SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the shooting-yourself-in-the-foot dept.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/12/nintendo-sends-cease-and-desist-notice-to-pokemon-rom-hacker/
A fan-made Pokémon ROM hack in the works for eight years was set to launch this Sunday. But a letter sent by Nintendo's Australian law firm on Wednesday has stopped those plans in their tracks.
According to Adam "Koolboyman" Vierra, developer of the fan-made Pokémon Prism project, Nintendo's Australian law firm sent him a cease-and-desist letter, which he uploaded to Google Drive with identifying information redacted. (American representatives for Nintendo were not able to confirm the letter's authenticity as of press time.) The request alleges that Koolboyman's project, which alters the source ROM of the 1999 game Pokémon Gold to create an entirely new adventure, violates multiple Australian laws.
[...] Pokémon Prism is different because it's a "ROM hack"—meaning, it's not a full game. Rather, Prism is a small patch file that is worthless without the original ROM file (which can either be legally dumped from a cartridge or maybe-not-so-legally downloaded from the Internet). Computer gaming fans would describe this kind of release as a "mod." Mods do a similar thing: they take existing, paid-for game engines and assets, and they apply a patch file that remixes existing content and adds new twists.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Francis on Sunday December 25 2016, @08:55PM
Ideally folks should look at the companies that own the rights and their track record before wasting time on these things. Then get permission.
Otherwise, you're risking a lot of wasted time if they decide to object and they'll probably win in court.
Now if it's a small mod, that's probably not necessary.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 25 2016, @09:27PM
Better yet, shun the existing overlords. If your material is any good it will stand on its own. And perhaps net you some money as well.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Pino P on Sunday December 25 2016, @09:51PM
Then get permission.
How is that possible? Companies like Nintendo refuse to work with individuals. From Corporate FAQ [nintendo.com]:
(Score: 1) by Francis on Sunday December 25 2016, @10:13PM
Some companies don't grant permission for various reasons, so barring a change in the law, you're risking a lot of wasted time and effort on a mod that's for personal use only.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Pino P on Sunday December 25 2016, @10:23PM
So I guess if Nintendo is unwilling to allow any legitimate outlet for its fans' creativity, the solution is to stop being a fan of Nintendo IP. But how can one abstain from such companies' products without looking like That Guy who reminds people he doesn't own a TV ( The Onion [theonion.com])?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 27 2016, @02:45PM
But how can one abstain from such companies' products without looking like That Guy who reminds people he doesn't own a TV
You don't. At this point, the companies are consolidating their stranglehold and the ordinary individual is not going to notice or care until something happens to something they directly care about. The law needs to change, badly, because as-is copyright law is draconian, an abomination of what it was intended to do, and rapidly becoming outright dangerous, and this is but one aspect of a much larger, deeper and more dangerous problem.
Chances are, this is not going to happen until it's too late and some lives are ruined, or worse. Total monopoly for all eternity over particular expressions of ideas (e.g. video games) was NOT what copyright was intended for, contrary to the belief of extremely self-interested individuals who are making a buck off of that system (who usually characterize attempts to undo it as asking them to work for free, or some other related tripe that usually devolves into a massive straw man-centric ad hominum attack on whoever is proposing it).
The Right To Read [gnu.org] was written by Richard Stallman regarding this sort of thing taken to its logical extreme and the result thereof. I do not agree with a lot of Stallman's assertions, but here I think he's right. Copyright law is a massive mess that is slowly handing control of just about anything involving information to corporations. And I don't think anything is going to be done until it's too late.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 26 2016, @02:54AM
so barring a change in the law, you're risking a lot of wasted time and effort on a mod that's for personal use only
How is the time wasted? The mod still exists, and can be shared openly. Although the law may forbid distribution, it does not actually prevent distribution.
It's not like these mods are sold for profit as a business.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Monday December 26 2016, @05:30AM
Sigh, isn't it obvious? Most ways of sharing require that you not share materials that infringe ip rights.
Then there's the resulting lawsuits.
So, yes, the work is wasted in cases where the rightsholder objects.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday December 26 2016, @09:39AM
Well, there's a solution: Get filthy rich, and then buy the rights for a sum that the current rights holder will not be able to resist.
Working out the details of this plan is left as exercise to the reader. ;-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 26 2016, @12:38PM
Profit is irrelevant. You are guilty of copyright infringement and trademark violation, perhaps have also violated business secrets.
But don't worry, the first one only lasts at least 70 years after the artist's death and the two others go on forever and ever and ever...
You. Are. Going. Down. HARD.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 26 2016, @12:13PM
It is a "derivative work" and may or may not be legal in your local jurisdiction.
Disclaimer: Nothing is legal in Autraliar if a corporation is invoived.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Monday December 26 2016, @06:58PM
Just determining if it's legal can cost hundreds of dollars. And even if it is a legal derivative work, you're still looking at the possibility of a trial if they don't back down.
But, in this case, they've likely violated Nintendo's trademark, which does require a response or Nintendo could lose it.