Search Results
6/19/2025, 3:20:27 AM
>>713046713
>Is that even a law? Sounds made up
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/2308#b
>A disclaimer, modification, or limitation made in violation of this section shall be ineffective for purposes of this chapter and State law.
https://www.mandourlaw.com/first-sale-doctrine/
I>n order to prove first sale with regard to copyright law, a defendant must demonstrate:
>The product was lawfully made with permission or authorization of the copyright holder;
>Ownership was initially transferred with permission or authority of the copyright holder;
>The defendant is a lawful owner of the copy in question; and
>The defendant’s use involves only the right to distribute the work, not to reproduce the work.
tl;dr: Companies like Shittendo thrive on your ignorance of your rights because their enforcement of their licenses and rejection of your warranty is objectively not legal. They exist in the legal gray area of "The FTC hasn't sued us for doing this yet" and that's all. There are multiple instances of case law of other electronics companies, famously Crapple, doing exactly what Shittendo is doing here and getting slapped for it.
The only question is if you have a million or so to pony up the legal team to fight this for 14 years over a $450 switch, since nobody does, they get away with breaking the law and your rights. Therefore, it's always moral to pirate Nintendo products. Just like it's always moral to shit on Tendies for not just putting up with this, but defending Shittendo for raping them.
>Is that even a law? Sounds made up
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/2308#b
>A disclaimer, modification, or limitation made in violation of this section shall be ineffective for purposes of this chapter and State law.
https://www.mandourlaw.com/first-sale-doctrine/
I>n order to prove first sale with regard to copyright law, a defendant must demonstrate:
>The product was lawfully made with permission or authorization of the copyright holder;
>Ownership was initially transferred with permission or authority of the copyright holder;
>The defendant is a lawful owner of the copy in question; and
>The defendant’s use involves only the right to distribute the work, not to reproduce the work.
tl;dr: Companies like Shittendo thrive on your ignorance of your rights because their enforcement of their licenses and rejection of your warranty is objectively not legal. They exist in the legal gray area of "The FTC hasn't sued us for doing this yet" and that's all. There are multiple instances of case law of other electronics companies, famously Crapple, doing exactly what Shittendo is doing here and getting slapped for it.
The only question is if you have a million or so to pony up the legal team to fight this for 14 years over a $450 switch, since nobody does, they get away with breaking the law and your rights. Therefore, it's always moral to pirate Nintendo products. Just like it's always moral to shit on Tendies for not just putting up with this, but defending Shittendo for raping them.
Page 1