@Crissy I'd say an instance owner effectively owns the posts and follower relationships. Specific server implementations allow moving followers, but others don't since it's not part of the ActivityPub protocol. Moving posts is currently not possible because the post and "actor" identifiers are bound to a specific host domain. Mastodon allows exporting posts, but they can't be imported into other servers, even Mastodon servers. There are attempts to address this issue, but we'll see.
@eyeinthesky yep, you got it tho my focus is 100% on the User's IP Ownership Role.
You rightly flag the technical limitations of ActivityPub, but those limitations do not equate to a transfer of intellectual property (IP).
The User owns the IP: Every post, every original thought, every photo remains the user’s copyright. The user grants the instance owner a licence (permission) to host and display the content. They don't give away the deed.
The Server has the custody: The server is the custodian—it holds the data. If the server goes down or bans you, the content is technically inaccessible to others, but the user still holds the original ownership rights to that IP.
The problem is the tool's failure to respect IP, not the user's lack of ownership.
FOR SURE: We need portability that treats our IP like the valuable asset it is.
