ImplyingImplications
no Swedish law is being violated
Unfortunately, Swedish courts disagreed
The reason is because the company that operates a shipping vessel often doesn’t own the ship–they charter it. It would be the owner that pays for the fancy wind propulsion systems but only the charterer would benefit from the reduced fuel costs. Owner-operators of shipping vessels sometimes do have a supplemental wind propulsion system.
Oh no! Not Microsoft Bingo! That’s a list of D list games nobody has ever heard of that all shutdown years ago. I don’t think the world would be a better place if the devs of Radical Heights, a free to play arena shooter that was launched and shutdown a month later in 2018 were forced to give their game out to everyone for free after.
My understanding is that a generic public music performance licence generally covers the use of pretty much any song played in any venue for any reason. I wouldn’t doubt they purchased such a licence because it’s fairly cheap.
However, there is legal precedent that tying the artist to a message they don’t like isn’t part of that general public performance licence. It’s recommended that, if the event is going to be religious or political, the organizers get confirmation from the artist that they’re alright with it to avoid a lawsuit. I highly doubt they’re doing this.
Edit: apparently the song was used in a video and not just played at a rally. That’s way different. They definitely just stole the song
Hi, industry bootlicker here! Nintendo is listening to their consumers. I was told corporations are evil and won’t listen to consumers and must be forced to do things by law. I much prefer consumers remain vocal about their wants because corporations do indeed listen. No government intervention required. I worry government rules could cause unintended problems that don’t benefit anybody.
