my_hat_stinks

You mean like all the things in the link OP posted which you scrolled past just to be an ass in the comments?

So your suggestion is instead of any attempt at regulation people should just boycott a company years after they've already given that company their money, despite the fact that you admit n even more ideal circumstances boycotts still do not work?

The entire premise of your comment is absurd, but let's assume for a moment we really do live in a world where a legal process can't be used unless it's successfully been used for widespread change before; what other action do you suggest people should take?

First paragraph of the article:

Earlier this month, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement added Microsoft to its list of priority targets due to the company’s intense entanglement with the Israeli military via Azure cloud and AI services. Specifically, BDS called for supporters to boycott Xbox, including Game Pass, individual games, and future purchases of consoles and peripherals. Now, in a show of solidarity, indie label Ice Water Games has removed one of its projects, open-world tactics RPG Tenderfoot Tactics, from the Xbox store.

From what I could tell the gnome teleports to a random still-covered empty tile and dies when there's nowhere left to run.

They were, but chose to remove the feature instead of complying.

You're absolutely right, Google chose to inconvenience their users rather than make it simpler for the user to choose their service. This is what Google chose to do rather than comply with regulation to make the field fairer. Google did this. The article is a PR piece to shift blame from Google for yet another anti-user decision Google made.

Google is not the good guy.

There definitely is already a resale market for Steam accounts, mostly used by cheaters or scammers who want a legitimate-looking account with no game or trade bans.

That's bullshit. You're not absolved of all wrongdoing because you used a computer as a middle man.

Apple chose to implement AI for this purpose, they are responsible for all output.

You have stated multiple times that you have a vested interest in pushing the narrative that Funko isn't the bad guy but somehow I'm the one that's not arguing in good faith? Yeah, sure, whatever helps you sleep at night I guess.

Making a fraud claim to a DNS provider and hosting service is the nuclear option. Literally the only thing either of those providers can do is to effectively take the entire site down. They intentionally made a misleading fraud claim instead of a DMCA takedown notice so they could force it through quicker. And you've completely ignored the fact that they're relying on AI to identify these "offending" pages, and the fact that they threatened the owner's parent. The non-apology statement they made is just icing on the cake.

You disagreeing does not make it a bad analogy.

If you hire someone to do a job and the process of doing that job results in someone being killed then yes, you absolutely are to blame, but that's not what happened here. They didn't hire someone to protect themselves, they contracted an AI company to delete anything which could paint them in a bad light then made claims of fraud through nonstandard channels to force their way through red tape then threatened parents of their victim when they were called out.

If you hire a hitman you're still on the hook for murder. Making someone else do your dirty work does not absolve you. Especially when you're a corporation and literally everything you do is through people you pay.