• Snapz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    671·
    2 days ago

    Fuck all the corpo fucks involved here with their plausible deniability attempt. If you truly felt any remorse, you’d talk about how you’ll disengage this AI chum service, or demand that requests are extremely precise or hyper targeted at specific direct issues. This story of blanket action helps the big company with monkey and always hurts the little guy that gets swept up in their ravenous wake.

    Also, educate the next month of your online presence you boosting the brand you wronged with your reach. But you won’t do shit, you aren’t remorseful.

    • Adalast@lemmy.worldEnglish
      30·
      2 days ago

      Personally I want to see the criminal shield removed for corporations. All C-Level executives become personally liable for any illegal actions, malfeasance, slander/liable, or injurious action perpetrated or instigated by the company with the ONLY defense being proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt (not just reasonable doubt) that an actor within or without the company caused the action with the express intent of harming the C-Level executives, either specific or generally.

      Fuck corporate personhood. Fuck people making a LLC and doing whatever the fuck they want under the guise of the company then the company declares bankruptcy while they run off like a cartoon character with bags of money. Leadership liability and culpability should be the norm, not the exception.

      • Richard@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        2 days ago

        Aren’t C-Suite already liable for illegal actions? I know for sure that it’s that way in Germany, and I cannot imagine it to be different in the U.S.

        • Adalast@lemmy.worldEnglish
          14·
          2 days ago

          Nope, they are covered most of the time by what is known as the “corporate veil”.

          Better explained than I can do here: https://federal-lawyer.com/when-can-a-ceo-be-held-personally-liable/

          Essentially, unless they are personally doing it, they are protected. Embezzle millions and you go to jail, poison a water supply, kill thousands, give birth defects, cancer, and a myriad of other health issues to a community at large and only the corporation is liable/culpable.

  • pyre@lemmy.worldEnglish
    31·
    1 day ago

    AI to determine people’s livelihoods, huh?

    By the way, who’s the Brandshield CEO? Asking for a friend.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
    281·
    2 days ago

    Translation

    OhShitOhShitOhShitOhShitOhShitOhShitTheAIReallyFuckedUpPleaseDontSueUsOhShitOhShitOhShitOhShit

  • oVerde@lemmy.worldEnglish
    211·
    2 days ago

    If only we had a few more Luigi, these corpo-shit would think twice

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      4·
      1 day ago

      They really like to show off how much power they have and how self defense is, indeed, justified.

      They do and undo like there’s no consequences whatsoever.

    • DontMakeMoreBabies@lemm.eeEnglish
      31·
      1 day ago

      They always talk about how giving coverage leads to copycats. Typically that has meant me getting pissed at the over coverage of mass shootings, but now I’m sitting here waiting like… Okay? Any day now? Maybe not.

  • Vespair@lemm.eeEnglish
    51·
    1 day ago

    “Funko did not request a takedown of the @itchio platform.”

    Man, I fucking hate corpo-speak like this.

    Yes, you didn’t personally make the request against itchio… But you hired this company to enforce “brand protection” and that’s what they did. So you did actually request the takedown, but you just did so by authorizing another party to make such requests on your behalf.

    This is like a military General saying “hey I didn’t commit any warcrimes, I just gave the orders to my men to commit warcrimes!”

    • GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      231·
      1 day ago

      Translation: “we didn’t think this predatory behavior would affect our bottom line, and we deeply regret that it has.”

  • zerofk@lemm.eeEnglish
    21·
    2 days ago

    I’m very interested in what the offending page looked like. itch.io in the first reports seemed to suggest it was a false positive, without outright saying so. Both Funko and BrandShield are quiet about it, but between the lines you can infer they think the AI tool’s report was legitimate.

  • Glide@lemmy.caEnglish
    801·
    3 days ago

    Why is it so hard just to say “this was not out intention, we recognize it was bad, and we are sorry.”

    There’s a lot of words here for a non-apology.

  • dumbass@leminal.spaceEnglish
    391·
    3 days ago

    Funko: We would like to apologise for being caught in the act, we will strive to better hide our asshole tactics next time, the person responsible for us getting caught has been reprimanded with 2 weeks paid time off.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.worldEnglish
      131·
      2 days ago

      $100 says they wouldn’t have said shit even if this was a smaller platform than itch and people didn’t basically put them on blast. Funko is just trying damage control now that their customers are calling foul. I seriously hope people stop buying these things as a punishment to this company using shitty AI and not actually apologizing, but I know thats wishful thinking.

    • 0xD@infosec.pubEnglish
      5·
      2 days ago

      I have two of them, from Mr. Robot, for decoration - just like I have other statues for the same purpose. I took them out of the box though, I don’t get why anyone would do that.