Theft by Creativity
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I imagine the fact that there hasn't been a decent Metriod game in a decade probably has something to do with it. Since Nintendo doesn't seem to care about this particular IP, I'm not surprised some fans took it into the their hands.List said:
Kind of like the Mother series, with the English translation of 3 and the various fangames.
*SIGH*
As per usual, it's more nuanced and, generally, the Great Wall of China of text if you don't want to attempt to simplify things and miss something important. I'm also quite sure that very, very Japanese corps like Nintendo (or Sega) still operate like a centralistic, totalitarian dictatorship, which could further help explain their hard stances on anything that might involve crazy Westerners, out of (justifiable) fear of missing something or something getting lost in translation.
Excerpt:
1. How can trademark rights be lost?
Rights in a trademark can be lost through the action or inaction of the trademark?s owner. The most common way to lose rights in a mark is to stop using the mark with no intention to use it again. This is called "abandonment."
However, trademark rights can also be lost unintentionally. For example, in some countries, it is possible to lose rights in a mark by allowing third parties to use the mark without controlling how it is used. This can include failing to control the nature and quality of the goods and/or services offered under the mark by the third party. Such failure to control often is referred to as "naked licensing." Rights may also be lost if the trademark owner or third parties use the mark improperly, so that it ceases to indicate the source of goods or services and becomes a generic term. For example, escalator and cellophane originally were trademarks in the United States but, as a result of improper use, eventually they became generic names of the products for which they had been used as brands. The determination of whether a mark has become generic can vary from country to country; such is the case with aspirin, which is a generic term in the United States but a protectable trademark in Canada and Germany.
It doesn't really matter if Nintendo goes about it the 'right' way or the 'wrong' way. Changing the system is a very slow process and generally best regarded as impossible for anyone running a business right now, no matter if your very own pride of hungry, hungry lawyers is on standby 24/7 or not. My take is Nintendo (and others) like to err on the side of caution, while the corporate capitalist hippie hacks over at Valve know their shit inside out and feel perfectly safe letting one slip and letting one rip without cracking a sweat.
AFAIK Nintendo keeps renewing the trademark for METROID PRIME specifically, while also maintaining at least two other instances of the METROID brand.
Shit reads like a telephone book, so here's a dirty little spoiler as an example:
The METROID trademark is filed in the category of Computer & Software Products & Electrical & Scientific Products . The description provided to the USPTO for METROID is Compact discs, computer game cartridges, optical discs, memory cards and electronic storage media featuring entertainment, educational and informational content, educational instruction, entertainment instruction and informational instruction, all pertaining to games; computer game cartridges; computer game discs; computer game memory cards; computer game programs; computer game software; electronic video game cartridges; electronic video game discs; electronic game memory cards; electronic game programs; electronic game software; interactive video game cartridges; interactive game memory cards; interactive game programs; interactive game software; interactive electronic game discs; interactive electronic game programs; interactive electronic game software; interactive video game discs; interactive video game memory cards; interactive video game programs; interactive video game software; video game cartridges; video game discs; video game memory cards; video game programs; video game software; downloadable multimedia files, namely, games, downloadable computer game programs, downloadable computer game software; downloadable electronic game programs; downloadable electronic game software; downloadable interactive electronic game programs; downloadable interactive game software; downloadable video game programs, downloadable video game software.
That's how one has to cover one's asses (and assets) these days. Fun, innit?
As per usual, it's more nuanced and, generally, the Great Wall of China of text if you don't want to attempt to simplify things and miss something important. I'm also quite sure that very, very Japanese corps like Nintendo (or Sega) still operate like a centralistic, totalitarian dictatorship, which could further help explain their hard stances on anything that might involve crazy Westerners, out of (justifiable) fear of missing something or something getting lost in translation.
Excerpt:
1. How can trademark rights be lost?
Rights in a trademark can be lost through the action or inaction of the trademark?s owner. The most common way to lose rights in a mark is to stop using the mark with no intention to use it again. This is called "abandonment."
However, trademark rights can also be lost unintentionally. For example, in some countries, it is possible to lose rights in a mark by allowing third parties to use the mark without controlling how it is used. This can include failing to control the nature and quality of the goods and/or services offered under the mark by the third party. Such failure to control often is referred to as "naked licensing." Rights may also be lost if the trademark owner or third parties use the mark improperly, so that it ceases to indicate the source of goods or services and becomes a generic term. For example, escalator and cellophane originally were trademarks in the United States but, as a result of improper use, eventually they became generic names of the products for which they had been used as brands. The determination of whether a mark has become generic can vary from country to country; such is the case with aspirin, which is a generic term in the United States but a protectable trademark in Canada and Germany.
It doesn't really matter if Nintendo goes about it the 'right' way or the 'wrong' way. Changing the system is a very slow process and generally best regarded as impossible for anyone running a business right now, no matter if your very own pride of hungry, hungry lawyers is on standby 24/7 or not. My take is Nintendo (and others) like to err on the side of caution, while the corporate capitalist hippie hacks over at Valve know their shit inside out and feel perfectly safe letting one slip and letting one rip without cracking a sweat.
That's actually just one of the most dangerous situations. The licensing out bit could (probably) be made to work out perfectly fine, but that would require Nintendo to trust you to absolutely not include any, say, titty or balls easter eggs and generally live up to their standards, which, in their eyes, you probably will never do anyway when they just caught you red-handed, grabbing their IP. In general, I don't feel like they're up to take any risks, though.Bilious Green said:
AFAIK Nintendo keeps renewing the trademark for METROID PRIME specifically, while also maintaining at least two other instances of the METROID brand.
Shit reads like a telephone book, so here's a dirty little spoiler as an example:
The METROID trademark is filed in the category of Computer & Software Products & Electrical & Scientific Products . The description provided to the USPTO for METROID is Compact discs, computer game cartridges, optical discs, memory cards and electronic storage media featuring entertainment, educational and informational content, educational instruction, entertainment instruction and informational instruction, all pertaining to games; computer game cartridges; computer game discs; computer game memory cards; computer game programs; computer game software; electronic video game cartridges; electronic video game discs; electronic game memory cards; electronic game programs; electronic game software; interactive video game cartridges; interactive game memory cards; interactive game programs; interactive game software; interactive electronic game discs; interactive electronic game programs; interactive electronic game software; interactive video game discs; interactive video game memory cards; interactive video game programs; interactive video game software; video game cartridges; video game discs; video game memory cards; video game programs; video game software; downloadable multimedia files, namely, games, downloadable computer game programs, downloadable computer game software; downloadable electronic game programs; downloadable electronic game software; downloadable interactive electronic game programs; downloadable interactive game software; downloadable video game programs, downloadable video game software.
That's how one has to cover one's asses (and assets) these days. Fun, innit?
What? No, Steam is the store, Valve is the company that manages Steam and makes games. How the hell did you come to the conclusion that Valve doesn't make games?InsanityRequiem said:
OT:
It's usually more complicated than what we normies have knowledge of.
Naturally, however since these companies are into profit so much you'd think they were being run by the Ferengi from Star Trek, they'd take any opportunity to make a profit. Of course I imagine the concept of spending money to make money is also a concept that's lost on them.Darth_Payn said:
Valve have made ~20 games, and two SDKs.InsanityRequiem said:
They very much do make and sell games.
It's because the companies are run by a bunch of detached crotchety old men (not necessarily literally) that likely haven't actually developed a game themselves in years, if ever. All these people have been so high up for so long that all they ever see is a bunch of numbers and have long since stopped giving a damn about what the fans want if any of them ever did. Their only concern is with holding their IPs in their claws and never letting go no matter how much more sense it would make to loosen their iron grip, just because they don't want anyone else doing anything with it. It's the adult version of this:canadamus_prime said:
It's these people who pushed for these draconian laws to come into being in the first place and the ones who could successfully push to have them removed now, but then they would have absolutely NOTHING to justify their behavior, that need to justification is the sole reason these laws exist and will continue to.
That's the thing though. If all they care about is profit and numbers then they're missing out on the opportunity to profit off of these fan projects.immortalfrieza said:
Because if they allow that to happen, and the game is better, less buggy, and fitted with more content than its official counterpart at release, then shareholders will look unfavorably on the company because some hack in a basement is better than a professional team of programmers and marketers.canadamus_prime said:
And when word of mouth gets out that a fan group made this awesome game, the group can start making their own games with their own IP and fans will follow them; and one purchase of your competition is one less purchase for you.
You're forgetting these companies' institutionalized arrogance. Nintendo is *Nintendo*, and only Nintendo does Nintendo. The sudden willingness to cut some slack to a fan who coded a mobile engine for a Sonic iOS app is nothing if a sign of sheer desperation. The brand is floundering, it's an asset Nintendo probably refuses to consider parting with, and at the same time it's sunken so low as to be of ancillary value. That gets you the unusual miracle story of Sonic Team bringing in members of the fan community. Shamefully - at least for them - they've lost touch with the formula, and need outside help to recapture it.canadamus_prime said:
The thing is they don't CARE about the profits these fan games could give them, what they care about is keeping a stranglehold on their IPs for as long as possible, simply to keep others from making anything out of it. This is because anyone permitted to make something from their IPs sets precedent for ANYONE to be able to in the future. Copyright and IP law hasn't been about protecting the rights of creators in decades if it ever was, it's about having an excuse to act like dicks to their consumers and justification for suing each other into the ground.canadamus_prime said:
The mast majority of IPs that haven't already should have entered the public domain years or even decades ago anyway.
You're not getting what I'm saying. They could turn that humble fan project into an official Nintendo (or insert major AAA company here) product. Officially stamp their brand on it, hire the people making it, and profit from the results.IamLEAM1983 said:
That is incredibly short sighted and stupid.immortalfrieza said:
Of course it's short sighted and stupid, it's never been about making sense or even simply about making money, it's about CONTROL. It's about making sure they have the power to screw over their customers and they don't have any other options but to just take it, and to make frivolous nonsensical lawsuits over supposed infringement of their "rights" to something, just so they can make millions off of settlement or even stealing the IPs of other companies right out from under them, all while crushing the little up and comers like these fans before they can even get started. Like all monopolies it's about making sure THEY have sole control over the production of these IPs and copyrights for as long as possible.canadamus_prime said:
Ah, the sunny years of Epic running websites that showcased other people's work with the Unreal editor, actively linking to sites devoted to Single Player campaigns made in the Unreal engine, and even running "Make Something Unreal" contests. There were even people like Hourences who turned their work into a resume item and got hired in the industry.canadamus_prime said:
Those were some good times in the pre-Gears of War days.
You're also not getting me. Or rather, you're not getting the concept of a Japanese company's image. Public face is everything to Nintendo, as it is with Sega and Sony. You're assuming they'd be capable of considering the benefits of altruism, and I'm telling you they won't. They won't, because doing otherwise would be an admission of failure.canadamus_prime said:
This is utterly false and untrue.IamLEAM1983 said:
Dilution is an element in trademark law, not copyright.
Intellectual Property is a catch all term for copyright, trademark, and patent law. But, they are not the synonymous. It's like saying, "well cats are cold blooded, because snakes are cold blooded, and their all animals, right?" Copyright Law and Trademark law are completely different animals with different functions and purposes. Copyright is, "I made this, it's mine, you can't make a duplicate and sell that as yours." Trademark is, "I'm selling stuff, and this is how I label my products so you know they came from me, you can't use that label and sell your stuff while pretending to be me."
You cannot lose your copyright due to not enforcing it. In fact, it's really hard to lose your trademark from non-enforcement. It's theoretically possible, and has happened, but it's vanishingly rare.