Intellectual property doesn't exist. Copyrights exist, patents exist, trademarks exist. But they are all different and none of them are the same as property. It’s just a propaganda term by people who want you to think they are.

Just to clarify my comment: what I mean by 'it exists' is in a practical sense, i.e. what people mean by 'IP' is enforced by the institutions. It does not matter that much if they are infringing copyright, patents or trademarks law, and in such projects it is very likely all of them. The sad state of affairs is that this term is also industry standard, so somewhat understood by artists as opposed to real laws which are understood by essentially nobody.

So for all other meanings IP does not exist indeed, and this is a misleading term. But instead on arguing on these details, it seems more productive to point that there is an already existing alternative that is better for everybody.

Like it or not, 'IP' exists. By doing these kind of projects, sadly these people relinquish their rights. They could be 1) fighting for change in these laws, 2) investing in free culture/software. Sadly, almost all of them don't. They are happy to operate in that grey space as long as it is tolerated, but they should know that they are on borrowed time. Big companies striking with absurd power at fan projects should help drive the point home, and should be the occasion to advocate for open standards.

I think civil disobedience is a form of protest. As you say, it helps drive the point home. If "illegal" video game tournaments are widely attended and accepted as societal good, or Nintendo lawyers anger enough people, the activism and legislation you hope for will follow naturally.

I would be afraid this approach would rather reinforce the status quo: the needle would slightly move so that people find themselves comfortable being serfs again, rather than encourage to move towards freedom.