Anti-Corporate Movement
This community is the first one on lemmy of its kind. It sits between the idea of anarchism/anti-capitalism and left leaning economic policy.
Our goal is to make people aware of the dangers of corporate control, its influence on governments and people as well as the small but steady abrasion of empathy around the world indirectly caused by it.
Current topics this includes but is not limited to:
- Meta's entry into the fediverse
- Game companies putting gambling mechanics in childrens games
- Embracer groups buyout and closing of smaller game studios
- IP trolls destroying small companies and keeping progress back for profit
Feel free to debate this but beware, corporate rhetoric is not welcome here. If you have arguments, bring them on. If its rhetoric trying to defend the evil actions of corporations, we will know and you will go.
Our declared goal so far is to have all companies and individuals worldwide capped at 999 mil USD in all assets, including ownership of other companies, sister companies and marital assets. The reason for this is that companies (and individuals) are not supposed to resemble small(?) countries with a single leader(-board) and shareholder primacy. Thats why we feel like they must be kept in check indefinitely.
But companies will just wander off The argument that large companies will just wander off is valid, which we embrace. We dont need microsoft, apple, google, amazon and other trillion dollar companies. There are small competitors being kept small and driven into brankruptcy by anti competitive behavior of these giants or simply bought up and closed. If starbucks left tomorrow, we would not have an issue with this.
But then we have x little microsofts that all belong to the same person(s) If in fact nobody was allowed to accumulate more than 999 mil in assets, they would not be able to own all these. And like defending agains burglary, it is not about complete defence but time and effort. You only have to keep the thief occupied long enough for them to be caught, give up or make a mistake.
But these giants have tons of IP which would then limit our growth Thats another topic we must touch on. We will (only this one time) take a page out of russias playbook and demand that IP of non complying companies (assets over 999 mil USD) will be declared invalid, which opens them up to be copied.
But then they will "live" in one country that doesnt accept this Correct, and they should be taken into custody the moment they enter the airspace of a country that supports this act.
view the rest of the comments
While the intention is good. The wording they want is terrible and clearly written by an angry group, not one thinking critically and actually trying to fix the root cause of the issue. Laws need to be specific, and this is very vague,which is bad when dealing with politicians. They are not subject matter experts. That's the actual point of lobbying your representatives, to give them the information they need to try and get the right laws passed. They don't understand the nuances of the game development industr to tweak this.
Pirate software has a really good video breaking down the issues with this specific movement, as it currently exists.
https://youtu.be/ioqSvLqB46Y?si=dRursUnIatrlmVlC
This isn't a law project to be voted, is a citizen initiative, asking for a law project to be created based on.
This is an excellent response to the piratesoftware video: https://youtube.com/watch?v=TF4zH8bJDI8
No it isn't, it isn't a response to that video AT ALL. Rossman's video was uploaded on August 4th. The Pirate Software video I linked was uploaded on August 6th.
Rossman is responding to a small section of a PirateSoftware livestream several days ago talking about Stop Killing Games off the top of his head on stream, not a fully edited and planned video after he had a chance to look more in depth.
Well, I guess I confused them up. Did he addressed Rossmann points?
Holy shit that dude is incredibly stupid, wow
All that video says to me “trust me, the industry won’t scam you”
I gotta say the guy usually has based takes but I think he is way off the mark on this. Litterally all they want is if a game requires a server, give players the option to self host if the publisher is shutting down theirs.
He shows a lot on YouTube shorts, usually with good comments.
No, he actually understands not only the player side, but also the actual development, publisher, and operations sides as well. He understands the dynamics of client-server interactions and that what's being asked by Stop Killing Games.
Random commenters on social media with no relevant credentials beyond playing games making snide comments mean very little when we're talking about discussing what we want to see from possible legislation.
Agreed, its a good idea in theory but theyre making it worse with ambiguous wording https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3jMKeg9S-s