-lawsuit
https://www.politico.eu/article/apple-fined-e8-million-in-privacy-case/
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2024-12-02/apple-hit-with-employee-lawsuit-alleging-workers-personal-icloud-accounts-are-monitored
I mean there's so many bro
I don't know that there's anything specific but I didn't like Apple before so I never cared about the details of their collaboration. I can't say they don't look like the least Nazi-enabling of these four but someone is free to correct that.
- Didn't they also shitcan Jon Stewart's show over Israel?

At the risk of getting a lot of hate: I feel this is a bit misguided?

"Fiduciary responsibility" is, unfortunately, the law of the land and has been since long before the fascism took root.

The FCC Chairman is capable of doing massive, irreversible damage to a business like Disney/ABC without any means to prevent it (only punish it after the fact, and after a lot of time in court)

As a business, if the management at these companies perceives an undeniable threat to the financial interests of their company, they are literally required by law to mitigate that threat, and they cannot use "violating free speech" as a defense because the 1st amendment only applies to government actions (so they could sue the government for the FCC Chair's interference and still lose in court when their investors file a class action suit for breach of fiduciary responsibility).

This is an impossible situation for these companies and their management.

And yes, the very system itself is to blame here. But I, personally, cannot reasonably expect the leadership of Disney to risk retaliation from the FCC in order to "defend free speech" when doing so can cost them everything, not just professionally, but personally as well. And that's before we even start to discuss the downstream consequences for other people (like all the jobs lost if the FCC goes after Disney/ABC)

So, if you have reason to pirate content independent of this bullshit - which you do, fuck this capitalist shit hole and the companies that profit from and perpetuate it - then go right ahead. I ENCOURAGE it

But we ought to focus our vitriol on the fascists first.

NOTE: I am making a very subtle distinction here... Creating financial consequences for a business such that they are pushed to take action against government overreach is a valid form of resistance! We just need to be clear and honest about what we're doing. I don't hate or begrudge Disney leadership for what they did here. But I will absolutely use the tools at my disposal to resist the fascists, including exploiting the financial interests of corporations to create conflict between the fascists and businesses.

My hope is that the very first thing they did after cancelling Jimmy Kimmel Live! was start working on a first amendment suit against the government. And while we wouldn't know about that (it would be crazy for them to tip their hand early) I would not be at all surprised if that's exactly what is happening behind closed doors right now. I'm very sure that Disney leadership is absolutely bristling at the undue influence being brought to bear on them by the FCC chairman

As a business, if the management at these companies perceives an undeniable threat to the financial interests of their company, they are literally required by law to mitigate that threat
This seems like a good reason not to support them financially if they comply with fascist demands.
I’m very sure that Disney leadership is absolutely bristling at the undue influence being brought to bear on them by the FCC chairman
Disney the corporation isn't the people running it because as you've pointed out there are systemic factors forcing their hands. For that reason it doesn't make sense to translate sympathy for what you might imagine they are feeling into sympathy for the company itself. Our relationship as consumers with these companies is inherently adversarial, and there's no need to anthropomorphize them, or take into consideration what would feel "fair" if a company could be thought of as a person, which it shouldn't.
- This seems like a good reason not to support them financially if they comply with fascist demands
  As I said, there are plenty of good reasons not to support these companies financially. I am NOT arguing against withholding your patronage from these service providers. But it has little to do with their willingness to comply with fascist demands and everything to do with creating an environment where the business faces a greater existential threat from losing customers than they do from pushing back against the fascists. It's a subtle but important distinction, IMO.
  Disney the corporation isn't the people running it
  Then the meme should use "that which" instead of "those who". I don't disagree with you but the meme is pretty clearly saying "the people in charge are supporting fascism" rather than "we can force change by hurting the business' bottom line".
My boy's wicked smaht
- Lol a compliment AND Good Will Hunting quote? I'm here for it. Thanks
Honestly the real issue here from my point of view is Nexstar and Sinclair, who have the market and clout to force ABC to comply. But instead of calling for a boycott of the two companies putting on the pressure, everyone is concentrating on the company who's getting pressured and caving. It takes a long time to get a constitutional law case to SCOTUS, which ABC would clearly and easily win, but they would lose a $6.2 Billion dollar merger deal in the mean time. As much as people like to pretend that these companies work for us, they work for the shareholders. And stonks only go up or the CEO and the board have to find new jerbs.
I'm not defending what they're doing or that they caved at all, just providing an easily downvotable alternate point of view.
https://www.businessinsider.com/nexstar-deal-fcc-jimmy-kimmel-suspension-2025-9
- Big time agreed. This is another major component of it and your assessment is spot on.