this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2024
739 points (97.8% liked)

Games

32986 readers
1341 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] caseofthematts@lemmy.world 367 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (5 children)

I'm just going to post this comment to this thread as well, since this is newer. Classic shifting of blame and no one taking responsibility for scummy actions.

Fun fact: Funko's current CEO is the ex-president of Wizards of the Coast!

Why is this relevant? Well, under her leadership, WotC sent pinkerton agents to someone's home to threaten them because they got some Magic the Gathering cards early. She said things like Dungeons & Dragons players were under-monetised, pushing to make the Table Top game more like a microtransaction-filled video game, and helped with the OGL scandal.

The OGL, for anyone unfamiliar, was an Open Gaming License WotC had for years with D&D 3rd party creators. It allowed certain things to be created using D&D mechanics and lore by anyone that followed its guidelines and allowances. A couple years ago, WotC tried to change that so they would make more money off of people trying to create things for D&D - to profit off of indie creators passionate about the game. There was a huge backlash, and they eventually went back on this decision.

All this to say, you can see what kind of leader the current Funko CEO is, and what's happening with itch isn't surprising to me.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 83 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Fucking Pinkertons? That's a company who can use a visit from Luigi.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 72 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Literally the company that RDR2 portrays as the bad guys, that sued the makers of the game and lost because they objectively ARE the bad guys.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 48 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

They have also had over a century to rename themselves and haven't, which means they want the reputation the name has.

[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 34 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

If you had a business that boiled down to "corporate mercenary" don't you think it would be incredibly convenient to have a reputation as a villainous bulldog?

There are very few companies who get to pretend they don't give a flying shit about people. This is one who will thrive on that reputation. Pinkertons and whatever Blackwater is now.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] donuts@lemmy.world 75 points 2 weeks ago

That's quite telling, thanks for sharing.

[–] oxideseven@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Name the CEO. Image too, or wiki link.

Let's stop letting scummy people hide behind brands and companies.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee 240 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They requested a takedown before talking to the website owners? That's such a hostile move

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 198 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

DMCA used to be used very very rarely because it carries(carried?) significant penalties for using it like a club. Now it's just being used like a club and it's quite obvious there's no penalty.

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 41 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

~~I don't believe that it was a malicious misuse. Most likely some fuckwit moron at Funko or Brandshield didn't understand the difference between the hosting platform and the registrar and sent the takedown request to the wrong place out of negligence.~~

It wasn't even a DMCA request.

[–] AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world 81 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Using AI driven software is willful negligence. Software can't take responsibility so the human operating it needs to take responsibility for the consequences of it. They took down the entire thing they need to face consequences. The hosting provider should also face consequences for overly broad responses to take down requests.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 73 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Doesn't matter, compensation is in order.

If a company uses tools that act poorly, or does not invest in training staff appropriately, it is a decision they make to optimize their business.

When they fail, they should have to learn what the costs of those mistakes are. A tweet is not enough.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 237 points 2 weeks ago (15 children)

So Funko issued a non-apology blaming Brandshield.

Brandshield issued a non-apology blaming the registrar (Iwantmyname), and saying their AI tool definitely had nothing to do with it

And Iwantmyname hasn't even put out a statement.

Fucked all around, yet it seems nobody will be facing consequence for this except Itch.io who got their website nuked out of nowhere.

Though if I were Itch, I'd get a new registrar ASAP.

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 110 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

I'd do a new registrar either way.

I've worked at hosting companies in the past. I don't know the timeline, but I've never encountered a situation where one folded this fast and just take down a client's site over a copyright claim.

And our clients, because of the nature of the internet being the internet, a small percentage were real scumbag folks, who while the content was objectionable and disgusting, it wasn't illegal. Which means it stayed up.

  • If there was something highly illegal like csam or dark web stuff and it came from a federal agency, we'd take down the site immediately.

  • If it was a strong letter from a legal entity that we trusted, we would pass that to the client and recommend remediation. No takedown unless there was a court order.

  • If it was a weak letter from a random legal entity, we lol'ed and wait for the threat of a lawsuit/court order. This was surprisingly extremely common.

So wtf is this registrar doing to shit on their clients so fast without a court order?

[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 68 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, if Iwantmyname are so neglectful as to pull the entire plug on your website over a singlular copyright claim, then I'd move right the fuck along too. They're clearly not a trustworthy registrar.

To make things worse, Itch.io isn't exactly a small company either. If this happened to someone smaller, with less outreach to fight back with than Itch, I can only imagine they'd have no recourse against this neglectful behaviour.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sabata11792@ani.social 39 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

They committed fraud with a false take down and are hoping they don't get the shit sewed out out them by pointing the finger.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] hono4kami@pawb.social 114 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (5 children)

There are lots of finger-pointing here. Funko said the takedown was done by their partner, BrandShield. BrandShield said it was a URL-specific (or is it subdomain?) takedown, not the whole domain. The registrar, Iwantmyname, responded said takedown by taking down the WHOLE domain.

I think Funko shouldn't have trusted AI to do legal-related stuff. BrandShield is a stupid idea born from the AI-hype. It's stupid and shouldn't have existed. Iwantmyname is just as incompetent if not more--they haven't even released any public statement about this. Their customer support are also slow to response apparently.

Itch.io should move domain registrar. Funko should stop using BrandShield, it only damages their brand more.

Also what's up with Funko calling someone's mom lol. that's stupid


I also think that this is why AI won't replace our jobs. I've seen many instances where technologies replaces jobs, but this ain't it

[–] themoonisacheese@sh.itjust.works 112 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Also: brand shield says they only wanted the url gone but you don't get that when talking to the registrar. Registrar are all or nothing, so clearly they knew they were doing this

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 84 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think this is a very important point. Why would you talk to a registrar of the domain to get a specific page offline. This doesn't make sense.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hono4kami@pawb.social 30 points 2 weeks ago

yup. someone is lying here

[–] Kelly@lemmy.world 40 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I think Iwantmyname may be the worst player in this story.

Everyone else kind of did what they were expected to do:

  1. Itch provides a platform for user generated content and took down some questionable content when asked.
  2. Funko is an IP based toy company and asked a tech company to protect their IP online
  3. BrandShield is a fucking cancer of a service that acted aggressively to protect its client's interests

But:

  1. Iwantmyname is meant to provide a domain name registration service,, it's a cutthroat industry where often times customer service is viewed as an unnecessary cost, but itch was their client and they should have been helping itch respond to the notice in a manner that allowed it to continue to exist. Instead they were willing to shut it down without any real dialog.

The rest might be decent business partners if you are looking for their kind of service but Iwantmyname isn't to be trusted.

[–] olosta@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago

While the registrar should have made more to understand the situation before acting, it's important to keep in mind that according to itch.io, the request was not a DMCA takedown but an accusation of "fraud and fishing". There's probably a very large legal exposure for a registrar to let criminal website use their service if they are made aware of it, so reducing their liability is probably their highest priority.

BrandShield is inexcusable for using such a claim as a first step.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] executivechimp@discuss.tchncs.de 87 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

I notice it doesn't include the word "sorry".

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 40 points 2 weeks ago

It's really just "this thing happened" and nothing else, as if they're reporting on events where they're just innocent bystanders. Instead of saying what they did, it's "hey, we didn't do [detail]".

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 79 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Why is it so hard just to say "this was not out intention, we recognize it was bad, and we are sorry."

There's a lot of words here for a non-apology.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 34 points 2 weeks ago

Lawsuit liability.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] obinice@lemmy.world 78 points 2 weeks ago

Fuck Funko and fuck their shitty CEO.

Not worth thinking about any further. I wish itch.io the best in their lawsuit.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 68 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Fuck Funko Pops.

Fuck BrandShield.

I accuse them both of causing itch.io to go down and it is their fault.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 66 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Fuck all the corpo fucks involved here with their plausible deniability attempt. If you truly felt any remorse, you'd talk about how you'll disengage this AI chum service, or demand that requests are extremely precise or hyper targeted at specific direct issues. This story of blanket action helps the big company with monkey and always hurts the little guy that gets swept up in their ravenous wake.

Also, educate the next month of your online presence you boosting the brand you wronged with your reach. But you won't do shit, you aren't remorseful.

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Personally I want to see the criminal shield removed for corporations. All C-Level executives become personally liable for any illegal actions, malfeasance, slander/liable, or injurious action perpetrated or instigated by the company with the ONLY defense being proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt (not just reasonable doubt) that an actor within or without the company caused the action with the express intent of harming the C-Level executives, either specific or generally.

Fuck corporate personhood. Fuck people making a LLC and doing whatever the fuck they want under the guise of the company then the company declares bankruptcy while they run off like a cartoon character with bags of money. Leadership liability and culpability should be the norm, not the exception.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 54 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

It so so pisses me off when these companies say shit like "thank you for sharing in our passion for creativity"

It's basically saying "thank you for agreeing with us", which I don't.

At this point you just know that any company saying something like that is abusive, doesn't give a shit and just want to pretend to be respectable.

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 28 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Corpo-speak in general is absolutely frustrating to read.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 54 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"Funko did not request a takedown of the @itchio platform."

Man, I fucking hate corpo-speak like this.

Yes, you didn't personally make the request against itchio.... But you hired this company to enforce "brand protection" and that's what they did. So you did actually request the takedown, but you just did so by authorizing another party to make such requests on your behalf.

This is like a military General saying "hey I didn't commit any warcrimes, I just gave the orders to my men to commit warcrimes!"

[–] GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 2 weeks ago

Translation: "we didn't think this predatory behavior would affect our bottom line, and we deeply regret that it has."

[–] Sixtyforce@sh.itjust.works 46 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

We HoLd A dEeP ReSpEcT...

Yeah hiring AI slop to take down websites with zero humanity oversight screams "respect."

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] dinckelman@lemmy.world 42 points 2 weeks ago

A corpo bully pointing fingers at some AI slop they use, how convenient

[–] dumbass@leminal.space 38 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Funko: We would like to apologise for being caught in the act, we will strive to better hide our asshole tactics next time, the person responsible for us getting caught has been reprimanded with 2 weeks paid time off.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Corporate doing corporate shit. And then asking why people hate corporations and their CEOs.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] kazerniel@lemmy.world 33 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

I "love" how they very carefully avoid making any apology whatsoever.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] SolarPunker@slrpnk.net 33 points 2 weeks ago

All the support to Itch.io's mom

[–] RonnieB@lemmy.world 32 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Why do people buy those hunks of plastic shit anyway

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 32 points 2 weeks ago

AI to determine people's livelihoods, huh?

By the way, who's the Brandshield CEO? Asking for a friend.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Translation

OhShitOhShitOhShitOhShitOhShitOhShitTheAIReallyFuckedUpPleaseDontSueUsOhShitOhShitOhShitOhShit

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] JTskulk@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Brand protection partners is a much friendlier way to say bloodsucking lawyers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It would be a real shame if abuse@dtnt.com (the domain registrar of brandshield.com) were to get a bunch of reports about scams and illegal activity found on the website. Bonus points for copying legal@dtnt.com.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›