Hacker News

points by ffsm8 2 days ago | 0 comments

Were they used in a commercial context when a commercial entity downloaded it?

If yes, they were in violation of the license. Fyi, that's explicitly stated in the article we're commenting on.

Supposedly they are, that is enforceable how? Download is not anything. Training AI on them is not anything. Using the trained model is not a violation of the terms just because you think it should be.

[–] ffsm8 2 days ago

i see. as long as i can download Software that is made available for free for students its completely legal to do so and use them commercially as a non-student, after all its freely downloadable.

good thing you explained how copyright works legally, almost spend my money unnecessarily.

[–] littlecranky67 2 days ago

COPYright becomes relevant once you COPY something. As in, give it to a third party. I don't see any third party involved here. The download itself is not subject to copyright - licensing terms may or may not apply - and just because the license text says something doesn't mean it holds up in court.

[–] ffsm8 2 days ago

Til you can download something without copying said something.

Wouldve been great to know for people that have been found guilty after downloading illegal and unlicensed content.

Fyi, the nation you mentioned (Germany) adheres to a much stricter concept called Urheberrecht. Under this regulation, you're actually in even more legal trouble. Though Roblox ain't German, so kinda irrelevant, admittedly

[–] littlecranky67 2 days ago

German Urheberrecht explicitly states, that downloading something is legal, if not downloaded from an obviously illegal source ("offensichtlich illegale quelle"). Thats why it is perfectly legal to download copyrighted music from youtube (because Youtube is obviously NOT illegal). Youtube ToS are irrelevant in that case. You are however still not allowed to copy the data (music) to a third party (that is when copyright starts).

Whether or not the file you downloaded was even allowed to be uploaded to that website, is irrelevant in that case. Then the uploader and provider are liable, not you the downloader.

[–] ffsm8 2 days ago

> Urheberrecht explicitly states, that downloading something is legal

Technically right with your phrasing, but wrong considering the context.

That exception is explicitly about the fact that eg pictures served on a website will be copied to the local cache and can still be shown without violating it. But besides that, nobody argued that the download itself was the license violation.

If Roblox only downloaded and then deleted it without using it in any way, they'd not have violated the license. Was that the point you were making? If so okay, that's true but from my perspective a pretty stupid view. Surely you're aware that they didn't?

[–] littlecranky67 2 days ago

Incorrect.

[–] phoghed 2 days ago

Yes, as of now, you can do exactly what you assume that Roblox did. How is this still surprising to people?

[–] paxy 2 days ago

How do you know what context it was used in?