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 1 year ago
So you’re just making wild assumptions?
Dettweiler42@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
That’s what I’m seeing, unless a documented source eventually shows up.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 year 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 1 year ago
What’s that source? You mean anonymous group claiming responsibility being reported in media?
Dettweiler42@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Conjecture is not documentation.
misk@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
What was wild about this assumption?
helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 year ago
The complete omission of evidence of any sort?
misk@sopuli.xyz 1 year 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 1 year ago
yes, I assume that