I was part of a human subject research study without my consent

Re:I was part of a human subject research study without my c... by kstrauser on Sunday December 19, 2021 @03:08PM (#29617805)

I wrote the blog post from yesterday’s HN story, and that last paragraph is what worried me. I know I’m not a business, and I don’t make money from my project, and believe I’m not subject to the CCPA because of that. I dread the idea of having to prove that in court, though, and how expensive it might be to (hopefully!) prove I’m not liable for even accidentally violating it.

There’s a reason patent trolls, copyright trolls, ADA trolls, etc. go after small entities: they’re more like to pay a small settlement out of fear than risk taking it to court and being bankrupted.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I was part of a human subject research study without my c... by smsm42 on Sunday December 19, 2021 @05:57PM (#29619415)

Patents and copyrights aren't limited to businesses, you can be in copyright or patent violation even if you're a private person - in fact, I'd assume vast majority of copyright violations now are performed by private people without profit motive. That particular law however is clearly written to target specific businesses and exclude private persons.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I was part of a human subject research study without my c... by dawnbreez on Tuesday December 21, 2021 @10:21PM (#29645254)

One of the biggest issues with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is that it was never designed for a world where Siivagunner[1] exists. On a fundamental level, it was built on the assumption that everyone involved can litigate--which means that the widespread ability to edit, remix, and review things has created some unfortunate exploits and exposed serious oversights in how the DMCA functions.

[1]https://youtu.be/rEcOzjg7vBU

[ Parent | on HN ]