Sounds quite dystopian, setting a precedent for either (or both) the host being considered accomplice for any wrongdoings of any third parties, and/or inducing hosting companies to become informal polices. And it comes in quite a curious time, when the EU is trying to push for chat control, some US states are trying to push for AI surveillance cameras, Brazil passed a law that requires apps to do facial recognition, GrapheneOS is being targeted by French news media, and all those using potential crimes and cherry-picking cases to justify.
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2025
143 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
77090 readers
3577 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Canada is attempting to pass age verification with bill s-209 and Spain bans Graphene from being used in Catalonia.
Are you sure Spain banned graphene? AFAIK police are merely biased against graphene because they presume drug dealers use it.
People believing in public pressure and grass roots should understand that these don't work.
Power works, and it depends on what's possible and what's not. Surveillance and censorship over these means is possible, takes power and makes one more powerful. Hence it happens.
Technical affect on social matters is slow, we're seeing it only now. Want different trees - build different genes.
No conspiracy is required.
I agree that holdibg hosts liable for user actions is a real slippery slope, in this case it seems to be a result of Cloudflare not following up a previously agreed upon settlement with the publishers in 2019. If you agree to remove the content, and then don't do it, then further suits are to be expected.
However the article does not go into further details about the specifics of the 2019 settlement, so it's hard to conclude if this is a classic fuck around and find out or just a further step of IP-holders going after everything and anything willy nilly
I'm confused about how any of this can be cloudflares fault. That's like blaming the electricity supplier because someone is using that electricity to grow weed.
Its a Japanese court, you're basically guilty the second you're accused.
The court ruled that cloudflare made it too easy to register an account and create a domain. And that they didn't do enough to prevent those domains from being used for piracy.
Apparently under Japanese law that's the barrier of proof they needed to cross.
Em, because electricity is a fundemental force that you supply to someone and he uses it, unlike hosting a website which is something hosted on a server and you have full control and access to see what you are hosting.
That is like saying why is it the chef's fault that he put poison in a meal when he did it because someone paid him to do it, he might not have known about it but he is a expert in his field and shoult know to check and not put the fucking poison in.
Japan needs to chill
Japan isn't doing so hot right now.
Does cloudflare actually provide servers?
I thought they were more of a middleman.
~~They~~ Japan don't have anything else left to sell
They don't aknowledge provider privilege?