I don’t think that blocking torrent downloads of movies is in any way interpretable. It’s illegal. Period. The rest can be debated, I’m not talking about that.
> on behalf of corporations
Who said that? I’m talking about illegal content. It’s on behalf of the government.
The items you mentions fall into the gray area. CP and pirated movies are not in the gray area, they are not debatable. The decision has been taken and confirmed in the court of law and Google has to follow it. It’s as black and white as can be.
> I don’t think that blocking torrent downloads of movies is in any way interpretable.
You can't do proper enforcement without interpreting. That's logically impossible. When it comes to interpreting, Google and others have a terrible track record.
> > on behalf of corporations
> Who said that?
That's what is happening right now under the current legal framework of big platforms being the judge, jury, and executioner. The legal framework you seem to support.
> The items you mentions fall into the gray area.
It's not gray. The things I mentioned, they should never have happened at all.
I don’t think that blocking torrent downloads of movies is in any way interpretable. It’s illegal. Period. The rest can be debated, I’m not talking about that.
> on behalf of corporations
Who said that? I’m talking about illegal content. It’s on behalf of the government.
The items you mentions fall into the gray area. CP and pirated movies are not in the gray area, they are not debatable. The decision has been taken and confirmed in the court of law and Google has to follow it. It’s as black and white as can be.