If you say the magic words, laws don’t apply.
EDIT: I looked up two of these. Theft prevention act? It’s like they’re randomly cutting and pasting parts of laws and in their heads somehow it makes sense.
I can also randomly pick words from legal documents to say anything I want. But then, every word in this post came from a legal document including the following:
I now own your house and by having read this post you consent to a transfer of all your assets to me. No signature or confirmation required. No take backs.
deleted by creator
No, it has to be “NO TAKESIE BACKSIES, WITHOUT PREJUDICE”. Now it’s all mine!
Fuck! Ya got me.
Yeah well your spouse is now my spouse, oogity boogity I said the magic words. Also gimme all your shoes.
Granted. You are now on the hook for her child support payments for my raising her kids.
The one thing a sovcit can never do.
You didn’t capitalize anything so I’m RUBBER and you’re GLUE. It is now your RESPONSIBILITY as I have claimed my RIGHTS.
Where’s your red ink thumbprint?
Blast!
You didn’t use EMOJIS so payment in the FORM of $1M upfront, THEN the usual PAYMENTS 😘🤣🤔🤑💥🦶🐢
I think that’s two things: raised kids, and paying child support.
You can’t own my house if I don’t own a house. Checkmate liberal
“natural born” is part of the qualification to be President of the United States in the constitution.
“Under God” is a clause that was officially added to the pledge of allegiance in the 1950s. The pledge of allegiance doesn’t really have much legal significance at all in the United States, even if it is recited daily in schools.
“Natural born woman” sounds a lot like an Aretha Franklin hit.
after reading about people who don’t understand law I can only say YOU MAKE ME FEEL LIKE less of a dumbass. (not you, mkwt, all you did was put Aretha in my head which is never a bad thing, also FREEEEeeeeeWAY OF LOVE)
This makes me think of people that add a “copyright” notice at the end of every comment
“I do not claim ownership of the song used in this video.”
Good, because you’d be a lunatic if you did, JazzMasterZero, but it doesn’t change the fact that you are still using someone else’s art in your monetized and shittily-edited dog trick compilation video.
Ugh the ones with the “anti-AI” “licensing”? I honestly don’t know how they expect that to accomplish anything, other than look like a pretentious idiot.
It’s either fair use to train, and the license does nothing, or it is not fair use to train, and the license is extraneous. I explained that to one of them and he said the license isn’t actually supposed to do the “anti-AI” he claims it does. Thus winning the discussion, I guess.
deleted by creator
For the US: you already have a copyright on everything you write. Adding CC-BY-NC grants others the right to republish it for non-commercial use, it does not remove any rights at all.
deleted by creator
No, that’s not how it works. Commercial use is already prohibited by default. They are adding no new prohibitions. They are allowing use that is not allowed by default.
deleted by creator
Yes, that’s why I wrote specifically for the US. Where many prominent AI companies are.
Don’t post on a third party site.
deleted by creator
I agree it’s not great for public discourse, but you are subject to the whims of the third party’s TOS. You can still publish it, but have to make your own site or pick a third party that won’t sell you out.
Or you just accept that the third party is going to do what it’s going to do. Post your discourse, but don’t expect it to be protected.
deleted by creator
I agree, that’s how it should work. GitHub as a third party probably had better TOS than most, and would face more uproar if they changed it. But they are not a social media site.
But for regular social media posting, Facebook, Twitter, etc, there is no fighting against their TOS other than abstinence. You can object in writing with one of those footers, but nobody in charge is going to read it or honor it. It will be shoveled into the AI along with everything else. Your only recourse will be an expensive legal fight, and it would be difficult to prove any particular post was in the AI or not. It’s unproven legal ground to say giving a post to an AI for training even qualifies as a “copy” under copyright, or what notification qualifies to exempt your content.
A footnote isn’t going to stop anyone from scraping comments. That’s just reality.
Art is mine do not steal!
Facebook idiots write „without prejudice” on everything
looks inside
Prejudice
Prejudice is other people. 🤦♂️
28cfr29 is about a voluntary theft prevention program. It’s not about registration at all.
There’s probably about 6 to 10 words in a row somewhere in it that says something they like and wish was in a different context, so they will quote just that line.
Lol of course.
Ah yes, let’s reference all of the laws, for which you don’t ascribe, to justify you not ascribing to those laws.
This is what gets me every time. They quote US laws, but at the same time claim they are not subject to any US laws. How do they decide what laws apply and what laws don’t?
How do they decide what laws apply and what laws don’t?
The same way religions do, willy-nilly.
My favorite is the “without prejudice” part. That’s the part of the spell that let’s you banish a demon but don’t prevent it from showing back up later.
that lets* you banish
Oh hey, it’s no tits!
That “may” is doing some real heavy lifting…
She of course teaches a “donation based” class on Telegram about how you too can be tased and dragged out of your car.
Great! I was feeling too sane and reasonable anyway.
Who isn’t, really?
Im really glad I wasn’t in the middle of taking a sip of something when I read this!
Study these codes written by the government, they give you rights; not those codes written by the government, they don’t give you any rights.
I don’t see a “may,” what am I missing?
Sixth word in the post.
I Declare and Decree that I Am …
Am I looking at a different image than you are?
I put up the wrong photo at first.
You must be, because the image OP posted to make this thread is not that one.
I don’t know. This is the image:
Yeah, if I do “open original URL” and go over and look at the post at lemmy.world, I see the image you are seeing.
I’ve noticed other federation missteps with votes, just trying to pay attention to these little weirdnesses that are emergent properties of a decentralized social media environment.
I changed the image, I posted the wrong one at first.
You know, I’m really rooting for these people. They are like Mario 64 speed runners looking for the new speed butt jump glitch. One of them might actually find something worthwhile.
I agree - I’m just waiting for it to get upheld by the Supreme Court before I get my cardboard license plates too lol
This can be viewed as soft evidence that we’re not in a simulation. Speedrunners achieve their goals, and do not waste time on unnecessary dialogue.
What’s really interesting to me is how much time they invest in this stuff. It’s not exactly interesting. And there’s no tangible result for them, other than ending up in court. They do end up having to pay tax or whatever it is they’re trying to dodge.
What do they get out of it?
These sovcits obsessed with sticking to the DMV just seem like flat earthers - there’s no actual point to the obsession.
Yeah, but in exchange for their $500 fine, they get the “moral victory”, they get to feel as persecuted as they want to be (read: “aren’t”), and they get a cool story to share with mayonnaise people on their divorced middle-aged white guy fascist gunnut forums. We all have our hobbies. Mine is Rubik’s Cubes.
Mayonnaise people 😅
Store-brand mayonnaise people, not Hellmann’s people. And definitely not Miracle Whip people…they’re the polar opposite of zesty. They are the human equivalent of a fifth grade field trip to the corrugated cardboard factory.
Imagine how much fun they would be having with a wizard character in D&D instead of trying to cast spells through the court system.
She left off her Facebook disclaimer.
I’m really curious about the “without prejudice” part. I’ve never heard that part of their “lore” before.
Does it basically end up meaning “give me the rights of this paper/document, but I reserve the right to not meet my end of the bargain”? Because knowing them, this is exactly what it boils down to.
How much blind faith does it take for these morons to have their whole hope seated in claiming that judges dismissing them bring called a “victory”? To my knowledge none of them has ever succeeded in any way in a court setting, so they have no real examples to point to besides a judge just not seeming it worth the struggle of dealing with them.
Although at this point we should be seeking to take every one of these cases there are and summarily deciding to rule for their worst case scenario. Movement will likely die off when they spend the rest of their lives such in jail or under an impossible set of fees that they’ll never even make progress on, much less finish off.
Clearly I jest, but if we could stop ducking these cases and start prosecuting them more harshly, this would naturally go away.
Meanwhile, here in Australia
Not stolen ok?
I hope her car gets towed.
The American colonies declared “All rights reserved” (independence), King George said nope and sent men with guns. The settlers won.
Let’s see if this sovcit is ready to put her assertion to the test.
Let’s see if the French save her ass, too.
This one shocked me. There’s actual punctuation this time. Crazy.
