Meta's recent legal defense hinges on the claim that there is insufficient evidence to prove it engaged in 'seeding' pirated books. The company insists that downloading copyrighted content does not constitute a breach of copyright unless it can be proven that one has shared that content. This argument suggests a nuanced view of copyright law, where distribution, not merely copying, is the point of contention. Various comments highlight the inconsistencies and potential hypocrisy in the legal framing of downloading as a form of piracy compared to a business entity like Meta doing the same. The broader implications raise questions about enforcement of copyright law and whether it disproportionately targets individual users rather than large corporations. Additionally, comments reflect on the historical context of copyright laws and the contemporary interpretations that seem to favor corporate interests over individual users' rights, contextualizing Meta’s actions as part of larger trends in digital rights and copyright discussions.