What do you mean? It sounds like you’re talking about trademark stuff where if the trademark holder doesn’t defend it they can lose protections associated with it. If so, that’s about trademarks, not copyright. This is copyright infringement. Disturbing the content (copying) without permission (right).
I’m not fluent in legalese, but won’t this make a precedent ?
None of that shit matters anymore.
What do you mean? It sounds like you’re talking about trademark stuff where if the trademark holder doesn’t defend it they can lose protections associated with it. If so, that’s about trademarks, not copyright. This is copyright infringement. Disturbing the content (copying) without permission (right).
Yes that’s what I meant.
Thanks for clarifying the difference.
No, only if they had been taken to court and found to not be infringing on copyright
Isn’t there some rule where if a company isn’t defending their trademarks from obvious violations, their claim becomes weaker?
Oooh you know what you just helped me realize idk what I’m talking about so thank you for that