And perhaps sidestepping its own policy in the process.

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    The only one I can see that could be applied to the situation is “risk for discord” if Nintendo threatened them with a lawsuit.

    • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Under which grounds? For a threat to work, it has to have some merits.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        They could threaten to sue discord for hosting copyrighted content, even if they expect to lose it doesn’t matter, the goal is to make discord close the channel and it worked.

        Cost/benefit analysis, you’ll probably win the lawsuit, it will still cost you a shit load of money in the meantime and you’re fighting against a company that has enough money to stop all its activities for a decade and still come out with enough funds to resume activities as if nothing happened. Or you can just ban one community from your platform.

        • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Right, if they host it, but they don’t. That’s the difference between what happened with GitHub/GitLab.

          And they can’t sue without the case having any merits. Meritless lawsuits also legally known as frivolous lawsuits are thrown out before even discovery phase with attorney fees awarded and the moron lawyers getting sanctioned.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Hosting isn’t necessary, providing access is enough, otherwise The Pirate Bay wouldn’t have had to change location again and again.

            • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Hosting is required under DMCA.

              Edit: Misread the part about The Pirate Bay.

              Previous comment

              And The Pirate Bay was banned and blocked hundreds of times, they have many proxy sites for that reason.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                And the fact that they didn’t host the content didn’t keep them from being raided and from seeing their servers being seized.

                • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Indeed, and they made them heroes, not villains. The Police Bay was a nice touch.

                  And DMCA wasn’t used as justification for the raid. US wasn’t even directly involved. It was explicitly mentioned that US law only applies to the US territory. You are grappling at straws to prove your point that is just false by any factual reading.

                  If that were the case, Lemmy would be illegal, since it allows you or me or anyone else to upload any image we don’t own the copyright to.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    They could threaten to sue for facilitating copyright infringement by letting the community do the thing they were just sued (and settled) for.

                    Once you involve the legal department they’ll often tell you it’s not worth fighting because although you might win because you’re doing nothing wrong, you might need to fight for long enough that the cost won’t be worth the effort, see Bleem vs Sony, Bleem won, it went bankrupt regardless.

                    If you think Discord wants to bother fighting against Nintendo’s lawyers, that will find all kinds of technicalities to keep things going, just to protect a community that’s pretty meaningless in the grand scheme of things, while they’re considering doing an IPO, then you’re pretty naive.