vintprox

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

I have an extensive write-up about contradictions with fair use that come from repost bots: https://lemmy.world/comment/3979989

It seems the bot that was reposting in your community is no more. Caught them red-handed without waiting.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Whether the meme is meant to be shared in some other context or not, I think, is the decision that should be based on the sum of copyright liberation and how generalistic the contents are. Today, I can't bear a thought of reposting some stranger's niche meme on social media without at least attaching a source or creator, because I'm most likely making one more point where engagement with the same meme ends - and reposting full works doesn't qualify as commentary/criticism/research, so it's not a fair use, to begin with.

That's why we are correct of assuming the worst from the bots: programming any fair use considerations is left to gather dust, as it's ultimately something that human has to decide.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You only need to recall where it took the Internet Archive, no matter the intent it has. But let's presume for a minute that a lot of it is educational: does unsolicited art reposting constitute an educational purpose, commentary, criticism, news, or a parody? If all that fails to meet, at least work with the portions that you're taking.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

It does not merit a verification of the author, when you hold their content encaged somewhere they did not approve yet. You say it's to increase registrations on Fediverse and for the brighter future, but please remember to deal with this ethically. Creator deserves to know first that your mirror (or whatever ends up being) intends to seek engagement with their piece.

Linking to original, as we both proposed, is an aftermath. Top three factors also need to be addressed if you claim fair use.

As an alternative, asking for consent and delaying repost is not a rocket science.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

TINLA: factors for fair use don't seem to align, though.

  • Such use does not characterize commentary, parody, etc. and is not transformative.
  • Post may prove to be substantial on its own, especially if it's an art piece.
  • Most of the work (individual post) or crucial parts being used.
  • Since there is most likely no thorough link to the author's website or profile, they lose the audience - nobody will go to look up the same post twice, not through Google and Google Images, especially.

About that last point: solvable by manually gathering authors' links or making a hyperlink to respective Reddit profiles.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The argument can be made that bots measuring the content are no better than some random dude on the Internet reposting shit they like. Situation becomes worse when that same "bot" doesn't credit the author proper.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Isn't this like stealing, guys? No, not from Reddit - from authors. Ask for a consent before mirroring anything, for the love of Fediverse. Cheers!