CileTheSane

Hey, good on you for learning things and admitting you were wrong.

Next time avoid statements like “stay on topic. You just proved you don’t understand the nuance I’m talking about” and you won’t look like such an ass when you actually read the article and realize you were wrong in the first place.

So you admit that I do own my likeness now?

Just catching up to the where I was in the first place? The argument you were so insistent was wrong and proved I “Didn’t understand”?

This is on the same level as “You can rob a store then when the cops come to your house say you were never there. They can’t arrest you if you weren’t at the scene of the crime.”

Lying is not a legal defense.

You just proved you don’t understand the nuance I’m talking about.

Translation: “I don’t have a rebuttal for your argument so I’m going to pretend it’s off topic.”

If you actually had an argument to make you would explain how the nuance was misunderstood and clarify what you meant. “You clearly don’t understand” just screams that you don’t have any foundational arguments for your claims.

You want to us to stay on topic?

Judge Beryl A Howell of the DC Circuit Court upheld a US Copyright Office ruling that works created by “AIs” are not eligible for copyright protection.

A work not being eligible for copyright protection does not mean it nullifies existing protections. If someone uses AI to generate an image of Ronald McDonald punching Mickey Mouse in the face and tries to sell it on a shirt they will get sued by both McDonald’s and Disney and they will lose easily.

“The courts have declared I don’t own the copyright for this” is not a defense for using protected images.

“there’s a nuanced difference between owning your likeness and owning a drawing of your likeness…”

So like, $5?

Except you’re not passing a machete to Jason Voorhees. That would be “double it and pass it to the next person who you know is going to pull the lever.”

You’re passing a machete to the next person in line. You don’t know who that is. They may or may not pass the machete down the line. Considering I would not expect a person chosen at random to kill someone when handed a machete, it seems unethical for me to kill someone with a machete just to prevent handing it to someone else.

People will presure companies not to allow it. “I will not purchase your product because it is helping fund hate speech”

It doesn’t matter that the company did not choose to place the ad there. The ad being there gives money to platform that they are recieving because of hate speech.

bOtH SiDeS!

Still dealing with weirdos on Lemmy who have nothing better to do than stalk my profile and try to pick fights with me elsewhere if I dare to disagree with them on a post, so not much has changed…

Don’t drive traffic to Reddit. The only way to “Troll” Spez is to not use Reddit at all. He doesn’t care what people are saying about him and long as they are engaging with the website.

That’s like saying “in my opinion”: it’s unnecessary. Of course it’s your opinion or you wouldn’t have said it, and of course that was true last you checked or you wouldn’t claim that was the case.

If someone’s information is out of date it is appropriate to correct them. It is absurd to expect people to do research before posting anything about anything to make sure it is “up to date”.

For example: did you double check that you can in fact still play games off-line using Epic before posting? Or did you just assume it was true based on “last you checked”?

I noticed r/all has changed drastically and showing less popular subs.

More space was taken up by flags than by protests.

Epic CEO Tim Sweeney previously revealed that the company pays a flat fee to each developer to give away their games, rather than paying per download.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/4/22418782/epic-games-store-free-games-cost-apple-trial-arkham-subnautica-mutant-year-zero

Your download doesn’t give the developer any money. The fee is already paid. The Developer gets just as much from you if you pirate their game, or more if you go purchase it on a different platform instead.

If what you said was true at the time you don’t look silly at all, because people don’t follow companies they decide they are done with.

If it’s outdated the reasonable response is simply informing people it’s out dated. Expecting them to keep up with a latest news of a company they don’t like makes you look silly.

“I don’t purchase from comapny X ever since they did Y” is a perfectly reasonable thing to say when people are talking about company X. The reasonable response to someone saying that is simply “They don’t do Y anymore, they haven’t done that since [date]”, not “HOW DARE YOU SHARE THE REASON YOU STOPPED USING COMPANY X IF YOU HAVEN’T BEEN FOLLOWING EVERYTHING THEY’VE DONE FOR THE PAST COUPLE YEARS!”

Man, if only there was another way to get free games…

I’ve got thousands worth of free games

So what’s the developer’s cut on a game you got for free? Or are you not nearly as concerned about developers as you pretend to be for the sake of your argument?