A safer process here would be 'fail open', require those with a vested interest to prove they require that the public NOT have those abilities rather than the present default of owners (buyer's / end users) rights being infringed upon.
Have to wonder about the sincerity of this after Yasha Levine illustrated the ties between big tech and the EFF, when big tech’s present theory of copyright is:
A safer process here would be 'fail open', require those with a vested interest to prove they require that the public NOT have those abilities rather than the present default of owners (buyer's / end users) rights being infringed upon.
Have to wonder about the sincerity of this after Yasha Levine illustrated the ties between big tech and the EFF, when big tech’s present theory of copyright is:
> Our Copyright: based and red-pilled
> Your Copyright: fake and gay