this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
132 points (96.5% liked)

Technology

59627 readers
3419 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] emr@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 5 days ago (3 children)

How do you litigate 'intention' in this way?

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 1 points 4 days ago

intention is litigated every day. Intention is what differentiates murder from manslaughter. Intention is what differentiates free speech from defamation.

[–] boatswain@infosec.pub 1 points 4 days ago

My understanding is that intention is not uncommonly litigated; I believe the question of "intent to deceive" is central to trademark law, for example. That's also what the the "degrees" of murder etc are about.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer. I do read an awful lot of contacts and talk to lawyers.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world -2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

This is not a legal text, you little cheat.

This is a sentence in natural language, want me to start asking such questions about everything you write?

If you make a deepfake of someone and share it, then it's defamation. Taking a picture voluntarily shared and editing it is not a crime.

[–] emr@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 days ago

By litigate I mean, if a person is creating something and says they don't plan to distribute it, do we take their word for it?

If it ends up getting distributed anyway, should we take their word that it was an accident?

We consider people's private data important enough that if you leak it even by mistake you are on the hook for that. You have a responsibility.

I think that rather than framing this as something harmless unless distributed and therefore intent to distribute matters, we should treat it as something you have a responsibility not to create because it will be harmful when it is inevitably distributed.