Reading between the lines with George here, looking at SWT's statement. Overall, the tone of the response is rather unprofessional and needlessly wordy, but let's start with this paragraph:
We are struggling to understand why Nintendo contacted us at all last week if they truly wanted us to continue operating. We are struggling to understand why they would not simply reach out to us after our event, rather than rush to meet with us before the Thanksgiving holiday break, just two weeks before our Championships event.
All right these dumb fucks were the ones who submitted an application for licenses with a ridiculous lead time, and then continually 'bumped' (their words) Nintendo for a response. Now they're saying they don't understand why Nintendo contacted them?
They asked Nintendo for a response, and I'm certain they put in their correspondence that a response was urgent and needed to come before their event. This is malicious deflection to confuse the argument, and a really poor thing to come out to bat with.
Regardless, we stand by our first follow-up (
linked here), and would like to reiterate that we received our notice in writing from Nintendo. We also received a direct response to our questions in our call about if we could continue to run the upcoming Championships and the 2023 Tour with the “unofficial” mutual understanding that we would not be shut down. We were told directly that those “times are over.”
They continually mention receiving a notice in writing from Nintendo, but they don't share that correspondence. It would take only a few seconds to share a screenshot of the email, or a photo of the fax or letter, but they don't. There's also no possibility that Nintendo's correspondence would be protected by an NDA as SWT doesn't have any agreement with Nintendo. There's no reason why SWT can't share the correspondence they supposedly have in writing.
The expression 'times are over' is not a very direct response. Them saying they were told directly something that is indirect is a laughably incompetent way to word something.
And again, we would like to reiterate that in our call we asked Nintendo directly if they understood the impact of canceling both the upcoming Championships and the 2023 Smash World Tour. In particular, we brought up international players traveling to the Championships as well as multiple documentary teams. In response to this question, Nintendo responded that they were “confident that from A-Z, all consequences have been evaluated in making this decision,” specifically acknowledging that fallout scenarios included “some positive, some negative, and some really negative.”
This is possibly the most informative paragraph for what is happening behind the scenes. Here is a translation, 'In our call we threatened Nintendo with making waves in the community if we did not get what we want.'
This is exactly what SWT did. They made their issue with Nintendo and Panda public after cancelling their own tournament, giving themselves a chance to strike first against both communities. They did this not because of SWT 2022, but
because Nintendo would not give them any licenses for 2023, putting them at a disadvantage against Panda, who they do not want to have any business relationship with (they have had no correspondence with them through this entire saga). By doing this, the community's public opinion is favorable to SWT, and that's supposed to put pressure on Nintendo and Panda (Nintendo certainly doesn't care; Panda very likely doesn't care). This is what happens when you spend too much time on Twitter and Reddit and think that winning updoots and ratios means you can get whatever you want. SWT is relying on pushback from the community to get a competitive advantage for streamer Smash tournaments.
The rest of the response is worthless noise, but I will say that SWT is making a huge mistake with these continuous, unrelenting open letters by pressing Nintendo to give some kind of official, public statement on unlicensed streaming. If pressed, Nintendo will have no choice but to state that unlicensed streams violate their copyright and must be C&D'd, because companies have to publicly defend their copyrights and trademarks if threatened or risk losing those rights (consider Aspirin).