You have entered the comedy area.
Pokemon has a worse copyright gatekeeping than Mario. I think it's tied to how popular the series is and Mario and Pokemon are Nintendo's top two most popular series.
I can't claim to know about Dreams' future plans, but I imagine that announcement of paid user-created content is enough for a need of action to be taken, since there might be an option to convert the current ones to be paid. I imagine that in most user-content games they are free, so it's not an issue for them to be taken down. Or maybe the nature of Dreams, a game creator, made it a more justified target.I don't get it. Games like Garry's Mod and Spore (and Spore: Galactic Adventures) have Mario's likeness and Mario-themed maps with a 1:1 accuracy running rampant around all the time, yet their content doesn't get taken down. Mods like this have existed since forever in plenty of 3rd party games. It's only now, in Dreams, that it's apparently become an issue, and Nintendo exercising this amount of control over other people's content in a 3rd party game all about user-created content strongly irritate me.
I know that Dreams does want to create paid user-created content and I'd imagine that would be highly problematic but the thing is, Nintendo is taking down these creations prior to those even being implemented.
Actually, that's a very common misconception. You can lose a trademark by not enforcing it, but copyright is not trademark. Copyright cannot be lost, and only expires after 75 years.If they don't enforce their copyright then they risk potentially losing the claim.
They are required by law to do stuff like this.
for stuff that's published by a corporation. Interestingly I think I read something once which stated that loopholes etc. which means that it may be only 50 years, maybe even only 25 years, in which case games such as SMB3 and by next year SM64 even would have expired. Most likely however, it's 75, so we'd have to wait another 43/51 years respectively before the copyright's over.75 years.
And Mario is trademarked, thus they are enforcing it.Actually, that's a very common misconception. You can lose a trademark by not enforcing it, but copyright is not trademark. Copyright cannot be lost, and only expires after 75 years.
Well he's dressed like one.On a different note it always amuses me how people keep thinking Mr L is a thief. Shows that none of then know about the various Tatsunoko anime series.
Yeah, that was painful. They at least had the courtesy to take the thing down when it's already completed mostly, so the files are still around.Remember when Nintendo waited 10 years to take down a fan remake of Metroid II: Return of Samus made entirely from the ground up with only using Game Maker all because they had their uglier, less fun Metroid II remake in the works themselves?
Pepperidge farm remembers.
Let's not forget the Brawl mod Legacy XP either, which recently disbanded. Listen, I know there's no proof Nintendo directly approached them but if memory serves Project M got into a similar situation close to the end of its life that totally wasn't a C&D until it was.
It's probably because there's a lot more Mario-themed fangames. There's a hub on creating Mario fangames, MFGG, and I don't think there's ones as quite as big. Other fan games do get taken down, not just Mario, but they have to get enough attention for Nintendo to start throwing a hissy fit. Other Nintendo-themed fangames do get taken down, we just had Pokemon Zeta and AM2R.Something I noticed tho is that it's mostly Mario getting this treatment. I've almost never seen a non-Mario Nintendo-themed fangame getting taken down. It's like they care less about copyright all of a sudden if it's something like idk, Zelda.
Like, the Fire Emblem community hosts an E3 for fangames the community makes yet it doesn't seem to attract any attention. I guess when it comes to your baby boy Mario you gotta protect him at all costs, eh?
It's freaking Nintendo. They're not going to see any dent in their profits. But clearly a Brawl mod is poised to destroy them inside out.I mean I can totally understand wanting to protect their IPs but sheesh, almost none of these fangames getting taken down are affecting the sales of their games.
If anything it's free advertisement for the real deal.
This makes little sense as copyright infringement happens all the time. If what you're saying is true, then no one would have a claim as they have all lost them a while ago. The reality is that it's only a few companies that are ridiculously anal and petty to the point they come off as bullies using a law they believe that suits them rather than everyone else. Look at Nintendo's YouTube content creator program. It's an abuse of copyright.If they don't enforce their copyright then they risk potentially losing the claim.
They are required by law to do stuff like this.
Yeah, this is true, but SEGA's own record is stupidly spotty. I recall one they've enforced IP protection on YouTube to a ridiculous degree. Sega isn't immune to this sort of behavior. I get that, yeah, probably bootleg merch shouldn't be sold, but I wouldn't group fangames as such.Many people cite SEGA's handling of Sonic to be a highlight because fan games are famously allowed, and in fact, Sonic Mania's team did fan games before they became professionals (and thus more qualified to develop an official Sonic game), yet at the same time they seem to stop certain merchandise like certain shirts from being sold.
Even if they were taking away N's profit, it'll have to affect them to a significant degree for me to care. It's a giant multinational multibillion corporation who has cemented major parts of pop culture. Who cares what a fangame or mod or bootleg does to them.imo copyright should mean "if it's clearly taking away n's profit its bad" not "if it has any kind of mario likeness and isnt explicitly liscened by n its bad even if its essentially free advertising"
We're effectively powerless. We can't do any change really aside from voting (but even that's a shot in the dark a lot of times because of our own screwed up electorate system). Nintendo has money to get lawyers to try to write laws that suit them and hurt everyone else (Lewis Galoob court case). Best we can do is condemn what they do rather than defend what they're doing, and talk about how copyright laws, how they're structured, is pure poison for society in most cases and serves only very narrow and powerful interest.Would still be more productive than getting mad at one of many companies that do it.
Yeah that's all most of us want to do. We just want to have our own take on their goddamn IPs.Sucks to want to make fangames about popular Nintendo franchises, doesn't it.
Speaking of Mr. L, I love how Shadoo uses his silhouette instead of Luigi's when you battle him in the Pit of 100 Trials. Guess the forgot to switch out the sprites when editing them.
Speaking of the Pit of 100 Trials, piss right off with making me do it twice.
I meant to say significantly - I agree with youEven if they were taking away N's profit, it'll have to affect them to a significant degree for me to care. It's a giant multinational multibillion corporation who has cemented major parts of pop culture. Who cares what a fangame or mod or bootleg does to them.