• Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    The reason why this might work on Lemmy but not on corporate Social media is that corporate social media often have terms of service that require you to give them ownership/rights/etc. Lemmy has no such ToC.

    Actually, Safe Harbor laws would encompass social media sites as well, so it would work there as well.

    Either corporations own the content you post and are responsible for it, or they just host your content you post that you own and are immune from harm for the content. The law is currently the latter, and not the former.

    Also, law trumps ToS’s.

    This comment is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

    • mholiv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t think the ToS approach would be invalidated here via your Safe Harbor fork theory.

      The ToS could state something like “you give us a worldwide perpetual right to use your content in any way we want including granting this right to whom we designate”

      You still own your content but by having an account you agree to the ToS that lets them do what they want.

      They just host it and are safe.

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        16 hours ago

        TOS can’t change Law, can’t strip away rights that you have.

        Law always trumps TOS.

        In fact, if a company tries to via their TOS they are opening themselves up for big risks/lawsuits, as they are trying to gain ownership of your content, voiding their Safe Harbor law protections.

        They can’t have it both ways, thats not how the Law works. Either they have the protection, or they own the content.

        This comment is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0