this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2024
50 points (93.1% liked)

Lemmy.world Support

3233 readers
121 users here now

Lemmy.world Support

Welcome to the official Lemmy.world Support community! Post your issues or questions about Lemmy.world here.

This community is for issues related to the Lemmy World instance only. For Lemmy software requests or bug reports, please go to the Lemmy github page.

This community is subject to the rules defined here for lemmy.world.

To open a support ticket Static Badge

You can also DM https://lemmy.world/u/lwreport or email report@lemmy.world (PGP Supported) if you need to reach our directly to the admin team.

Follow us for server news 🐘

Outages 🔥

https://status.lemmy.world/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
MrKaplan@lemmy.world
jelloeater85@lemmy.world
lwadmin@lemmy.world
Serinus@lemmy.world
50
Not something urgent, but the Aussie parliament passed new laws yesterday and it could impact Lemmy.world (in a year) (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 22 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) by AnAustralianPhotographer@lemmy.world to c/support@lemmy.world
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hi Lemmy.World Admins and Support Staff,

I like this place a lot and wanted to give you a heads up pollies down under passed some new laws.

The govt wants a ban on social media for everyone under 16. This week was the last sitting week of parliament and a few bills were passed by both houses and are set to become law. (See link).

I'm not after any immediate reaction or actions, but looking to bring it to your attention for you to discuss (edit:internally) how you would react. I haven't seen the legislation and don't know how this is meant to be mechanized and it seems pretty hard to do.

Some other tech giants have already made statements as this appears to be a worldwide first.

Edit: I might have a look at the laws text and put some details here as a comment

-AnAustralianPhotographer

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world -2 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

Lemmy is not social media

[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Reddit is considered a social media under this law.

What makes Lemmy different?

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 10 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

They're not directly equivalent because Lemmy is a service (like HTTP, phpBB, or e-mail protocols), not a singular service provider (like Reddit or Gmail). The law would likely have to be enforced on individual instances.

In a practical sense, lawyers might want to have the compliance mechanism built into the Lemmy project itself... but what do I know, I'm not a lawyer, and lawyers generally know/care fuck all about the technicalities of emerging technologies.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Here's a link to the text of the legislation.

From what I understand they define it very broadly:

(i) the sole purpose, or a significant purpose, of the service is to enable online social interaction between 2 or more end-users;

(ii) the service allows end-users to link to, or interact with, some or all of the other end-users;

(iii) the service allows end-users to post material on the service;

(iv) such other conditions (if any) as are set out in the legislative rules; or (b) an electronic service specified in the legislative rules;

So basically everything Web 2.0 - ish that they haven't given an explicit exception to. Lemmy totally qualifies.

[–] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world 6 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

By those definitions any newspaper website with comments is social media. The sole purpose (or main purpose) of a Lemmy instance is to aggregate links, the comments are secondary (just like in newspaper websites). The definition is too vague and if you apply it to the letter it would include 99% of websites, even porn websites have comments these days.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 hours ago

The definition is too vague and if you apply it to the letter it would include 99% of websites

I think that is their intention

[–] Kelly@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago

The sole purpose (or main purpose) of a Lemmy instance is to aggregate links

We call them "link posts" and I think they may qualify as posts under this broad definition.

For the purposes of this Act, material is posted on a social media service, relevant electronic service or designated internet service by an end - user if the end - user causes the material to be accessible to, or delivered to, one or more other end - users using the service.

https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/osa2021154/s11.html

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 0 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

For the purposes of subparagraph (1)(a)(i), online social interaction includes online interaction that enables end-users to share material for social purposes.

Well that clears things up...

Now they just need to define "social purposes".

[–] Kelly@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago

They seem more concerned with making sure businesses won't have issues.

Note 1: Online social interaction does not include (for example) online business interaction

If retailers though they might have issues just because they let customers post product reviews there would have been a fell funded campaign against the legislation.