6 ms·
One interesting thing about this is the question of what is a file. Depending upon how Twitter stores a tweet, does a file actually exist at their location, o
by cyanbane 15y ago
One interesting thing about this is the question of what is a file. Depending upon how Twitter stores a tweet, does a file actually exist at their location, or only a stream of information? Under current DMCA what would they be asked to remove X number of tweets in a row? If decoded and a copyright holder (provided there is one) notices, does he have to submit 155 claims/takedown notices? What if that information is broken up, chunked and some agreed upon pattern is used ie every 3rd tweet is garbage etc?
- Animus7 15y agoThis seems to kind of tread into the territory of DeCSS haikus [1]; if I can speak (tweet) the file, isn't that expression of my rights to free speech? [1] http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/decss-haiku.txt http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/decss-haiku.txt
- cyanbane 15y agoYup. I remember when DeCSS hit they had shirts printed up with the code on the back. I know this was a small file the OP sent, but at what point is the medium the moved to a context in which it is free speech? Has twitter reached that point? Are they an immovable third party communications medium?
- icebraining 15y agoif I can speak (tweet) the file, isn't that expression of my rights to free speech? Philosophically? Possibly. Legally? No, since public performances of literary works are speech too and they're still protected by copyright.
- cyanbane 15y agoInteresting (IANAL). So what is the legal distinction, persistence? I read recently that the MLK "I Have a Dream" Speech was copy-written. I assume the difference in persistence comes from the delta between if I go up to the front of an auditorium and read the speech vs if I record that speech to an auditorium and redistribute it. Twitter would be an archive-able public medium is that where its usage as a medium gets moved to illegal?
- icebraining 15y agoNo, there's no distinction, going up to the front of an auditorium and reading the speech is copyright infringement too. According to the law, that speech is not protected free speech. (by the way, sorry, nitpick: copywritten → copyrighted)
- beej71 15y agoIt's a little different, since the DeCSS code wasn't copyrighted. Your right to redistribute other people's copyrighted data is severely limited by law. But if something's not copyrighted, and then They say you can't redistribute it, well, then we have something more like DeCSS.
- baddox 15y agoThe legal distinction must solely rest on intention. As you've hinted at, every digital work is just an integer. Copyright protection of digital works implies that some integers are illegal to copy and distribute.
- wlievens 15y agoIndeed. There are other integers that are illegal for other reasons. For instance, the integer that encodes the string text of your email to a hired assassin.