• Tash@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    11 months ago

    I would love to have the EFF chime in, but there are some protections for you as a host under the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) - or safe harbor provision in the USA.

    As to how that has been tested legally on federated content, I don’t know. Perhaps another elder of the internet can tell me how Usenet servers handle it.

    • gabe [he/him]@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      11 months ago

      You are right, there is safe harbor protections here. It’s a legal mess that must be navigated carefully. We will see how things progress.

      • treadful@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        11 months ago

        While correct, you still may end up having to deal with the law about it. The whole “you can’t beat the ride” thing. Could be a ton of hassle and legal fees.

        • Tash@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          What are you implying here? That @gabe should never have bothered with running a server? What about the server you are connected to right now? Should they shut down because of what may travel across it?

          No.

          They’re protected under the same rules as somebody running a WiFi hotspot at a coffee shop. As long as they are doing everything within reason to be a good steward of their local network (which is what Gabe is doing) then they are protected.

          • wagesj45@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            11 months ago

            Doesn’t seem like he was implying anything. Just stating the fact that part of the burden of citizenship is sometimes having to interact with law enforcement, maybe even go to trial, even if you’ve done nothing wrong.

            • treadful@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Pretty eloquent way of saying what I was trying to express. Thanks

          • treadful@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’m not suggesting anyone should or shouldn’t do anything, nor that I’m not grateful for people that do. Just saying it’s a potential downside that people should seriously consider before hosting any public access systems.

            They’re protected under the same rules as somebody running a WiFi hotspot at a coffee shop. As long as they are doing everything within reason to be a good steward of their local network (which is what Gabe is doing) then they are protected

            Hopefully, yeah. But again, there’s still this potential of the coffee shop of having all their equipment seized and having to deal with a law enforcement investigation and maybe even the courts. Even if the risk of actual jail time and monetary penalties is low, it’s something people should consider before doing it.

            This is one of the reasons I’m not running a public access network or TOR exit node at home even if I think those are worthwhile things to do.

          • Natanael@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            FYI not all jurisdictions deal with website hosting (storage and distribution) as equivalent to hotspot/ internet services (dumb relay)