Nintendo Seeks Damages & Broad Injunction Against 'Pirate' Game Streamer

Nintendo Seeks Damages & Broad Injunction Against 'Pirate' Game Streamer * TorrentFreak

Nintendo is hoping to wrap up its lawsuit against gamer Jesse Keighin, aka EveryGameGuru, after he failed to answer the complaint. The game giant seeks $17,500 in damages for copyright infringement, including streaming pre-release games and sharing links to emulators. In addition, Nintendo requests a broad global injunction to prevent future infringements, even for games that do not yet exist.

8 comments

I really hate how circumventing protection measures on their own device is considered illegal. It's my device, I should be allowed to do what I want.
Even the term "protection measures" annoys me, as it tries to protect their interests on my device.
Also, linking to an emulator should not be considered "trafficking circumvention devices". Making circumvention devices illegal is bad enough.
But the streamer is an idiot too as he was publicly streaming cracked games pre release. Streaming any game can be considered copyright infringement, although it's usually not enforced (it's free advertisement).
- But how is it deemed illegal when Nintendo "loses" pre-release games in the wild and somebody "finds" it and shows it off on YouTube? Game reviewers are bound by NDAs and have contracts with Ninty - but these "criminals" don't. So what's the crime here? Publishing something Ninty didn't want to get out yet? And how is this copyright infringement when he never stated that he's made a Mario game? Or is trying to sell Mario-themed stuff? It's an official game from Ninty, so what does this have to do with copyright? Where did he copy it?
  Same with the "circumvention" ... if you can easily make a copy of the key from your own device - which you've legally bought and where you only need a paper clip to do it - what are you circumventing then? If you buy a lock, it usually comes with the keys on a keyring that's "locked" to the loop. Is removing a key from that keyring also "circumventing" then?
  The big problem here is that most people doing law have no idea about the technical stuff. And until that changes we'll see lots of these ridiculous claims going through.
  
  The legal system exists to be manipulated by rich people, for rich people.
  We can blame all the rubes that said "they're a business and they need to make money!" for why these corporations now have the power of gods.
  
  So what's the crime here? Publishing something Ninty didn't want to get out yet?
  Theoretically any streamer could get sued for copyright infringement by the copyright holders. This is because they own the gameplay, irrespective of whether someone plays it themselves or watches someone else play it. That's why Nintendo sues for copyright infringement. Usually game companies understand streamers correctly as free advertisement (sometimes even paid) and don't sue.
  Edit: I can imagine they look at broadcasting playing their game in a similar way to someone reading a book out loud publicly. Which is also copyright infringement.
  I agree with you on most of your points. And just wanted to clarify this.
- This is what happens when society is comprised of useful idiots.

Up next: Nintendo thinking of suing everyone with a Mario tattoo into slicing off affected bit of skin.
- Wait, until they find out about Supermarionation...

Never give Nintendo money.

8 comments