Atari 2600 game Princess Rescue pulled from Atariage store

[7th lutz]

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/215885-atariage-summer-homebrew-releases/?p=2827743

What happened was Atariage store was told to stop selling the game.

[Bojay1997]

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/215885-atariage-summer-homebrew-releases/?p=2827743

What happened was Atariage store was told to stop selling the game.

It sounds like Nintendo hit AtariAge and the programmer with a cease and desist letter. Not super surprised given that the game uses the Super Mario music note for note to the extent the 2600 can reproduce it. Nintendo seems to be overly aggressive on cracking down on stuff like this from the use of Super Smash Bros. at the EVO tournament to its takedown of fan videos and playthroughs. Definitely not a fan friendly company by any stretch.

[Akito01]

It's a bummer, but not unsurprising. I hope this doesn't affect the version of Sonic he's been working on, or AtariAge's willingness to carry a physical cart of it.

I'm glad I got a physical copy of Princess Rescue. I hesitate to wonder what it is worth now.

[bigbacon]

so the guy should just change the music. He should have know better in the first place.

[A Black Falcon]

Yeah, releasing a game with graphics and music blatantly ripped out of Super Mario and then selling it for money was definitely asking for trouble...

[Akito01]

In fairness, and in this guy's defense, there's a virtual cottage industry in recreating classic games on the Atari, Intellivision and Coleco, and the only major issue prior to this involved Gorf of all things. I'm sure part of the reason there have few problems is that many of the old publishers and developers no longer exist . There are something like half a dozen versions of Pac Man available for sale, and even takes on Nintendo properties such as the updated versions of Donkey Kong for Intellivision. Whatever has changed recently definitely has to do with Nintendo's end of things. There are valid reasons for Nintendo wanting to protect their copyright, but it continues to create a poisonous attitude among gamers to keep going after such small fry.

[sloan]

With the history of Atari Age and the way Al Yarusso has done some people, I couldn't be happier. I only wonder how they have gotten by with infringing on Namco's IP's for so long.

[Bojay1997]

With the history of Atari Age and the way Al Yarusso has done some people, I couldn't be happier. I only wonder how they have gotten by with infringing on Namco's IP's for so long.

This is the first negative thing I have ever heard about Al and I've been a member here and at Atari Age for a very long time. Are you going to share more information about your claims or is this just a completely scurrilous attack?

[7th lutz]

I only wonder how they have gotten by with infringing on Namco's IP's for so long.

You don't know the whole deal with Namco. The fact is the programmer of the 7800 game Pac-Man Collection contacted Namco years ago around the 2005/2006 time frame. Namco didn't respond, but Namco didn't tell the programmer to stop developing the game either. That meant the programmer was given the okay to develop the game without any problem.

[7th lutz]

With the history of Atari Age and the way Al Yarusso has done some people, I couldn't be happier.
I got 2 questions for you:

1.) Were you banned banned from Atariage in the last 2 years?
2.) Were you selling homebrews on Atariage?

[Greg2600]

sloan you're WAY off base on Al, he's a pleasure to deal with, and his forum is a treasure to the community. His homebrew store is one of a kind. Only the Collectorvision Coleco guys come close.

This is a shame, and really not a surprise, given Nintendo's history. When I say that, this is of course not the first time. Their recent attack on YouTube Let's Play videos was sheer stupidity. How ridiculously lame are they to be attacking an Atari 2600 game!!! A 2600 game!!! Other publishers simply don't care. I mean, did MS sue the guy who has been selling Halo 2600?

[7th lutz]

This is the first negative thing I have ever heard about Al and I've been a member here and at Atari Age for a very long time. Are you going to share more information about your claims or is this just a completely scurrilous attack?
I can tell that there had been Members of Atariage banned for stuff in terms of selling without permission or go a step farther than that including a long term member of Atariage. There was an Atariage member that was selling hacks, and homebrews of games without permission of the author.

There was an Atariage member late last year that banned for buying homebrew games for making bootleg copies of games illegally. That person also had questionable ethics as an ebay seller also.

[7th lutz]

I mean, did MS sue the guy who has been selling Halo 2600?

There is a catch with Halo2600. Ed Fries had permission to make Halo2600 from Microsoft and that was easy for Ed to do since he was the vice president of game publishing at Microsoft during most of the Xbox's lifecyle.

What happened with Ed Fries usually doesn't happen. The fact is there was homebrew Intellivison games that never were released because game companies didn't want their ip's to turn into homebrew intellivision games such as Tetris, Pooyan, Alien, Space Invaders, Maniac Mansion, rick dangerous, sword of fargoal, nibbler, and mule as examples.

[sloan]

Not a scurrilous attack in the slightest, and not unfounded. And, no, I am in no way 'way off base'. Al's fans and cronies will defend him to the death, so I have nothing to present to those people.

Suffice it to say I know numerous individuals who were banned, not for illegal homebrews, but for just disagreeing with AA's trolling moderators and Al's cronies. Alcoholics and other miscreants who are given free reign to call people anything they want (Former Atari employees are the worst offenders). It is a tight-knit clique over there, and if you get out of line in the eyes of you know who, there is a heavy price to be paid.

Don't ask me to name names, but I stand by my claims completely.

[Bojay1997]

Not a scurrilous attack in the slightest, and not unfounded. And, no, I am in no way 'way off base'. Al's fans and cronies will defend him to the death, so I have nothing to present to those people.

Suffice it to say I know numerous individuals who were banned, not for illegal homebrews, but for just disagreeing with AA's trolling moderators and Al's cronies. Alcoholics and other miscreants who are given free reign to call people anything they want (Former Atari employees are the worst offenders). It is a tight-knit clique over there, and if you get out of line in the eyes of you know who, there is a heavy price to be paid.

Don't ask me to name names, but I stand by my claims completely.

Sorry, but I've been on Atari Age for probably a decade or more and I have never seen anything close to what you are claiming over there. The only people I have ever seen banned are spammers, people selling illegal or unauthorized items and people who troll to the point where there is really no other option but to ban them. It appears that you probably fit into one of those categories which is why you were likely banned.

[7th lutz]

I only wonder how they have gotten by with infringing on Namco's IP's for so long. Says the person that told treismac to go to retrozone and order DK Pie Factory for NES.

[7th lutz]

Not a scurrilous attack in the slightest, and not unfounded. And, no, I am in no way 'way off base'. Al's fans and cronies will defend him to the death, so I have nothing to present to those people.

Suffice it to say I know numerous individuals who were banned, not for illegal homebrews, but for just disagreeing with AA's trolling moderators and Al's cronies. Alcoholics and other miscreants who are given free reign to call people anything they want (Former Atari employees are the worst offenders). It is a tight-knit clique over there, and if you get out of line in the eyes of you know who, there is a heavy price to be paid.

Don't ask me to name names, but I stand by my claims completely.
I am a member at Atariage going to be 8 years late November and I have been a lurker there from 2001 to 2005. I never seen what you I have never seen anything close to what you are claiming over there too like bojay1997 mentioned.

I can also tell you that the people that I know that are banned aren't exactly innocent. People that had been banned for trolling to the point of not choice and spamming besides illegal homebrewers.

One of the banned members that wouldn't mention the name actually made a fake Atariage facebook page and committed slander on a moderator at Atariage by falsely calling that person a sex predator on facebook before that facebook page stopped existing. That banned member did that for getting back at Atariage for getting banned and that shows that person had issues outside of the internet by doing that stuff and don't tell me that the people who get banned not for illegal homebrews didn't do any wrong doing as a result.

[bigbacon]

way to derail...

either way, the guy got WAY to much exposure, made a copy of a nintendo game, started making money on it, and Nintendo came down on them.

[CastlevaniaDude]

Yet a bunch of teenagers with the gall to create a game called Mother 4 don't get a cease and decist.

I know it's different because they're not selling it, but I think having a popular game that purports (whether they are open about it not being official or not, calling it Mother 4 voids that...) to be a sequel to a legendary franchise does more damage to your intellectual property than "Princess Rescue." Mother 4 is a realistic thing that could potentially happen (I know, it is unlikely)... Nintendo is NOT going to make money off of a 2600 Mario clone.

[Greg2600]

I've been on AA just as long as DP, and you have to be a pretty big prick to get banned over there. It's not arbitrary. Yes they have banned a few long time members, but I'd say the most cited reason is that they distributed prohibited roms, were warned, and kept on doing it. Or they sold something that was prohibited, were warned, and kept doing it.

There was quite a rivalry between AA and DP for a number of years, but it ended 7 or 8 years ago at least.

Let's not get off topic, the a-holes here are NOA! :)

[sloan]

I told you Al's fans and cronies would defend him to the death. None of it changes truth. Not a one of you has denied that certain prominent former Atari employees are give carte blanche to treat people like dogs over there. When this was addressed, certain people received unjust rewards. Al is not going to bite the hand that feeds him. Sad, but true.

On topic:
For the programmer, I feel only a little sorry. You have to expect that something like this could happen when you do something that similar to a popular IP.

Not a big loss. AA has lots more games for sale over there.

[treismac]

Let's not get off topic, the a-holes here are NOA! :)

^Yup. The suits at Nintendo are just... soulless. I, personally, just couldn't have imagined the programmer of Princess Rescue making enough money off this project for Nintendo to begin to care, but it shows what I know. It is about irrationally and obsessively protecting their flagship's ip, right?? How could the legal fees Nintendo would spend if this went to court be worth it? Why doesn't Nintendo redeem this project and get their slice and then port it over to their Virtual Console or as an added bonus on the next Mario game? Nintendo's creative half needs to communicate with their business half and make use of this cool project rather than trying to kill it. To me (i.e. way off base, apparently), the knee jerk "business" decision to kill the game is, paradoxically, bad business.

[buzz_n64]

I'm very glad that I was able to get one when I did. Still unopened in pristine condition.

[Greg2600]

I told you Al's fans and cronies would defend him to the death. None of it changes truth. Not a one of you has denied that certain prominent former Atari employees are give carte blanche to treat people like dogs over there. When this was addressed, certain people received unjust rewards. Al is not going to bite the hand that feeds him. Sad, but true.

On topic:
For the programmer, I feel only a little sorry. You have to expect that something like this could happen when you do something that similar to a popular IP.

Not a big loss. AA has lots more games for sale over there.

Is this a Curt Vendel thing? He never worked for Atari. The programmer didn't make the game intending to make a profit. He purposely kept the IP as close as he could to SMB on purpose.

[Rickstilwell1]

Does anyone know if the Princess Rescue rom has been dumped and distributed to the usual hack sites?

[orangest]

Does anyone know if the Princess Rescue rom has been dumped and distributed to the usual hack sites?

The rom has been released. Don't know about distribution.

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/215058-princess-rescue-binaries-released/

[Rickstilwell1]

The rom has been released. Don't know about distribution.

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/215058-princess-rescue-binaries-released/

Cool, downloaded. At least now I can play it on a harmony cart once I get one instead of missing out totally.

[slobu]

I got confirmation that it was indeed a cease and desist.

Albert either cannot or will not talk about it publicly.

I could imagine some deal being made to at least continue providing the game ROM for no charge. That deal including a gag order.

Then again, for better or worse, Al has a tendency to use as little communication as possible.

[offensive_jerk]

I knew I should have ordered that one

[slobu]

I'm pretty sure the eBay flippers are laughing and hugging eachother right now. Trouble is, I think big companies can get eBay to take down material they don't like. Should be interesting to see :p

[TheRedEye]

I'm pretty sure the eBay flippers are laughing and hugging eachother right now. Trouble is, I think big companies can get eBay to take down material they don't like. Should be interesting to see :p

Please, eBay homebrew flippers have never experienced joy and you know it.

[bigbacon]

I'm waiting for the VGA graded copy to hit ebay at 9,999.99.

[tom]

Fuck Nintendo, they're as bad a Infogrames/Atari were. I never liked Nintendo since the NES days

[Dan Iacovelli]

I don't see how distributing the rom for free would be be part of it.
since nobody got money from from the rom
has to be about the actual sell of the game now al is stuck with 50 carts for prge
too much publicity is the main reason why ninenendo went after it

[Bojay1997]

I don't see how distributing the rom for free would be be part of it.
since nobody got money from from the rom
has to be about the actual sell of the game now al is stuck with 50 carts for prge
too much publicity is the main reason why ninenendo went after it

I haven't seen the cease and desist letter, nor has Albert posted any real information about the whole situation, but undoubtedly Nintendo would demand all copies of the game, free or otherwise cease being distributed immediately. The commercial nature of the product is only one factor in a fair use analysis and it certainly is not the only or necessarily the most important one.

[Words iManifest]

Wow, I just ordered it like four days ago. Just made the cut-off I guess.

[slobu]

Wow, I just ordered it like four days ago. Just made the cut-off I guess.

If it were me I'd be wondering if it'll turn out to be a refund.

[bigbacon]

I still don't get why people are up in arms over this? If super mario was your IP, you'd be protecting it also.

it hard to go after everyone, especially in certain regions of the world, but if you do this stuff in the USA, get the exposure, and start making money, then you best expect that they'll find out and put a stop to it.

[Lady Jaye]

With the history of Atari Age and the way Al Yarusso has done some people, I couldn't be happier. I only wonder how they have gotten by with infringing on Namco's IP's for so long.

We are NOT going to start a flame war with Atari Age. Case close. K?

To go back to the topic, I'm surprised that D2K, the brilliant remake of Donkey Kong on the Intellivision, wasn't hit as well with a C&D.

[Greg2600]

I haven't seen the cease and desist letter, nor has Albert posted any real information about the whole situation, but undoubtedly Nintendo would demand all copies of the game, free or otherwise cease being distributed immediately. The commercial nature of the product is only one factor in a fair use analysis and it certainly is not the only or necessarily the most important one.

Maybe they were simply told to stop selling it? I know that sounds naive. In any case, the rom is out there, it's never going to be pulled from the interwebs.

[Bojay1997]

Maybe they were simply told to stop selling it? I know that sounds naive. In any case, the rom is out there, it's never going to be pulled from the interwebs.

While that's possible, I've written my share of cease and desist letters over the years and I've certainly seen plenty of them and I've never seen one that allows an alleged infringer to simply stop selling the product and leave a free version of it up for public download. Generally, the cease and desist is only the first step and a settlement still needs to be negotiated, but again not knowing the specifics here, perhaps Nintendo and Atari Age and the programmer have already reached a settlement.

[sloan]

We are NOT going to start a flame war with Atari Age. Case close. K?

Case was never opened. I stated factual information and some did not like it. That makes me the bad guy? The thread had another forum's name in the title. That does mean that it is open to discussion within said thread, does it not?

Check my history of posting on this site and see if I am into flaming anything.

Guess I did not realize this was Atari Age 2.0 site.

[Bojay1997]

Case was never opened. I stated factual information and some did not like it. That makes me the bad guy? The thread had another forum's name in the title. That does mean that it is open to discussion within said thread, does it not?

Check my history of posting on this site and see if I am into flaming anything.

Guess I did not realize this was Atari Age 2.0 site.

You did not state factual information, you launched into a bunch of unsubstantiated attacks on Albert and Atari Age and then when those of us who have actually been around DP and Atari Age for many years pointed out that we had never seen anything resembling the conduct you claimed had transpired, you accused us of somehow being "fans" and "cronies". In any event, your alleged bad experience with Atari Age and Albert has nothing to do with the situation being discussed which is that a homebrew was shut down by Nintendo.

[bigbacon]

really feel a mod just needs to lock this already.

[Bojay1997]

really feel a mod just needs to lock this already.

Not sure why you feel that way. Other than one individual making offensive claims and charges, everyone else seems to be having a rational discussion about a fairly significant news event in the classic gaming community.

[Tanooki]

Fuck Nintendo, they're as bad a Infogrames/Atari were. I never liked Nintendo since the NES days

Wow your grasp on reality isn't very realistic is it? As cool as the game is and how amazing what all was pulled off, the game is using a clear likeness of Mario, and other visuals of the SMB title, plus it's using a very clear rip of the music from the game as well. Selling something like that even if it is a niche market for a very dead 2600 system, you're still asking for it. Like it or not big companies are pretty protective of their big cash cow creations.

I agree with bacon, he sees it as it is, and this thread is getting a bit train wreck like, not there yet, but it could need closing later depending if it went bad.

[Greg2600]

Case was never opened. I stated factual information and some did not like it. That makes me the bad guy? The thread had another forum's name in the title. That does mean that it is open to discussion within said thread, does it not?

Check my history of posting on this site and see if I am into flaming anything.

Guess I did not realize this was Atari Age 2.0 site.

You're entirely off topic, this is not an attack Atari Age thread, not that such a thread should be allowed regardless.

[Bojay1997]

Wow your grasp on reality isn't very realistic is it? As cool as the game is and how amazing what all was pulled off, the game is using a clear likeness of Mario, and other visuals of the SMB title, plus it's using a very clear rip of the music from the game as well. Selling something like that even if it is a niche market for a very dead 2600 system, you're still asking for it. Like it or not big companies are pretty protective of their big cash cow creations.

I agree with bacon, he sees it as it is, and this thread is getting a bit train wreck like, not there yet, but it could need closing later depending if it went bad.

I won't disagree that this was probably an infringement and that Nintendo was well within their rights to take action. Having said that, I do believe companies need to take a balanced approach and Nintendo lately has engaged in some pretty questionable behavior by demanding that fan videos and playthroughs be taken down and that EVO not be allowed to use Super Smash Bros. in their tournaments. All I'm saying is that a little reasonableness towards your fans can go a long way to creating a positive perception of a company and Nintendo can use all the help it can get right now given the state of the WiiU and the fairly mediocre software sales numbers they just posted for a bunch of first party 3DS titles.

[treismac]

All I'm saying is that a little reasonableness towards your fans can go a long way to creating a positive perception of a company and Nintendo can use all the help it can get right now...

Amen. The game was, after all, made for the Atari 2600 and not iOS, right?

[slobu]

The thing that saddens me is that NO ONE in the process is talking about finding out the specific points of compliant and SIMPLY REMOVING THEM. Everyone wants to secretly backdoor ROMz and carts instead of just encouraging Sprybug to switch around some assets and re-release. It's a good enough game to stand on its own.

[tom]

First Star and AA got it right with Boulder Dash for the VCS, maybe with Nintendo they (he) could have done the same?

[Greg2600]

He may do that, but he's busy. He's currently working on that Sonic 2600 game, which may also get a C&D now! His goal was to produce a game that was as close to SMB as possible. Intent was not to sell it, that came about later. Frankly, as cool as the game is, without the Mario sprite or the music, it's a shell of what it was.

[Neb6]

^Yup. The suits at Nintendo are just... soulless. I, personally, just couldn't have imagined the programmer of Princess Rescue making enough money off this project for Nintendo to begin to care, but it shows what I know. It is about irrationally and obsessively protecting their flagship's ip, right?? How could the legal fees Nintendo would spend if this went to court be worth it? Why doesn't Nintendo redeem this project and get their slice and then port it over to their Virtual Console or as an added bonus on the next Mario game? Nintendo's creative half needs to communicate with their business half and make use of this cool project rather than trying to kill it. To me (i.e. way off base, apparently), the knee jerk "business" decision to kill the game is, paradoxically, bad business.

I totally agree.

Finally, someone with a rational well-considered answer that offers a business solution for both parties.

Nintendo's execs need to wake up and see the opportunities created by the efforts of their fans.

[bigbacon]

I totally agree.

Finally, someone with a rational well-considered answer that offers a business solution for both parties.

Nintendo's execs need to wake up and see the opportunities created by the efforts of their fans.

What opportunity? NES+ games are iconic, atari, not so much. There is no incentive for them to want to do anything with it. it is so niche that it is beyond any reasonable usage to them. They just want to protect their assets. Again, if you had something that was 'stolen' and someone started making money off it you would be there making deals with them, you'd get them to stop pushing their product because it could make you and your company look bad.

You guys are talking like most of the world even know this took place when that is SO far from the truth. I'm pretty positive most of Nintendo's fans would care one bit that they squashed an Atari 2600 fan made game.

that is the reality of it. Small communities don't mean squat to huge companies and if they want to control their products with an Iron Fist, they have every right to do so and in this case, it really isn't going to knock nintendo down except in the eye of people here and in other small internet communities.

[Greg2600]

Nintendo would have to figure out who the heck owns the Atari 2600 license before signing onto such a project. Ha ha ha.

[Tupin]

The thing is that companies have to protect their IPs from highly-visible fan projects otherwise they technically concede rights to it and set precedent. But really, a lot of these companies ignore it until they absolutely have to cut it down before it goes any further. If this was just a ROM, didn't explicitly use Mario characters, and had new music, Nintendo would have no grounds. But this was something that used copyrighted material and was sold for a profit.

Protip: If you're running a fan project like this, don't advertise it much. What comes to mind for me is the MLP (yeah, I know) fighting game that people somehow managed to get into EVO and then promptly were thrown a C&D. They knew it existed for a long time, and probably wouldn't have said/done anything until people raised money to get it into EVO. Maybe if people stopped being so spastic about stuff like this they'd be more successful.

[Atarileaf]

NES+ games are iconic, atari, not so much.

I'm sorry but that statement is beyond stupid.

[AtariAge]

The thing is that companies have to protect their IPs from highly-visible fan projects otherwise they technically concede rights to it and set precedent.

This is true for trademarks (such as "Super Mario Bros."), but not for copyrights. Companies might like you to think that, though.


Protip: If you're running a fan project like this, don't advertise it much.

I agree, in this case Princess Rescue received a ton of attention, and I'm sure that's what pushed it over the edge. Kind of took on a life of its own--I didn't really promote the game outside of AtariAge. I bet the recent IGN video review may have been the nail in the coffin.

..Al

[Tupin]

To be fair, the outside example I gave didn't exactly try to hide that it used designs/names directly from a copyrighted IP, and in a way that the company probably wouldn't want to be publicly associated with, either. But again, it would have come out if people stopped getting worked up and plastering it everywhere. Especially because it never was supposed to make money. The only thing that stopped it was idiots entering it into a fighting game contest. It was barely in beta. Like I said, idiots.

Did enjoy the ROM of Princess Rescue, though.

[Rickstilwell1]

He may do that, but he's busy. He's currently working on that Sonic 2600 game, which may also get a C&D now! His goal was to produce a game that was as close to SMB as possible. Intent was not to sell it, that came about later. Frankly, as cool as the game is, without the Mario sprite or the music, it's a shell of what it was.

A Sonic fangame will never get a C&D. Otherwise Sonic Retro . org would have been gone a long time ago.

[Greg2600]

A Sonic fangame will never get a C&D. Otherwise Sonic Retro . org would have been gone a long time ago.

Only if they sell things with Sonic on it, that's the red line.

[Scotterpop]

This is true for trademarks (such as "Super Mario Bros."), but not for copyrights. Companies might like you to think that, though.



I agree, in this case Princess Rescue received a ton of attention, and I'm sure that's what pushed it over the edge. Kind of took on a life of its own--I didn't really promote the game outside of AtariAge. I bet the recent IGN video review may have been the nail in the coffin.

..Al

It's a shame that NOA sees a small project like this as a threat. But hey, I guess you know where the line is drawn now! Thanks for uploading the file, btw. I just played it on my PSP Go... so take that, Nintendo (and that goes for you too, Sony!).

[Kiddo]

Having said that, I do believe companies need to take a balanced approach and Nintendo lately has engaged in some pretty questionable behavior by demanding that fan videos and playthroughs be taken down and that EVO not be allowed to use Super Smash Bros. in their tournaments.

Nintendo didn't "take down" YouTube videos. They put their own ads over Super Mario and Pokemon stuff and the self-entitled LPer community went up in arms because they couldn't rake in profit from spewing foul language, loud screaming and low-brow humor over playing New Super Mario Bros. U. Big difference.
Also, for better or worse, Melee made it to EVO in the end and was a big crowd pleaser.

There's plenty of crap Nintendo actually does do wrong, but spreading misinformation isn't helping to correct this.


Yet a bunch of teenagers with the gall to create a game called Mother 4 don't get a cease and decist.

NOA hardly has jack to gain from defending the Mother IP from fangamers, because beside the Virtual Console rerelease of Earthbound they basically consider it a franchise they can't profit from enough to want to protect the IP that badly, if not an outright unviable one. If they did, they could have shut down the Mother 3 fan translation years ago, because it's already known they were aware of the project well before it's completion.

In comparison, Mario is one of their top-sellers. Simple priorities. There's a reason the cease-and-desists mostly relate to Mario, Zelda and Pokemon while Mother and Fire Emblem fans have basically gotten to do whatever they wanted for years.

[tom]

That's bullshit, either an IP need to be uphold, be it a shitty game or a good game, or not. They can't pick and choose.

[Tupin]

That's bullshit, either an IP need to be uphold, be it a shitty game or a good game, or not. They can't pick and choose.
They actually legally can't. If they don't go after every single thing that could potentially be mistaken for a Nintendo product, they lose some of their IP rights.

Honestly what it seems like you have to do is make it so Nintendo would never touch it (almost parodic levels of violence, etc) out of fear of associating themselves with it at all. You lose some of the authenticity of making a fangame, but it's safe.

[SparTonberry]

You can lose trademarks by not enforcing them, but you can't lose copyrights.

I mean, if Nintendo NEEDED to enforce their copyrights, why haven't they hunted down NES/SNES repro sellers yet? (yes, I realize that may be some of you on this forum) It shouldn't be THAT hard to find them if they really wanted to, right?

[7th lutz]

First Star and AA got it right with Boulder Dash for the VCS, maybe with Nintendo they (he) could have done the same?

I don't know for sure.

There fact is Homebrew authors or companies that make homebrew games did ask companies for permission to get a deal for porting a game, but didn't happen in some cases. The Intellivision homebrew scene had arcade games, etc. planned, but didn't happen because the owners of the IP decided not to do an agreement.

[Bojay1997]

I don't know for sure.

There fact is Homebrew authors or companies that make homebrew games did ask companies for permission to get a deal for porting a game, but didn't happen in some cases. The Intellivision homebrew scene had arcade games, etc. planned, but didn't happen because the owners of the IP decided not to do an agreement.

Yep. Licensing can be very tough, especially with a large company that has no interest in seeing the crown jewel of its IP interpreted by a homebrew programmer. Best case scenario it can take months or even years to negotiate and finalize an agreement and often a company will want some kind of approval over the final product and that may never be granted. There's an old saying that sometimes it's better to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.

[Words iManifest]

If it were me I'd be wondering if it'll turn out to be a refund.

Nope, I just got it. Sweet !

[Kiddo]

I mean, if Nintendo NEEDED to enforce their copyrights, why haven't they hunted down NES/SNES repro sellers yet? (yes, I realize that may be some of you on this forum) It shouldn't be THAT hard to find them if they really wanted to, right?

Because in the vast majority of cases, that'd be Square's responsibility? The most common repro carts are for fan translations of JRPGs. The most notable exception, StarFox 2, is probably in a legal limbo to begin with due to Argonaut's ownership of the code.

[Bojay1997]

Nintendo didn't "take down" YouTube videos. They put their own ads over Super Mario and Pokemon stuff and the self-entitled LPer community went up in arms because they couldn't rake in profit from spewing foul language, loud screaming and low-brow humor over playing New Super Mario Bros. U. Big difference.
Also, for better or worse, Melee made it to EVO in the end and was a big crowd pleaser.

There's plenty of crap Nintendo actually does do wrong, but spreading misinformation isn't helping to correct this.


You are incorrect and I find it very offensive when someone posts incorrect information in response to a factual post and then accuses me of somehow spreading misinformation. Since you couldn't be bothered to check your facts, there is an article below that explains what happened. Nintendo did in fact start a massive takedown of let's play videos and then changed position later on and instead starting slapping ads on them. Contrary to your assertions, many of the videos taken down didn't contain foul language, low brow humor, loud screaming or frankly anything but amazing gameplay skills. There's nothing entitled about expressing yourself in a creative way by playing a game in a unique style. In fact, in Japan there are entire DVD series devoted to just those kinds of playthroughs.

In addition, Melee only made it into EVO after a great deal of public pressure and $90K+ in charitable donations from fans. Frankly, the organizers had some interesting stories to tell after the fact about how ridiculous Nintendo was to deal with as detailed below.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/05/nintendo-kicks-lets-play-videos-off-youtube-then-slaps-ads-on-them/

http://www.vg247.com/2013/07/12/evo-2013-nintendo-tried-to-close-super-smash-bros-melee-tourney/

[SparTonberry]

Because in the vast majority of cases, that'd be Square's responsibility? The most common repro carts are for fan translations of JRPGs. The most notable exception, StarFox 2, is probably in a legal limbo to begin with due to Argonaut's ownership of the code.

I see plenty of people selling yes, StarFox 2, but also EB Zero, SMB: The Lost Levels, and any number of Mario and Zelda hacks (such as Parallel Worlds and BS Zelda). Common enough that Mike Matei even played a few of them.

[Kiddo]

You are incorrect and I find it very offensive when someone posts incorrect information in response to a factual post and then accuses me of somehow spreading misinformation. Since you couldn't be bothered to check your facts, there is an article below that explains what happened. Nintendo did in fact start a massive takedown of let's play videos and then changed position later on and instead starting slapping ads on them. Contrary to your assertions, many of the videos taken down didn't contain foul language, low brow humor, loud screaming or frankly anything but amazing gameplay skills. There's nothing entitled about expressing yourself in a creative way by playing a game in a unique style. In fact, in Japan there are entire DVD series devoted to just those kinds of playthroughs.

In addition, Melee only made it into EVO after a great deal of public pressure and $90K+ in charitable donations from fans. Frankly, the organizers had some interesting stories to tell after the fact about how ridiculous Nintendo was to deal with as detailed below.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/05/nintendo-kicks-lets-play-videos-off-youtube-then-slaps-ads-on-them/

http://www.vg247.com/2013/07/12/evo-2013-nintendo-tried-to-close-super-smash-bros-melee-tourney/

I'll put the Evo thing aside because we're trying to argue different perspectives from the same set of "facts", so there's subjectivity there.

But the YouTube crap? Um, sorry, but look at my own YouTube Channel. Full of Nintendo videos. The vast majority of them untouched by them. The only ones they claimed specifically had Super Mario World footage in them and they weren't even popular anyway. And guess what? Absolutely no takedowns were done. (http://www.youtube.com/KiddoCabbusses)

I don't care what a bunch of "Gaming journalism" (Hah!) news sites say. I am someone who would've been directly affected if these hyperbolic reports were true.

So who's the offensive one now?


I see plenty of people selling yes, StarFox 2, but also EB Zero, SMB: The Lost Levels, and any number of Mario and Zelda hacks (such as Parallel Worlds and BS Zelda). Common enough that Mike Matei even played a few of them.

SMB: The Lost Levels I could see them theoretically doing a takedown on because that's one they specifically still sell themselves. Since I haven't heard of repro carts for that until you mentioned it, though, I assume that's an example that just slipped.

Mario and Zelda hacks are probably their own degree of ownership concerns - copyright isn't entirely black and white, you know, and there's no actual case precedant on examples of, for example, certain hacks that have absolutely no relation to the game being hacked anymore. "EB Zero" in and of itself is technically a hack of NES Mother with a title that's honestly alien to Nintendo, so it probably also slipped under the radar.

As for BS Zelda... To start, I'll say that while the carts of BS Zelda are heavily hacked to work the original game is one of their own, so I'd assume they could take down on them if they wanted to. But on that note, Nintendo seems to prefer to pretend the Satellaview never existed, so perhaps they fear the expectations of their hardcore fans if they do such a takedown. (Come to think of it, same for Mother, there.)

[Bojay1997]

I'll put the Evo thing aside because we're trying to argue different perspectives from the same set of "facts", so there's subjectivity there.

But the YouTube crap? Um, sorry, but look at my own YouTube Channel. Full of Nintendo videos. The vast majority of them untouched by them. The only ones they claimed specifically had Super Mario World footage in them and they weren't even popular anyway. And guess what? Absolutely no takedowns were done. (http://www.youtube.com/KiddoCabbusses)

I don't care what a bunch of "Gaming journalism" (Hah!) news sites say. I am someone who would've been directly affected if these hyperbolic reports were true.

So who's the offensive one now?



That would still be you. Just because Nintendo didn't take down your videos doesn't mean it didn't happen to others. Next time perhaps you should do a Google search as there are plenty of people who shared their take down experiences on various forums. So yes, why bother with facts when all that matters is what you believe, right?

[Kiddo]

That would still be you. Just because Nintendo didn't take down your videos doesn't mean it didn't happen to others. Next time perhaps you should do a Google search as there are plenty of people who shared their take down experiences on various forums. So yes, why bother with facts when all that matters is what you believe, right?

So you're basically telling me to trust random people's anecdotes over my own 7-year YouTube history, as well as the history of the channels I am directly or indirectly affiliated with?
Why should I, especially with this supposed direct contrast? How am I supposed to believe these people are being honest when my channel and it's current status and history directly contradicts everything said?
How about instead, you tell me why my channel would be exempt from this supposed Mass-Nintendo-Persecution?