Legally, in EU, you probably cannot scrape an instance of someone else because of the database copyright law. But I have no idea if that applies to being part of the network. Since the other instances send you their content willingly.
Maybe someone should make a license extension to ActivityPub, where instances can communicate what can and what can’t be done with the information they publish. Then at least there would be legal clarity. If it can be enforced is another question.
The thing is, the license probably doesn’t mean a whole lot in that case because of the way content is shared on the Fediverse.
As you say, you actively send your content to other websites, and licenses need at least some degree of active acceptance. Including a license field in the metadata almost certainly does not meet any kind of legal threshold. It’s significantly weaker than the EULAs they everyone knows that nobody reads.
Legally, in EU, you probably cannot scrape an instance of someone else because of the database copyright law. But I have no idea if that applies to being part of the network. Since the other instances send you their content willingly.
Maybe someone should make a license extension to ActivityPub, where instances can communicate what can and what can’t be done with the information they publish. Then at least there would be legal clarity. If it can be enforced is another question.
The thing is, the license probably doesn’t mean a whole lot in that case because of the way content is shared on the Fediverse.
As you say, you actively send your content to other websites, and licenses need at least some degree of active acceptance. Including a license field in the metadata almost certainly does not meet any kind of legal threshold. It’s significantly weaker than the EULAs they everyone knows that nobody reads.
The content posted here has no obvious license. I wonder if an administrator could just put any license of his choice on your posts.