this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
463 points (99.4% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54746 readers
217 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's at least reassuring to know that the DoJ values the privacy of these horrible criminals enough to warrant blurring their faces. Hard to believe those assholes were spending the money on beautiful rainbows. A rainbow isn't a tangible possession someone can just keep to themselves! The idea that some guy can just own this abstract thing is deeply offensive to me and I will not be giving any more of my hard-earned money to library genesis.
Bet it's a stock image the FBI didn't pay for
Makes me think of this video of the geneticist Albert Jacquard that tries to show how ideas will always be in the commons. How it's impossible for people to own a concept of an idea, using the example of "it's impossible to tell who saw the rainbow the first to own its concept".
It's in french but it's a total masterclass, I should translate it someday : https://effingo.be/2011/05/22/albert-jacquard-demonte-le-concept-de-propriete-intellectuelle/