| ▲ | peri-cl 4 hours ago | |||||||||||||
> "Wouldn't that be covered by fair use?" There's no human to appeal to in social media platforms. It's automated, algorithmic enforcement; and when it's wrong (or someone exploits it to be wrong, like this), you're powerless to do anything. It means nothing if you're technically in the legal right: the platforms are risk-averse and don't care about your false positive. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | GJim 3 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||
> It's automated, algorithmic enforcement; and when it's wrong (or someone exploits it to be wrong, like this), you're powerless to do anything. Ahem... In the UK/EU Let me introduce you to article 22 of the GDPR The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her. i.e. If subjected to an algorithm making decisions, you have an automatic right of appeal to a _human_. https://gdpr-info.eu/art-22-gdpr/ You need to adopt a sensible data protection law if you don't want to be exploited. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||