Same happened to X and they're still using it. Once you a billionaire you're above stupid laws like copyright or trademark.
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
72 points (97.4% liked)
Technology
34894 readers
922 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
If you pirate stuff they can sue you to the ground but if a fine is not related to total income or wealth it's just something to be ignored.
Can't understand why not more people lobby for fines to be proportional in general...
if the punishment for a crime is a fine, it's only a crime for the poor.
If the fine is not a fixed amount but actually gets more expensive the more money you have it actually is quite nice though
Always enjoy those stories about millionaires paying some big sums for speeding tickets in Switzerland
For a person making $30,000 a year, a $1,000 fine could mean very significant impacts on their daily life.
For a person making $30,000,000 a year, a $1,000,000 fine may mean they can't afford an extra Ferrari.
For a person "making" $30,000,000,000 a year, a $1,000,000,000 fine may mean they can't... Buy another island? You still have $29,000,000,000 that you can do who knows what with. This is the entire GDP of some countries. I also don't know if this one is a realistic example.
Anyway, proportional is nice, but really you need a progressive system to really match the weight of punishments, as far as impacting your daily life or happiness.
Trouble is governments generally won’t vote in something like that cos their mates too often are those rich people or donors to their party.
Unless you get some really wild folk who give zero shits but they normally don’t end up in power for long.
Guess the fines need to climb exponetially, then
I found this today because I‘m getting old posts for whatever reason but I‘m glad I saw it. Since we‘re used to the „rich people laugh about speeding tickets“ mentality, it’s quite nice to see them stack (like now in the EU) but you made me get why this isnt enough. It needs to be based on impact, not only proportion.
The corporation formerly known as Facebook also shouldn't be using the name "Meta".
A British software firm, Threads Software Limited, has given Meta a 30-day ultimatum to cease using the name "Threads" in the UK, citing ownership of the trademark.
So it's just a threat with no actual value or feasible legal repercussions?
They usually give them an ultimatum. If that isn't followed then they'll sue.
Threads Software Limited successfully trademarked the name "Threads" in 2012 for its intelligent messaging hub, which offers the capability to store a company's emails, tweets, and voice-over internet protocol phone calls in a cloud database.
How would anyone confuse the social media company Threads with the business-to-business "upload your emails to a database" company, which apparently serves law firms? If I Google there names, I encounter no less than three different companies with the same name that offer products more closely related to Threads than the one filing the lawsuit.
Sounds to me that they thought they could squeeze more out of Meta but found out that their domain name isn't as critical as they thought.