this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
486 points (98.4% liked)
Gaming
20189 readers
15 users here now
Sub for any gaming related content!
Rules:
- 1: No spam or advertising. This basically means no linking to your own content on blogs, YouTube, Twitch, etc.
- 2: No bigotry or gatekeeping. This should be obvious, but neither of those things will be tolerated. This goes for linked content too; if the site has some heavy "anti-woke" energy, you probably shouldn't be posting it here.
- 3: No untagged game spoilers. If the game was recently released or not released at all yet, use the Spoiler tag (the little ⚠️ button) in the body text, and avoid typing spoilers in the title. It should also be avoided to openly talk about major story spoilers, even in old games.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
At first I was like "WTF does an indie games site have to do with Funko?" then I Googled it...
Looks like they hosted a BUNCH of infringing games, so Funko, instead of doing the righteous thing and sending them a takedown request, just nuked the whole domain...
And this nuke should cost them dearly, as there are so many Devs and Artists affected by it.
I mean, I don't blame them for protecting their IP, they just picked a super shitty way to do it.
I don't even think they would have needed an official cease and desist... just a friendly note of "Hey, none of this Funko material is licensed, please remove it."
I blame them. Fair use is a thing and even beside fair use fuck em. copyright are getting more and more stupid by the day.
It's not fair use to use images and names you have not licensed.
See this asshat:
https://youtu.be/Nv8llGq9fkY
https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/s/TCK6HUAFm7
Buddy I'm going to 3d print some funko pops just to fuck with em.
Stop being a bootlicker bootlicker.
I'm sure your multi-million dollar company really appreciates being defended by some rando on a super niche site
Bootlicker
Fair use is country dependent. But here is the US definition:
https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/index.html
And from switzerland:
https://theswissquality.ch/understanding-the-legal-doctrine-of-fair-use/
buddy as if anyone on here would care about copyright infringement. i guarantee you 90% of users on here pirate all their stuff
Well, if you care about an indie gaming site being shut down for copyright violations, yeah, you might want to actually care about copyright infringement.
What they were doing here though was supporting developers profiting off someone elses IP. It would be like, I dunno, I started an independent Superman movie and was fundraising off that. It's a little different from piracy.
In the case of the Five Nights at Freddies game, the developer is infringing on not one but TWO properties.
yes it is.
No, it isn't.
https://copyright.psu.edu/copyright-basics/fair-use/
"In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."
So, me, making a fan page for FunkoPop versions of the Five Nights at Freddies characters and using their images? THAT'S fair use.
Me charging money for a fan game based on the same Funko versions of those characters is NOT fair use.
"Section 107 of the Copyright Act gives examples of purposes that are favored by fair use: “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, [and] research.”"
legal != moral
also it was done by their users, not them.
Fortunately our laws aren't about what's moral or not. You need religious police for that.
The correct process would have been to issue a takedown request, then go after the domain if nothing was done, they just jumped the gun.
what i mean by moral, is about things being fair or not, and this is clearly not.
see, the fact that they can jump the gun, but the end users cant is the problem here. even the correct process is very biased towards big companies because they can afford a lawyer army to harass people with weaponized bureaucracy.
who cares besides them anyway? they cant sue everyone.
I blame them for protecting their IP like a old white person protects their property value by shooting at any black person that moves into the neighborhood.
But they didn't send a C&D, they sent an AI automated phishing report about a fan page for an actual licensed Funko game.
They weren't address copyright anything, even if it was there.
Hence the "super shitty way to do it". ;)
That's not just a shitty way of doing it, it's a fraudulent accusation of something unrelated.
Thanks, I was super confused for a bit!