They also didn’t send a cease and desist but reached out to him directly and asked him to take it down.
You’re right, and I should have double checked and worded it better. However, for all intents and purposes, politely asking him to take it down is the same as a cease and desist.
they are worried about having their IP associated with proprietary Nintendo libraries.
That is indeed apparent, however I still don’t get it. What do they hope to gain from currying favour from Nintendo? They don’t sell Nintendo games on Steam, and doing so is a pipe dream (lol sleepy Mario).
The result is the same but there’s a huge difference between getting legally threatened by a big company and being asked nicely.
Not really. Asking nicely can easily be a veiled threat.
The knowledge of having zero chance to be sued by Nintendo.
But that’s an excessively risk averse position to take. It doesn’t even really fit for Valve, although it’s common with lawyers. Hence why I don’t think Valve has the right lawyers for their ethos.
You’re right, and I should have double checked and worded it better. However, for all intents and purposes, politely asking him to take it down is the same as a cease and desist.
That is indeed apparent, however I still don’t get it. What do they hope to gain from currying favour from Nintendo? They don’t sell Nintendo games on Steam, and doing so is a pipe dream (lol sleepy Mario).
The result is the same but there’s a huge difference between getting legally threatened by a big company and being asked nicely.
The knowledge of having zero chance to be sued by Nintendo.
Not really. Asking nicely can easily be a veiled threat.
But that’s an excessively risk averse position to take. It doesn’t even really fit for Valve, although it’s common with lawyers. Hence why I don’t think Valve has the right lawyers for their ethos.