60
DRM-Free OnlyFans Downloads See Widevine Project Nuked From GitHub
(torrentfreak.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2025
60 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
73538 readers
872 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
And they have every right to do so. If you like it or not. You don't own and have not created the protected content. On what basis are you deciding it should not be DRM protected?
morally, no. cartoon mouse says, yes.
they have literally given 3 of such bases
On the basis of having bought it. If they haven't sold it but made such an impression, then they've committed a crime.
When you are buying a cure against all problems with miniscule text saying it's just a metaphor, the seller is committing a crime. It's the same here.
Morally. Regardless of how courts interpret this right now. That feature that courts and practice officially do not equal morality and thus we can decide differently this time, if we can provide an explanation, is the main advantage of English legal system and those descended from it over others.
they have literally given 3 of such bases