4 ms·
I dunno. I usually read HN comments before the article, so I know what to look out for when reading it. But that's not the tone I'm getting here. >So I called
by Nexxxeh 2y ago
I dunno. I usually read HN comments before the article, so I know what to look out for when reading it. But that's not the tone I'm getting here.
>So I called his mom and said, ‘Listen, I wanted to tell you some things that Andrew is doing on the computer.’ She says, ‘So you’re saying he hacked your game.’ And I hear in the background: ‘I didn’t hack anything!’ I start describing it more technically. She says, ‘Is this a problem?’ I say, ‘Hacking software, that’s a federal crime, but I don’t want that to be the conversation. Why don’t we make it a conversation about the good and bad things he can do with a computer?’
>The kid was live-tweeting it. The tweets were this:
>1.Pokémon just called my house.
>2.What the hell is a general counsel?
>3.I now know what I did was wrong, and I’ll never do it again.
>Which was fantastic. Absolutely baked my legend in at Pokémon for like five years.
Yeah, the DMCA is bullshittery, but it's a legal weapon that the GC is expect to wield for his company.
He did his job, in a way that had no legal consequences for the kid, and still got the result his company needed.
That seems like the correct way of handling it. Is it ideal from a societal perspective? No, the DMCA should be gutted. But from a practical perspective, this was a win all around.
And the kid was hopefully pushed away from trouble, at least until they were old enough to cover their tracks better.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- thrance 2y agoI mean, you are right but it still feels wrong to see a lawyer bragging on the internet about shutting down a kid that basically just peeked in a toy his parents brought him.
- gorlilla 2y agoHe's not right. The lawyer likely didn't have a legal leg to stand on, but may have caused a paradigm shift in this kid's life. Why do you assume there weren't knock-on effects/consequences to his actions? Or that they were positive (set him on the right track) vs deleterious?
- matheusmoreira 2y ago> this was a win all around No. This kid did nothing wrong. Yet he still felt the need to say these words: > I now know what I did was wrong, and I’ll never do it again. He lost some of his dignity that day. He was made to submit. To some rich corporation's will. Despite probably having zero obligation to do so. I couldn't care less what your job is or what "results" your employer wants out of you. If you do what this guy did, you suck.
- hyperman1 2y agoI wish I had more upvotes to give you. A company made a mistake. A kid found out. So the company sicks the lawyers on the kid? Teaches the kid to not be curious? Does he really believe kids should only sit down and mindlessly consume content,only when a bigcorp dictates it, never walking a millimeter from the path? And then the bastard lawyer brags about it? My blood boils just reading this. I hope that corporate creep never has any kids of his own.
- floydnoel 2y agosociety is becoming enshittified by the majority of people giving a pass to people doing banal, evil stuff constantly because it is "their job."