11–20 of 62 posts
I think this is a sticky issue that continues to this day. The scope of Nintendo’s IP should include the delicate game balance of jump distance etc that makes the game what it is. On the other hand the creation of these other products is sort of ‘complementary’ to Nintendo’s products in the same way phone cases complement iPhones.
This might be the earliest case of corporations abusing (electronic) copyright laws to influence competition I know of. Clearly, there is no real basis to claim that a memory poker infringes Nintendo's copyright, but Nintendo successfully lobbied against it anyway.
Not successfully at the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nin... . (Perhaps successfully later on with the DMCA.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yikes, broken link. This one should be fixed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nin... (Hint: if the last character is not alphanumeric, put a # (a blank URL fragment) to work around HN's autodetection of punctuation) (Edit: I don't recommend percent-encoding URLs, mainly because certain web servers react differently to percent-encoded URL, like https://www.google.com/search?q=world+dog and htt…
> Hint: if the last character is not alphanumeric, put a # (a blank URL fragment) to work around HN's autodetection of punctuation I usually use URL encoding (aka percent encoding) [0] in this case but that’s a pretty neat trick and certainly more convenient than for example pasting the URL into https://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/dencoder/ and pressing the encode button and copying the encoded URL. [0]: https://en.wikip…
I think this is a sticky issue that continues to this day. The scope of Nintendo’s IP should include the delicate game balance of jump distance etc that makes the game what it is. On the other hand the creation of these other products is sort of ‘complementary’ to Nintendo’s products in the same way phone cases complement iPhones.
Under what basis? If we take the theory that nintendo's IP includes such things, that's an argument that people shouldnt be able to use those elements in a competing game. However making a cheat cartridge is not like that. Copyright is after all about restricting the right to make copies. Its not a catchall monopoly that allows the owner to dictate how to use the product that has been sold to them. Companies sometime…
The thing is, 30 years ago a Game Genie was just a way to get some fun out of old cartridges, or blast through an unfair game. Nowadays most games have some kind of an online component, if they're not entirely multiplayer. Hell, most players of online multiplayer games would love to see the cheaters plaguing their games go to jail. Effectively, not only have the conditions of the market changed so much as to render the Galoob precedent unusable, it also makes it kind of anti-consumer, at least in the context of online multiplayer.
Microtransactions also ruin the Galoob precedent - obviously if people are selling you what are effectively cheats, then your cheat device is usurping the market. I bet you if Nintendo had found a way to charge you a quarter every time Mario lost a life, the court would have ruled the other way.
(Blizzard is also responsible for using the DMCA to ban server emulators, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bnetd#Blizzard_takedown_demand... . They argued that a server emulator that doesn't check CD Keys is a circumvention tool, and won. Hell, I'm pretty sure this is THE reason why the DMCA exception for old game servers explicitly only covers situations in which the developer released an authorized server program, such as Valve games or Java Minecraft.)
Back when BP spilt oil, people refused to buy their gas. Where is that outrage for these companies anti consumer practices?
Towards the end of the second video, 3:50-ish they mention how Nintendo is being anti-competitive by fully controlling what (and how) software can run on their systems, and their reasoning is "quality control". Sounds familiar?
I think this is a sticky issue that continues to this day. The scope of Nintendo’s IP should include the delicate game balance of jump distance etc that makes the game what it is. On the other hand the creation of these other products is sort of ‘complementary’ to Nintendo’s products in the same way phone cases complement iPhones.
So if my record player plays a record at the wrong RPM it's breaking the artist's IP ? If I modify my honda civic with a body kit I'm breaking IP? If I put a sticker over the apple logo on my MBP I'm infringing on their design? to me the modification of bits in MY Nintendo from MY Cartridge should be none of their business.
The things you describe are legitimately derivative works in the scope of copyright's worldview.
The issue is that viewing every single idea or concept as "property" with an owner and a price tag attached is a fundamentally broken model.
Seems like nintendo should have been happy, the game genie probably led to a bunch of snes sales due to its console killing tendencies(possibly just a myth...but I swear...that thing caused trouble on my nes.) and you literally needed a nes and games to use it.
I get the philosophy behind making games unfun and such, I personally would rather beat a game genuinely than cheat, but seems kinda hypocritical from a company that prides itself in making games where players can enjoy themselves in their own way.
There's a Miyamoto interview on the front page currently espousing exactly such things. Nintendo does many things I personally find counterintuitive and even counterproductive. Especially in regards to things like this. I also owned a few of those black 'non-licensed' nes cartridges that exist for similar reasons.
Nintendo makes some damn good games and I understand the Disney-esque protection over their ip, but some of the things they do just seem like it would be better off if they just let things be.
Towards the end of the second video, 3:50-ish they mention how Nintendo is being anti-competitive by fully controlling what (and how) software can run on their systems, and their reasoning is "quality control". Sounds familiar?