Theft by Creativity
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I figure it's a tad more nuanced. Copyright owners have to report violations to maintain their IP, sure, but what *constitutes* a violation is up for debate and is subjective.
Nintendo took one look at AM2R and jumped the gun. They took one look at the fan-made Pokemon game and jumped the gun. On the other hand, Valve took a look at Black Mesa and realized there really wasn't any way to misconstrue Black Mesa as being Half-Life. There's no violation to report, only what you can objectively call an homage.
Nintendo does legally need to protect its IP, but it could really stand to hire a legal team that can tell the difference between fans putting together a tribute and, say, some ROM hacker using Nintendo's assets in one of the bootleg market's ubiquitous five-berjillion-games-in-one knockoff consoles. I've heard ridiculous theories involving Nintendo actually looking for a payoff - but how is a lone bedroom programmer going to shit out however million dollars you think Nintendo might want?
Nintendo isn't a slavering wolf out of a Tex Avery cartoon, it's just being more than a tad paranoid about copyright law.
Nintendo took one look at AM2R and jumped the gun. They took one look at the fan-made Pokemon game and jumped the gun. On the other hand, Valve took a look at Black Mesa and realized there really wasn't any way to misconstrue Black Mesa as being Half-Life. There's no violation to report, only what you can objectively call an homage.
Nintendo does legally need to protect its IP, but it could really stand to hire a legal team that can tell the difference between fans putting together a tribute and, say, some ROM hacker using Nintendo's assets in one of the bootleg market's ubiquitous five-berjillion-games-in-one knockoff consoles. I've heard ridiculous theories involving Nintendo actually looking for a payoff - but how is a lone bedroom programmer going to shit out however million dollars you think Nintendo might want?
Nintendo isn't a slavering wolf out of a Tex Avery cartoon, it's just being more than a tad paranoid about copyright law.
Companies really shouldn't be worried about fan projects unless they are somehow illegal outside of copyright law or are being sold, and if they're going to be sold they could always just try and arrange some royalty payments rather than shut them down.
The thing that is really baffling about these sorts of things is that if the company doesn't want to do anything with the IPs themselves, why not license them out to devs/creators that want to do something with them? They could them make money off of zero effort on their own part.
It could just be that Pokemon and Metroid are still franchises that Nintendo is making games for, so protecting their IP means they don't have third party stuff in competition, while Valve has long ago stopped giving a shit about Half-Life.
Hey, I happen to like Emilio's take on the franchise! City 17 was immersion-breakingly bereft of goats, or cloven-hooved quadrupeds of ANY kind!
(But seriously, while I know that US copyright law is a sad, stinky swamp of legal uncertainty, there's a line between "protecting your IP" and "letting your lawyers sharpen their teeth on honest fan works".)
(But seriously, while I know that US copyright law is a sad, stinky swamp of legal uncertainty, there's a line between "protecting your IP" and "letting your lawyers sharpen their teeth on honest fan works".)
Here?s the biggest difference between Valve and Nintendo. Nintendo makes and sells games, therefore they have a legal right and obligation to protect their work, even if it?s stupid and detrimental to themselves. Valve?s a store, they don?t make and sell games.
Also there?s a difference in business philosophy between Nintendo and Valve. Nintendo?s what you?d call rigid corporate philosophy, whereas Valve is a loose and laid back philosophy that doesn?t believe in structure (Explains why they have no PR/community management group).
And then we have to have an honest discussion on what Fair Use is. It?s a defense statement, which means that it must go in front of a judge and the judge declares the product is Fair Use or not. So for all the products that were taken down? They?re not Fair Use until a judge says they are.
Also there?s a difference in business philosophy between Nintendo and Valve. Nintendo?s what you?d call rigid corporate philosophy, whereas Valve is a loose and laid back philosophy that doesn?t believe in structure (Explains why they have no PR/community management group).
And then we have to have an honest discussion on what Fair Use is. It?s a defense statement, which means that it must go in front of a judge and the judge declares the product is Fair Use or not. So for all the products that were taken down? They?re not Fair Use until a judge says they are.
Are copyright laws the same by the country? Because I think in countries like China are more liberal and in Japan is more strict. I am still wrapping my head about what YouTube alone considers fair, let alone everything else in the internet. This could be fixed if it was the American Nintendo branch doing the penalties, they can and should abide by the laws we know for a fact as fair use, but Nintendo [of Japan] doesn't appear to give them any power, at least compared to Nintendo of Europe. And considering whatever system that takes down YouTube videos is in possession of Nintendo in the laws of Japan, we need the Rosetta stone more than ever to translate "You've done f*cked up" to Japan. I can only hope YouTubers like MatPat, iJustine or Jirard Khalil reach Nintendo's internal staff to call them out, because considering the Mario Maker videos that were still up by last year, baby steps are being done.IamLEAM1983 said:
As a company that's big on being family-friendly, there's another really good reason for Nintendo to shoot first and ask questions later. How can a company be certain that the entire fan project follows the content guidelines people expect of them? Not just in the playable game, but in every line of code. I'm thinking right now of something like http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112870-Steam-User-Finds-Misogynistic-Joke-Buried-in-Dead-Island-Code-UPDATED. When you see a Pokemon fangame you assume it will have not just the gameplay, but also the tone of the established franchise. But that's not something Nintendo is in a position to assume. Maybe if they were given the chance to approve the game and its content beforehand (which they would never do, admittedly).IamLEAM1983 said:
Pokemon Go is reportedly hitting 100 million downloads, which is more than 25 million more downloads than the number of 3DS and Wii U's sold to date. That's a lot of people getting into Pokemon that could easily be confused into thinking that Pokemon Uranium is a new Nintendo game (I'm not talking about gamers that come to sites like this, I mean the masses at large that didn't even understand the Wii U was a separate console). I mean, people don't even understand that Niantic is the developer of Pokemon Go. Pokemon Uranium was downloaded 1.5 million times. Just a single off-color joke or bit of foul language, even just lurking in the game's coding, could damage their reputation/brand identity and generate undesirable headlines.
Also, as a business I'd have to imagine they don't want free Metroid and Pokemon games coming out just a few months before they launch their own $40 retail titles. I bet that's why the Mother 3 translation is still up to this day - it's not a brand with new games actively coming out this year. Also, am2r represents a free upgrade to one game they are currently selling online, Metroid 2, using the art assets from another game they are currently selling, Zero Mission. Why would anybody pay money for the virtual console version of Metroid 2 after the release of am2r?
It's not like Nintendo is the good guy here, but I'd be a lot more irate if these fangames weren't using art assets from games currently being sold digitally, weren't based directly on games still being sold, weren't using the official names of the existing franchises, and weren't from franchises being currently developed for. Even discounting the 'protect your trademark' arguments, that's a lot to expect a corporation to ignore.
In regards to the half life remake. I'm not so sure. I mean years later and we still have the last third of the game missing. It's like there's some force preventing them from doing a complete remake.
I've often wondered why these companies don't hire the developers of these fan-projects to turn said projects into official releases that they can then profit off of. That would make much more business and PR sense to me.
The question is why do people still keep wasting energy on these projects. Pokemon Uranium and Metroid are just the latest in a LONG list of these incidents. You'd think people will learn by now. I'm not saying it's either right or wrong. But come on, why waste energy and effort into something that will SURELY and DEFINITELY be taken down.
About pokemon uranium though, I could think of several reasons why they don't want it to exist though. But my guess is they're afraid it will eat into the sales of the ones coming out.
About pokemon uranium though, I could think of several reasons why they don't want it to exist though. But my guess is they're afraid it will eat into the sales of the ones coming out.
Ah, but that would be the sensible, logical choice, and that's not the world we live in.canadamus_prime said:
I don't understand why these fan teams have to use official names and likenesses in the first place. Just do something original looking with a different name but the same mechanics/design etc.
That's what the Darksiders guys did and those games are fantastic. Hell Batman Arkham Asylum pulls very heavily from metroid. Why does it HAVE to be mario, why does it HAVE to be samus? etc. It really really doesn't.
That's what the Darksiders guys did and those games are fantastic. Hell Batman Arkham Asylum pulls very heavily from metroid. Why does it HAVE to be mario, why does it HAVE to be samus? etc. It really really doesn't.
They couldn't have predicted the hype that would surround them and call the attention of the broken copyright system, Metroid one was during a Metroid drought in its anniversary year and Pok?mon one was about the 8-9 years of work to get where it is now. News sites were actually reporting on them, fan projects are not supposed to go under any kind of spotlight or else this happens.List said:
I am afraid of the next one coming up: Mother 4, a fan-made sequel to Mother 3 built from the ground up, to which it seems the creators in Japan are aware of, but not the businessmen. If the Earthbound Halloween Hack had been taken down, maybe there would be no Undertale.
The simple answer is sitting right there in there in your first paragraph. They're fan groups. Simple as that. They simply want to use a game's characters, settings and playstyle they love so much and update it or infuse it with a new idea. The people that do this are probably just as interested in the characters as they are about the game's mechanics themselves. It happens all the time in pretty much any creative work that people are interested in. Fan Art, fan comics, fan fiction, short films, machinima, parodies. It kinda strikes me as a self-defeating question cuz the answer's pretty obvious. Monty Oum didn't HAVE to make a video starring ripped models of Dead or Alive and Final Fantasy characters duking it out... but he did anyway, cuz Monty was a giant weeb and that shit's awesome.LazyAza said:
Legally, well, the results of pretty much every anticipated fanwork speaks for itself, but generally there's nothing really wrong with it. And heck, most companies are probably even pretty damn aware of the latter and either can't do much about the actions they need to take or don't give a shit.