Kind of a funny thing, but from what I see, totally understandable. The third party, Valve in this case, doesn’t actually know who created what, just that one piece of media has stuff from a different, unrelated piece of media which can cause lawsuits if stolen. I think. Idk, IANAL, and I’m also not a lawyer.
Plus, at the end, the only thing that Valve required was a statement that the two named entities are, in fact, both DBAs for one particular person, signed by that person.
Yeah, if it starts happening a lot they should consider some sort of enhancement to their internal customer database and/or front end, but this just seems like some annoying bureaucracy in the name of scalability that was bypassed with a fairly silly but simple workaround.
Kind of a funny thing, but from what I see, totally understandable. The third party, Valve in this case, doesn’t actually know who created what, just that one piece of media has stuff from a different, unrelated piece of media which can cause lawsuits if stolen. I think. Idk, IANAL, and I’m also not a lawyer.
Plus, at the end, the only thing that Valve required was a statement that the two named entities are, in fact, both DBAs for one particular person, signed by that person.
Funny headlines, but 100% normal IP CYA behavior.
Yeah, if it starts happening a lot they should consider some sort of enhancement to their internal customer database and/or front end, but this just seems like some annoying bureaucracy in the name of scalability that was bypassed with a fairly silly but simple workaround.
Hey what are you doing this weekend I have an idea
Is it the whole IANAL thing? Because thats not what you think it means…
But they said IANAL and also I’m not a lawyer. So it has to be what I think it is.