lemmydividebyzero@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
They also noted that unauthorized streams of illegally obtained (and) unreleased games compromise Nintendo’s prerelease marketing, which is an offense Keighin allegedly committed over 50 times, infringing copyright of 10 different Nintendo titles in the process.ľlľ
Come on… We are not talking about streamimg an old game (modified or not) on an emulator.
The guy played a game before it was even released and streamed it… And not only once, but with 10 different games. What an idiot… Was probably warned and ignored it, just like the court hearing…
So? Maybe there’s a case against him for regular piracy, but streaming a game pre-release doesn’t seem like anything remotely close to copyright infringement. If anything, it’s journalism and protected speech.
If a leak causes damage to Nintendo’s marketing plans, then Nintendo shouldn’t have let it leak in the first place. That’s negligence on their part.
Of course idk the full story here. Not showing up to court and handing Nintendo a default judgement is stupid.
If something that would normally be copyrightable is leaked, then the only people who have legal rights to that work are still the original owners. Anyone taking/sharing it is breaching copyright.
Different case for something someone recorded/created themselves, ex recording police abuse on their phone.
I know some people have a misguided view of “But you didn’t register copyright, it’s not copyrighted”. That’s the opposite of how it works. Rights are granted at time of creation; copyright is a “granted” right as part of sale/viewing managing how something can be shared.
Otherwise, a photographer that takes a picture of a rare Snipe can have that photo “legally” stolen before they make it to a lawyer.
If something that would normally be copyrightable is leaked, then the only people who have legal rights to that work are still the original owners. Anyone taking/sharing it is breaching copyright.
It’s like you’re trying really hard to contort the discussion to make it seem like Nintendo has solid a case here. All the protections you’re talking about apply to works regardless of when or how they’re released. From the point of view of copyright law, a “leaked” recording of a game is no different from a regular recording of a game. Afaik, the guy in the OP isn’t being accused of sharing leaked game files.
If you’re trying to say that a recording of a video game is not considered fair use under copyright law, then I give you the existence of Youtube and Twitch as counter evidence.
I know some people have a misguided view…
Maybe, but I don’t see how that’s relevant here, unless you’re implying I have that misconception. If that’s the case, please point out which part of my comment lead you to this conclusion.
If you’re trying to say that a recording of a video game is not considered fair use under copyright law, then I give you the existence of Youtube and Twitch as counter evidence.
So, funny you should say that…
This happened to Persona 5. Atlus felt that they had a legal basis to make copyright claims on the game - in their case, circumstantially around spoilers (I guess because they wanted people to pay $50 to experience the late-game story)
And they walked back, not because lawyers were dismantling their case, but because of public outcry. That basis of public preference is what has encouraged game studios to be friendly with Twitch / YouTube, not because judges would rubber-stamp any fair use “transformative work” argument. That is also why many games have given explicit notices to say “Content notice: Please feel free to share videos of this game wherever you’d like!” etc - as it is a non-default judgment.
So, as strange as it is to say, most uploaded videos of a game is in some murky legal territory. Obviously, most studios don’t care and even prefer them to be shared for visibility - or took the time to include those notices to make it 100% legal. But when the recording came from an internal build, the game itself is “stolen”, in that the person playing it breached either terms of viewing or terms of employment, and then the person re-uploading it is breaching copyright as they had no permission.
If you want to work it through the other way, permission to upload a work is non-default. You need to provide a basis it’s legal, not a basis it’s illegal. In many cases, it’s “I made this”. For 99.9% of video game content, it’s “the developer is okay with it”.
If a leak causes damage to Nintendo’s marketing plans, then Nintendo shouldn’t have let it leak in the first place. That’s negligence on their part.
That’s not how the law works.
But your honour, he wasn’t even wearing body armour, it was so easy to shoot him. His murder is entirely his fault it shouldn’t have been that easy for me to do it.
If he didn’t sign an NDA, then this sounds like a bullshit suit.
It could be counted as IP infringement, corporate espionage, copyright infringement, trademark infringement, trademark abuse, and I’m sure various other things an actual lawyer would know.
I hate large companies and corporations, I think Nintendo is extremely horrible with a lot of their practices, especially regarding abandonware, archiving, and emulation, but when someone commits various crimes, especially unapologetically and without a just cause, they’re still a criminal.
This is a case of a selfish prick of a man being a criminal against a selfish prick of a company.
sane companies “leak” their upcoming games to influencerson purpose as part of their marketing strategy.
nintendo, once again, chooses to treat their most dedicated fans like shit.
Zoomboingding@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
For all its shit with killing fan projects, tournaments, and frivolous lawsuits, this is actually a legitimate case.
Orangutanion@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
And yet, because of all that other shit, I still don’t support Nintendo.
samus12345@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
Of course not. An asshole who’s right is still an asshole.