• rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    Why is it weird to be mad at a multibillion dollar corporation for garnishing the wages of a disabled person’s disability benefits, simply because he was providing the means to do what you want with your device? I don’t care what the courts say. It should not be illegal to sell something that allows you to do what you want with your device. Even if that device facilitates piracy. IP isn’t real and shouldn’t exist in the first place.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I actually didn’t know they were directly selling pirated software, I thought it was only about the modding device. However, I’m glad you recognize the extremely excessive nature of the ruling. Do you happen to know why they went after a single individual instead of the whole group?

        • schmidtster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          It shows people are getting mad just because someone endorsing piracy got their comeuppance instead of what actually matters.

          • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            Just to be clear, you’re ok with saddling a disabled person with $14m dollar fine to a multibillion dollar corporation, for the crime of making $300k on a device that allows you to do what you want with your device? It wasn’t specifically meant for piracy, there are several good and legitimate reasons to have full control of your device.

              • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Because he lives in the US Canada, where it’s expensive as fuck to just exist as a disabled person.

                • Stamets@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  He actually lives in Canada. Your comment still applies overall as it is not feasible to live adequately on disability here but he’s not in the US.

                • schmidtster@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  Person is in Canada and has disability insurance as well as government benefits. Unless the articles are wrong in saying disability insurance.

                  Still don’t see how it’s relevant to the story about being fined. Would be the same story for anyone disability or not.

                  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    OP corrected me, and I edited my comment to reflect the correction. Still don’t see how it’s weird to be upset about a company fining the everliving fuck out of a private citizen because the company is anti-ownership.

    • beefcat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      disability benefits can’t be garnished. i think it’s ok to be mad at people for spreading misinformation even if they themselves are fighting a just cause. lies like this help nobody.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      IP isn’t real and shouldn’t exist in the first place.

      This. They’ve made up a dubious analogy between owning physical items and knowledge, and make the “burn the witch” act when you point out that it’s unsatisfactory to make laws, and there are plenty of people running around who haven’t ever made anything in their lives which would be impeded by IP, so they just support it.

      I know a few people who’ve made IP-worthy things, sometimes published (small-issue), the pattern is that they are against IP (while for them I’d understand having emotional reasons to support it).