To be precise, the DMCA takedown wasn’t ordered by a court, but rather, a preliminary injunction (from Stardock) to prohibit such a takedown was rejected by the

To be precise, the DMCA takedown wasn’t ordered by a court, but rather, a preliminary injunction (from Stardock) to prohibit such a takedown was rejected by the court. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.320268/gov.uscourts.cand.320268.102.0.pdf https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.320268... Gem of a quote from the order: > …The harm Plaintiff complains of is indeed of its own making. Plaintiff had knowledge of Defendants’ copyright claims from the outset. Despite that knowledge, it developed potentially infringing material without resolution of the IP ownership issues, and then publicized the release of that material during the pendency of this action. It now claims that its investment in Origins and reputation are on the line. Given that Plaintiff largely created the foregoing predicament, the Court is disinclined to extricate Plaintiff from a peril of its own making.