Crunchyroll has faced backlash after voice actor David Wald revealed the company has been illegally opening and distributing his fan mail for the past five years, violating U.S. federal law regarding obstruction of correspondence. This revelation sparked widespread outrage, highlighting Crunchyroll’s questionable practices, including its monopoly over anime distribution in the West following its acquisition by Sony. Critics argue that Crunchyroll has become complacent, exemplified by the failure of its original content and a significant price increase for subscriptions. Furthermore, Wald’s situation underscores broader issues within the company, such as alleged discrimination against voice actors and a toxic work environment. Crunchyroll’s response has been inadequate, stating they are investigating the matter but failing to acknowledge their responsibility. This incident adds to the growing list of grievances against Crunchyroll, raising concerns about the treatment of voice actors and the future of anime distribution.
Is Crunchyroll actually beholden to US law if they are a Japanese owned company?
Here in Australia the moment someone in the US cries foul it is waved away because simply not applicable to the laws of this country regardless what US federal law is broken, the same way all these other international companies wave away breaches of Australian law 🤷🏼♀️
I guess it would come down to the employment contract and if he was employed by a Japanese company or a US owned one?
Not sure which is why I ask.
If an Australian company has a shop or office in the US, what happens in that shop is beholden to US law. If a Japanese owned company commits US crimes while in the US, they are committing crimes.