You understand that arguments about the legitimacy of law is an argument about whether a law should exist rather than if a law does exist, right?
There’s a difference between saying that someone’s “in the right” (which they’re absolutely not) and saying someone is legally capable of doing what they want. (which is debatable)
This dumbass contacted Nintendo to taunt them about how he’s gonna stream leaked pirated copies. Hard to have sympathy for this idiot for poking the bear.
Turns out, when you do something clearly not okay and then actively go and taunt the people who could sue you for it with it, they might just, you know, do that. Since you actually went and asked them about it.
I mean I think the guy is stupid, but let’s honestly reflect here, who gives a fuck about some leaked Nintendo game getting played a week or two early. Like honestly, it might not technically be victimless (though even that can be argued), but the ‘damage’ is so small it’s like being upset that someone stepped on your grass.
Id rather see someone play a leaked game early, then have to deal with some corporate garbage trailer that pulls all the stops to deceive it’s fans. I’d rather see actual gameplay, from a normal user then the slop they script.
They aren’t selling anything, so what does it matter other then tendo can’t lie as easily.
Amazing response to Nintendo. Get fucked tendo, get fucked. You control nothing
You know, it’s okay to recognize Nintendo’s scummy legal practices while also recognizing that in this one single instance they are in the right.
There comes a point where being right doesn’t matter more than the fact that they’re cunts.
IP law is an illegitimate institution, so no they’re absolutely not.
Well that’s not how the law works, you don’t get to violate it just because you don’t like it.
That’s sovereign citizen BS, and that never ends well for them either.
You understand that arguments about the legitimacy of law is an argument about whether a law should exist rather than if a law does exist, right?
There’s a difference between saying that someone’s “in the right” (which they’re absolutely not) and saying someone is legally capable of doing what they want. (which is debatable)
Streamer sounds like an idiot:
They emailed Nintendo directly about plans to continue doing so;
There is nothing wrong with emulators. The ROMs themselves, sure. Emulators? Heck no
But there is something wrong with emailing Nintendo to say “No matter what you do, I’m going to help more people pirate your games!”
Whether there is something wrong with doing that is a matter of ethics and personal values…
Regardless of those, it’s profoundly stupid to taunt Nintendo with confessions of piracy and threats to commit more
There’s no such thing as being too based.
Based on what?
Stupidity apparently.
This dumbass contacted Nintendo to taunt them about how he’s gonna stream leaked pirated copies. Hard to have sympathy for this idiot for poking the bear.
It sounds like they actually control quite a lot.
Turns out, when you do something clearly not okay and then actively go and taunt the people who could sue you for it with it, they might just, you know, do that. Since you actually went and asked them about it.
Playing leaked games early. Wow, you have no standards. Just hate for Nintendo.
I mean I think the guy is stupid, but let’s honestly reflect here, who gives a fuck about some leaked Nintendo game getting played a week or two early. Like honestly, it might not technically be victimless (though even that can be argued), but the ‘damage’ is so small it’s like being upset that someone stepped on your grass.
Oh no, playing leaked games early!
I give back what I receive, so in theory…yes.
Id rather see someone play a leaked game early, then have to deal with some corporate garbage trailer that pulls all the stops to deceive it’s fans. I’d rather see actual gameplay, from a normal user then the slop they script.
They aren’t selling anything, so what does it matter other then tendo can’t lie as easily.