At this point I'm very concerned about the open source industry relying so much on github. You have to remember that any project there can be swept away overnight because it doesn't fit into the agenca of a large company, for example.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

And Elon Musk was "legally in the clear" to sue a trade group into non-existence over the idea that companies deciding to boycott his site independently was collusion.

I am objecting loudly and powerfully to "legally in the clear" being equated with "acceptable" or "within the spirit of the law."

Make no mistake. As far as we know, this is only legally in the clear because the developers are unable to fight it. That does NOT make Nintendo's action correct. By LAW the developers are in the right, they simply cannot afford to defend themselves. If your claim is that it is technically legal to threaten to sue anybody you want, you are correct and also terrifyingly shortsighted. Inability of someone to defend their rights for financial reasons is a miscarriage of justice. Given the options of smugly pointing out the technical situation or ranting about the injustice, I'll take the latter.

Let's put it another way... You're absolutely right. Nintendo is LEGALLY in the right to bully someone into submission using the threat of a lawsuit they cannot afford with overwhelming money. The legal system can't touch them.

But that means the ONLY place where Nintendo will EVER face ANY kind of consequences is in the court of public opinion, so why on EARTH would your take on the situation be, "Oh well... nothing we can do." It's not much, but it's the ONLY lever you have, and to relinquish it is fatalistic, shortsighted, and overall inconceivable as a strategy.

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Where did I say "oh well, nothing we can do?" You're literally tying random arguments to my name.

Nobody here made the argument that what is legal is exactly what is fair. Nobody here made the argument that Nintendo being overly litigious is a good thing. The only argument made is that copyright law is flawed because companies abuse it and that lawmakers need to fix it.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You've said that, but this doesn't seem to be a copyright issue. As far as I know, Ryujinx used NONE of Nintendo's proprietary material whatsoever. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

What I'm seeing isn't an IP issue at all - it's simple strong-arming.

The initial argument that started all of this chain was a statement that Nintendo was understandable in their legal action, and I took and STILL take issue with that.

"They are absolutely within their rights to approach the developers of Ryujinx and threaten to sue them."

While this is TECHNICALLY true in the most literal sense of the word, it carries the implication that there is something justifiable at some level about the actions they've taken.

My response is it's correct in only the most pedantic sense, THIS is the element I find egregious for how much it understates just how disgusting Nintendo's actions are. This is nothing more than a mafia shakedown with lawyers instead of grunts, and to play it down like that is improper.

IP, copyright, shutting down streamers... all of this is a totally separate issue, and all of THAT activity is actually SUPPORTED by law.

Shutting down Ryujinx is on a massively different level. It's neither a copyright issue OR a legality issue. It's a direct strong-arming contrary to established law, and THAT is what this thread is about. There are other articles to discuss IP and content creators, which are a completely different issue with different repercussions.