this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024

337 points (99.4% liked)

Ghazi

714 readers

21 users here now

A community for progressive issues, social justice and LGBT+ causes in media, gaming, entertainment and tech.

Official replacement for Reddit's r/GamerGhazi

Content should be articles, video essays, podcasts about topics relevant to the forum. No memes, single images or tweets/toots/... please!

Community rules:

Be respectful and civil with each other. Don't be a jerk. There is a real human being on the other side of your screen. See also the Blahaj.Zone Community Rules

No bigotry of any kind allowed. Making racist, sexist, trans-/homo-/queerphobic, otherwise demeaning and hateful comments is not ok. Disabilities and mental illnesses are not to be used as insults and should not be part of your comment unless speaking of your own or absolutely relevant.

No gatekeeping and being rude to people who don't agree with you. Leave “gamer” stereotypes out of your comment (e.g. sexless, neck bearded, teenaged, basement-dwelling, etc). Don't compare people to animals, or otherwise deny their humanity. Even if you think someone is the worst human on the planet, do not wish death or harm upon them.

No "justice porn". Posts regarding legal action and similar is allowed, but celebrating someone being harmed is not.

Contrarianism for its own sake is unnecessary and not welcome.

No planning operations, no brigading, no doxxing or similar activities allowed.

Absolutely no defense of GamerGate and other right-wing harassment campaigns, no TERFs and transphobia, racism, dismissing of war crimes and praise of fascists. This includes “JAQing off”, intentionally asking leading questions while pretending to be a neutral party. This also applies to other forms of authoritarianism and authoritarian or criminal actions by liberal or leftist governments.

NSFW threads, such as ones discussing erotic art, pornography and sex work, must be tagged as such.

Moderators can take action even if none of the rules above are broken.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zone

othello@lemmy.blahaj.zone

chewinchawingum@lemmy.blahaj.zone

YrRhyfelwr@lemmy.blahaj.zone

GhaziMods@lemmy.blahaj.zone

337

submitted 3 days ago by squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/ghazi@lemmy.blahaj.zone

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Artists, merch sellers, and journalists making and posting Luigi media have become the targets of bogus DMCA claims.

top 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 days ago

Wait the insurance company think it owns the likeness of the assassin that took out their ceo.

What the fuck?

[–] spider@lemmy.blahaj.zone 42 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

"We're sorry to inform you that an intellectual property claim has been filed by UnitedHealth Group Inc against this design of yours on TeePublic"

If UnitedHealth really filed that claim, they're even more tone-deaf than I thought.

[–] RumorsOfLove@lemmy.dbzer0.com 51 points 3 days ago

'There is no world in which the copyright of a watercolor painting of Luigi Mangione surveillance footage done by Kenaston is owned by United Health Group as it quite literally has nothing to do with anything that the company owns.'

wake up and smell the daisies United Health Group owns everything and everyone in North America

[–] grue@lemmy.world 62 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

She got an email from TeePublic that said “We're sorry to inform you that an intellectual property claim has been filed by UnitedHealth Group Inc against this design of yours on TeePublic,” and said “Unfortunately, we have no say in which designs stay or go” because of the DMCA. This is not true—platforms are able to assess the validity of any DMCA claim and can decide whether to take the supposedly infringing content down or not. But most platforms choose the path of least resistance and take down content that is obviously not infringing; Kenaston’s clearly violates no one’s copyright. Kenaston appealed the decision and TeePublic told her: “Unfortunately, this was a valid takedown notice sent to us by the proper rightsholder, so we are not allowed to dispute it,” which, again, is not true.

It's time to boycott TeePublic.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago

Don't go that far. Just ask someone to sign their name to the statement that they truly believe that UHG literally owns the likeness of the dude who (allegedly) shot one of their CEOs so you can call them a fucking moron by name online.

[–] kipo@lemm.ee 11 points 3 days ago

Done. TeePublic is dead to me.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 71 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I wonder who saw this coming?

Was it stallman again?

Yeah it really was. It’s annoying and terrifying how right Richard stallman always is.

[–] imPastaSyndrome@lemm.ee 23 points 3 days ago

I mean, I can't say he's the only or the first one to say anything similar

[+] trucy@lemmy.dbzer0.com -10 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Was he right when he wrote "I think it is morally absurd to define 'rape' in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17"?

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 26 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Out of context, I see nothing wrong with that. Rape is rape. Location and age shouldn't be a factor in deciding whether something qualifies as rape or merely sexual assault. And while we're at it, can we also get rid of the ass-backwards criteria in some jurisdictions that make being penetrated a requirement?

[+] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone -8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Maybe so, but it's also like "is this really the hill you want to die on?"

What "maturity" is is a complicated and nuanced subject. Hell, some 50 year olds are less mature than 16 years old, what implications might that have? Not to mention how to even quantitatively measure maturity. You're getting out in the weeds in a similar way of how you would regarding intelligence

At some point you just have to pick your poison, and saying "18 years is the age of consent" and strong protections for victims is considered good enough for most.

Edit: on re-reading, you didn't say what I thought you said, that's my bad, either way, I'll keep this comment up assuming that stallman was arguing for changing age of consent laws.

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Wild to assume that and not the much more reasonable idea that he was pointing out how absolutely insane it is that a couple can be making love in one area and cross an imaginary line and suddenly it's rape because one of them is 17 and the other 19.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Fine, look into the original https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#Comments_about_Jeffrey_Epstein_scandal

The context was about Jeffrey Epstein

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

After reading the entire section I still don't think I see your point of view. He says clearly that the girl was being harmed and doesn't defend Epstein, in fact, criticizes him. It's gross, but seems accurate to assume Epstein would have made his victims lie and act.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 days ago

My point was that the context was about age of consent laws. I believe stallman backtracked afterwards a little, but he also has a history of skeevy behaviour, so I don't know how much benefit of the doubt he should be given

Either way, the point was more regarding the whole "this is the hill you're willing to die on?", he could have just kept his mouth shut

I'm not really invested in the conversation regarding stallman, there are a couple of other additional reasons why I'm uncertain about him, but I leave this stuff to the organizations and the people affected. I just tried providing more context for the whole thing surrounding stallman, and why this stuff is not baseless

[–] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 days ago

Yes.

[–] sunglocto@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 days ago

Saying one correct thing doesn't mean everything else you say is right

[–] PennyRoyal@sh.itjust.works 28 points 3 days ago

So how about merch with ceo and board members’ names and addresses on it?

[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 51 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So they claim copyright.

So that means they admitted to orchestrated the assasination?

[–] zippythezigzag@lemm.ee 0 points 2 days ago

I mean I hate them as much as everyone else but that's a bit of a jump.