You can believe what you want, but there’s absolutely no way you would be correct. Any large company sponsoring a cyber attack, if caught, would be nailed to the wall and made an example of. The extreme risks are simply not worth the comparatively small reward of reducing a tiny fraction of piracy.
A more realistic and reasonable avenue would have been to sponsor the companies going after IA for copyright infringement as a result of them loaning out unlimited digital copies of books without DRM.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 5 weeks ago
So you’re just making wild assumptions?
Dettweiler42@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 weeks ago
That’s what I’m seeing, unless a documented source eventually shows up.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 5 weeks ago
A documented source has shown up and you’ve already dismissed it as “silly”. Unlikely any future sources would change your mind.
misk@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
What’s that source? You mean anonymous group claiming responsibility being reported in media?
Dettweiler42@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 weeks ago
Conjecture is not documentation.
misk@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
What was wild about this assumption?
helenslunch@feddit.nl 5 weeks ago
The complete omission of evidence of any sort?
misk@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
There’s motive and circumstances. Nintendo opened every possible front in the last year or so. Now this happens. Even if not related to IA specifically this definitely looks like retribution.
Also, please read my first comment again. I think I made it clear it’s speculation.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
yes, I assume that