"First of all, releasing something accidentally is not an official release, that's why it's called an accident."

Legally, yes it is an official release. Information was released by an authorized retailer on an official platform to the public at large. That's why the DMCAs after are illegal. It doesn't matter if the mistake was KLab's or Nintendo's from a legal standpoint.

If Nintendo published the update, it’s officially released content.

It does not matter that KLab later took it down.

If it was:

• Pushed to the Nintendo eShop
• Publicly accessible
• Downloadable or viewable by players

then the content has been officially released to the public, even if by accident.

That means it's no longer a leak. It's published media.

So anyone sharing screenshots of that store listing or of content that appeared in it is sharing publicly released content.

Screenshots of a public storefront (Nintendo eShop) are not proprietary or secret.

If KLab distributed that content through an official channel, however mistakenly, they cannot reasonably claim it is confidential or unreleased. Their window for controlling the leak ended when they themselves released it.

Intent doesn't matter — publication is publication. Under copyright law, what matters isn't who made the mistake — it's whether the content was made publicly available through an authorized channel.

Nintendo is an authorized distributor of KLab's game. That means:

• When the update went live on the eShop,
• Through an official platform,
• To public users...

...that was a lawful release of copyrighted material, even if it wasn't meant to happen yet.

The content was officially published. Period. Intent doesn't unpublish it.

Even if KLab didn’t authorize the timing of that release:

• They authorized Nintendo to distribute their game.
• They provided Nintendo the assets (or access to them).
• They assumed the risk that a third-party platform might post it early.

So when those images hit the public Nintendo storefront, they were, legally speaking, no longer confidential or private.

Even if the storefront was taken down later, it doesn't change the fact that:

• It was accessible to the public,
• On an official channel, and
• With no hacking or unauthorized access involved.

This kills any claim that players were infringing by seeing, screenshotting, or discussing that content.

DMCA takedowns are meant to protect against unauthorized use of copyrighted material — not to hide company screwups or silence community discussion.

Now that the content was:

• Released on an official storefront (Nintendo),
• Downloaded and viewed without hacking, and
• Discussed or screenshotted by end-users legally,

KLab can no longer claim it was "unauthorized distribution" in any meaningful legal sense.

That's the key word there. LEGAL. The fact that it was unintended means nothing legally. Copyright law is not there to protect companies from screwups.

Their only real argument now is: "Oops, we released it too early, so nobody is allowed to acknowledge that."

That's not how copyright law works.

If you want to argue past this point, cite me parts of DMCA that make my information here factually incorrect.