:blobwizard: Tsatnosk is a user on manowar.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse.

On the topic of ownership in federated and p2p social networks Show more

@zatnosk it should be all right reserved by default, never good to force people use open licenses.
:blobwizard: Tsatnosk @zatnosk

@miwilc it doesn't make sense to public something in a distributed social network, without permitting it being stored and retransmitted on other servers.

@zatnosk yeah, the other option is to use a CC-BY-ND license by default.

@miwilc There can exist other licenses than CC and "All Rights Reserved".

Which is why I called for a _new license_ to be designed, that would only allow storing and sharing in a given social network.

@zatnosk how do you define social network in a cross-country applicable legal way

@miwilc name the protocol. If what you're doing is not a part of the named protocol, you're not licensed to do it.

@zatnosk that is extremely vague and could invalidate the "all rights reserved" clause.

Better to do what YouTube/Facebook does and add a ToS,

Maybe something like: "by using this service, you agree to authorize us to send your media to other servers for purposes of federation, you still own your content"

@miwilc a ToS is meaningless in a federated social network.
No terms I set on myself on manowar.social can restrict what mastodon.social and users on m.s is allowed to do with my content.
Only a license can do that.

And I'm _obviously_ not saying the license should be worded as I describe it. I'd want professional lawyers to design one that is a usable for this context and sits between "All Rights Reserved" and "Creative Commons" in permissiveness.