11–20 of 29 posts
This is a technically true story, but why don’t they report the Garry Mod has issued false DCMA notices too? It really seems like Engadget hates Nintendo.
What kind of IP has "a physics-based sandbox game" (quote Wikipedia) that warrants DCMA notices? I mean to send out their own DCMA notices. Not receiving them.
Serious question: why aren't false DMCA claims prosecutable as fraud? The elements are there - a knowingly false representation, detrimental reliance, and materiality.
Nintendo seems to go through these litigious cycles every once in a while. I wonder if this is them asserting their IP as part of a larger strategy to focus attention on an upcoming system launch?
Serious question: why aren't false DMCA claims prosecutable as fraud? The elements are there - a knowingly false representation, detrimental reliance, and materiality.
Garry has now clarified that the takedowns were in fact issued by Nintendo, contrary to earlier reports. https://twitter.com/garrynewman/status/1783501547361411494
To which:
A. Why would he have lied?
B. This has had millions of views across all platforms. If it wasn’t real, don’t you think Nintendo would be calling up and telling him that it was fake?
This is a technically true story, but why don’t they report the Garry Mod has issued false DCMA notices too? It really seems like Engadget hates Nintendo.
What kind of IP has "a physics-based sandbox game" (quote Wikipedia) that warrants DCMA notices? I mean to send out their own DCMA notices. Not receiving them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Garry has now clarified that the takedowns were in fact issued by Nintendo, contrary to earlier reports. https://twitter.com/garrynewman/status/1783501547361411494
Hilariously, there are people there yelling it can’t be true. To which: A. Why would he have lied? B. This has had millions of views across all platforms. If it wasn’t real, don’t you think Nintendo would be calling up and telling him that it was fake?
A: Its Garry. He used to go onto community servers and grief cause hes a troll and might find it funny to fan the flames.
B: If people think they are doing it anyways they might as well actually start pressing claims.
That seems rather slow reaction time... Clearly they have not had many people actually looking around the Internet to find too many of these things always...
Nintendo seems to go through these litigious cycles every once in a while. I wonder if this is them asserting their IP as part of a larger strategy to focus attention on an upcoming system launch?
They have only recently started allowing their IP to be used for non-game products, like the recent Mario movies. My guess is that they are being litigious again because they want to avoid any confusion between sponsored and non-sponsored products.
- Nintendo is the most reliant on their own IP for sales
- Nintendo does not have a corporate giant to absorb any misfires
- Nintendo is the smallest gaming giant, at half the value of Sony, and less than a tenth the value of Microsoft
- Nintendo has the greatest dependency on maintaining an image of being family-friendly. Shock content wouldn’t muster a single headline for a Microsoft IP, but could be national news if it involves Yoshi and causes suicidal thoughts in a 6 year old
All of this adds up to a more strict attitude.