980

Dear server admins, please defederate threads.net. Dear users, ask your server admin to defederate threads.net. (mstdn.social)

submitted 11 months ago by mypasswordis1234@lemmy.world to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

808 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Meta just announced that they are trying to integrate Threads with ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, etc.). We need to defederate them if we want to avoid them pushing their crap into fediverse.

If you're a server admin, please defederate Meta's domain "threads.net"

If you don't run your own server, please ask your server admin to defederate "threads.net".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

All activity pub needed to do was create a user rights guidelines that prevents profiting off the data. Meta wouldn't have touched the Fediverse with the 10-foot pole, if that were the case.

[-] LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Lololol and what legal mechanism are you going to use to enforce that?

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

ActivityPub is a protocol, not a fucking organization. It literally has no agency.

[-] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

You can licence a protocol

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

ActivityPub can't license anything. When you identify actual human beings in this conversation, perhaps you might have a point. So far you don't.

[-] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

First off, calm the hell down. You're being needlessly antagonistic.

Secondly, it seems like the W3C is the publisher of the activity pub standard seems like they ducats what is an isnt compliant.

Seems like of was specifically authored by a team including Evan Prodromou according to the wiki.

If they wanted too, but like literally and open source software, it could have been given licencing requirements

Specifically, my research has turned up that implementations of these protocols can be licensed. Threads' version of ActivityPub likely has its own licence. I think it would be safe to say that the creators of Lemmy and Mastodon specifically could have privacy rights dictated within their license implementation. That would nullify threads legal capabilities.