this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
35 points (100.0% liked)

Socialism

2844 readers
63 users here now

Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.


Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A profoundly stupid case about video game cheating could transform adblocking into a copyright infringement

https://pluralistic.net/2024/07/29/faithful-user-agents/#hard-cases-make-bad-copyright-law

@socialism

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] towerful@programming.dev 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Does that mean that NAT is copywriter infringement?
Your client connects to their server via a home router.
The server replies with a packet. The packet is rewritten by the router so it can reach the client.

[โ€“] memfree@beehaw.org 3 points 3 months ago

Doubtful since NAT is a service with multiple RFCs defining various methodologies for mapping. That is: software expects NATing. Software expects IPs, ports, etc. to get redirected. I guess if you wrote your own NAT service that did not conform to RFC standards, it might be considered a modification of the original intent, but I suspect the issue would have to be with changes to packet data rarther than the header.... now try explaining that to a copyright judge -- because I bet some will choose to not understand.