• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3613 days ago

    If companies are going to do this then they should be legally required to continue printing/selling all of their legacy content. Because sometimes these kinds of sites will have the random obscure content that the publisher literally doesn’t sell anymore, but then the company still gets crazy with them.

    “You have our content. Take it down.”

    “Okay, then make that content available direct from you so people can actually legally access it.”

    “No.”

    • molave
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -913 days ago

      Companies have the same rights as a private person to not have their stuff distributed if they don’t permit it. How do you proceed from that?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3113 days ago

        A business is not a person. They should not get all the benefits of being a person with none of the negatives, and then also get all the benefits of being a business with none of the negatives.

        • molave
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          Which, to our dismay, is not how the current law works. Only a law change will bring what you describe.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        512 days ago

        Idk, I personally don’t think it’s fair to throw a hissyfit about it when they don’t even bother making it available, especially since the monetary damages are negligable. They’re not losing customers when they never had them.

      • Rozaŭtuno
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 days ago

        Just because they have the right (or more precisely: they gave themselves the right through lobbying), it doesn’t mean it’s fair. They’re literally gatekeeping culture.

      • @mindbleach
        link
        English
        213 days ago

        Once it’s published, fuck that.