|
|
|
|
|
by SpicyLemonZest
554 days ago
|
|
Funko says in the statement that they're dealing with it. They've reached out to itch.io to understand who's doing what, which isn't clear at this point. For example, the company itch.io previously identified as responsible for the domain being taken down has publicly stated - perhaps honestly, perhaps falsely - that they requested a takedown of only the one infringing URL. (https://x.com/BrandShieldltd/status/1866200019335794763) |
|
They submitted a takedown to the domain registrar. That means they requested a takedown of the whole domain, because the registrar has absolutely zero ability to operate on a URL level of granularity. They can only take down the entire domain.
There are three possibilities here:
1. BrandShield submitted a takedown to the domain registrar knowing exactly what that meant, and is now lying about it, demonstrating that they should not be put in a position of power.
2. BrandShield submitted a takedown to the domain registrar not understanding what that meant, demonstrating a total lack of knowledge and/or level of incompetence that means they should not be put in a position of power.
3. BrandShield did not submit the takedown to the domain registrar at all, some other vendor did, and somehow no one has pointed that out yet.
Obviously #3 is unlikely given their public statements, so let's just say at this point there is absolutely no reason to give BrandShield any benefit of the doubt and their clients should be encouraged to find a vendor that isn't either lying or incompetent.