Kevin Beaumont (@GossiTheDog@cyberplace.social)
cyberplace.social
Attached: 1 image Apparently Microsoft don’t understand how the Fediverse works, and want me to delete the parody account @microsoft@lea.pet 🤣🫡

The admin of the Mastodon instance cyberspace.social just received an AI powered notice to delete the parody account @microsoft@lea.pet

  • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.worldEnglish
    655·
    6 days ago

    So I guess I’ll explain the post for you, since it seems you do not understand the fediverse, either.

    cyberplace.social federates with lea.pet but is not responsible for and cannot control the Microsoft parody account on lea.pet. Microsoft sent the notice to the wrong server. That’s why Microsoft does not understand the fediverse or how federation works, and why the post is funny instead of dumb. Now you can laugh too! You’re welcome!

    • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      4 days ago

      Holy shit. I can’t believe that 65 people upvoted this. Do you really believe that’s how the world works? Are you actually adults?

        • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          4 days ago

          You have full control over a server on which you chose to run certain Software. But you feel you don’t have to comply with takedown requests because that’s just how the software works? That may work on indulgent parents but not in court. If you’re too technically inept to know how to comply, then you’re just not complying. End of story.

            • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              4 days ago

              Depends on the jurisdiction. This is a conflict between freedom of speech and the reputation of the brand (which has financial value). Countries with a more recent monarchical past tend to value reputation over free speech, eg Japan but also Europe. The US has been a republic for a quarter millennium. Since MS is a US company, I think they wouldn’t even pursue this in the first place.

              Generally, service providers are exempt for liability for such things if they follow certain rules of conduct. EG the US DMCA says that you are not liable for copyright infringement, if you comply with takedown notices. I’m not sure how that works for trademarks in the US.

              Generally, though, you should expect to be held responsible for any infringing content on your service, once you learn/are notified about it. You will be treated as if you had created the content yourself. That means that you will have to make the argument in court that the use of the trademark was legal. And if you lose, you will pay the damages.

              Questions?

    • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
      530·
      6 days ago

      So it’s funny because the fediverse is so niche that no one designing automated copyright systems care about its odd and unique addressing system?