• AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        It was a valid point - Nintendo could sue the twelve year old for putting Mario fanart on their fridge, but they’d struggle to show damages, so even if they were only doing it to prove a point about how litiguous and evil they could be, it would be enough of a waste of money that they wouldn’t bother.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          A 12 year old putting Mario fanart on their fridge is not copyright infringement. They didn’t distribute it. It’s their house.

          • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            It’s a common misconception that distribution is required for infringement. Fanart that’s never shared still copies the likeness of a copyrighted character, and copying copyrighted stuff (outside a few very specific exceptions, e.g. fair use for parody, critique or education, making a single backup in case the copy you bought is damaged etc.) isn’t legal. As there are obviously no damages, no one ever gets in toruble for it, but that doesn’t mean it’s legal.