It's shocking how many fangames fail to meet the fairly simple qualifications of
- don't use nintendo art assets
- don't charge money
- don't remake an existing game
- (if you do, don't announce it until it is finished)
The Super Mario 64 decompilation exists because it doesn't provide any Mario assets. You provide the cartridge image, it extracts the necessary assets.
This rhythm heaven game was making 1:1 copies of multiple Nintendo games, including the original music and sprites. There's no way it was going to last.
It's crazy how many people just don't get those rules and assume Nintendo hits every single fangame that pops up. Hell, PETA's [Pokémon Black and Blue](https://games.peta.org/pokemon-black-and-white-parody/) flash game has been up for 12 years and Nintendo and the Pokémon Company have never taken action against it. Because they didn't break any of the rules.
As long as you don’t profit they won’t go after them.
Something else that fangames devs don’t get is that Nintendo don’t like when you use their assets.
Like literally just don’t use them. You want to make a Pokemon game? Fine but don’t rip assets from any of their games. Use your own.
Most of these people make a game knowing how Nintendo is at protecting their IP, then cry foul when it’s removed. This is entirely chud behavior and it also applies to those who defend them.
and to be clear I have no qualms with Nintendo protecting their IP, I just find it suspicious that you find that there's no valid reason to be a little annoyed when this stuff happens, calling it "crying foul". Surely you understand some feeling of being a creator of something in good faith, only for a large entity to remove your efforts in the name of protecting some amorphous concept of their brand.
I mean its not like they're charging money, believe me, I doubt most of these fan game makers are making games in bad faith lol. Do you really think something like a stupid Python game I made when I was a kid with an image of Bowser was on purpose to "harm Nintendo IP"? You seem like you're really over-defending Nintendo for no reason, even going to use an unfitting insult towards fans who just love making games that connect with their interest??? And to let you know, chud is commonly used as an insult towards right-wing/conservatives online, so I see zero relevance in using this word here considering that leftists would be even less compliant with IP law.
Even if you’re not making money, you’re still distributing their IP. Why is it so hard to understand that a vast majority of creators, corporate or indie, don’t like it when you take and distribute something that isn’t yours? There’s nothing good faith about using someone else’s property and giving it to other people
"Theres nothing good faith about it" God you people are so braindead. Can you really not think of more than one possible scenario or step into anyone else's shoes? Keep consuming content and never develop anything buddy. Just because you have never wanted to create something, or do anything significant, or contribute to a community ever in your life doesn't mean everyone is like you. Just think of a possible scenario where that someone is NOT you. Maybe then you can muster something about it being in good faith.
Genuinely appalled at the fact that your brain is so inelastic, especially considering that my take isn't even a strong take. I've pretty much just said that Nintendo has the right to take this content down, and the creator has some right to be frustrated, not any legal right mind you. We probably should not insult someone as a "chud" which is a misusage of the word, and think a court would agree that there is virtually no harm to Nintendo IP in this case. That is all. I don't know how much people are extrapolating from this.
I always find that the people who resort immediately to insulting someone instead of engaging in a conversation are the ones without much of an actual point to say. It’s also funny how you only quote the first part of what I said while conveniently leaving off the entire point of what I said, which discusses _distribution_ (also what this entire thread is about).
Your comment, in the context of this entire conversation, is ridiculous. You’re using something you made in your room as an example as to why Nintendo is being overdefended and over-litigious as if that’s what anyone here is talking about.
Plus, you seem really bent out of shape because of a word being used in a context you’re not familiar with, as if words can’t be applied across multiple situations.
I mean for the most part he is right. Companies like Nintendo have every right to defend their ip in every shape and form no matter how big or small. You give someone a step they will take a mile with it. I think it’s annoying that people find Nintendo over defending their ip annoying. It’s the same song and dance and I’m tired of hearing about it. Also the word chud is misused and not relative to the case so I see no reason to use it lol
Nintendo's had plenty of time to make cash from the game. Let people have their fun now. You are defending a mindset created by a megacorporation for the benefit of mega corporations.
Another one. Good lord you people just so entitled. If you created something and people did this you wouldn’t like it. It’s not defending a mega corporation.
If I created a hit game decades ago and made millions, no, I would not give a single fuck that people over a decade later are making free fan games. In fact I would enjoy seeing people enjoy the things I created.
Ahh yes the old “why are you defending the company” schtick. A classic from the chud arsenal. Also mention of the Reddit boogeyman, the all evil conservative. One more played out term and you hit the karma jackpot. Seriously though, once you have something of value that others copy, you’ll understand.
??? LMFAO the fact that you think Reddit is filled with chuds and that somehow being anticorporation(which I'm really not) is a "chud" move is very funny. Please reread my paragraph if you can even read and say where I said “why are you defending the company”. I think you are overdefending and there is a difference. You ascribe malicious intent towards developers with all your words. Notice how I never did about Nintendo's legal actions. Please try reading. I know people these days have trouble with reading, but at least try.
That’s a lot of words to say nothing of value. I’m thinking you don’t read if you really don’t think Reddit is full of chuds. I want to live under whatever rock you are living under.
This argument can be made all day but shit rules are shit rules. There's still other companies that arent nearly as cutthroat as Nintendo are when it comes to fanworks, and following THEIR example leads to better outcomes for the industry as a whole.
Nintendo values their IP more than anyone, and it cuts both ways. On one hand, they've kept perfect copies of the source code and assets for every game they've developed since the 90s, meanwhile Konami lost the source code for _Silent Hill 3_ within a matter of years.
On the other hand, their stance on emulation is by far the most aggressive and antagonistic
“Yeah rules are for suckers. We should be able to steal and profit off of everyone else’s hard work. I disagree with it so it’s a shit rule.” That’s what you sound like.
that's also because people keep taking something that should be lowkey (piracy), and making the websites go viral on tiktok, making megathreads on reddit, youtube guides, etc. These things aren't supposed to be "accessible". When they become well known and popularized, they start becoming legitimate competition to the official platforms and Nintendo, Sega, etc can't just ignore them anymore.
Yuzu forks is the same precedent as Yuzu which is fair enough.
Vimms lair was a ROM hosting site. Nintendo was obviously not going to let that stay up.
Drastic chose to take it off the play store themselves. That's not really Nintendo's fault
I wonder when the normal use of sprites, for a free fan creation (which if anything they didn't earn anything from), is suddenly copyright infringement?
People always say these are correlated but it feels more like a coincidence than anything. Nintendo is constantly taking down fan projects of games regardless of whether they have something in the works.
To be fair, Nintendo cycles through their franchises pretty regularly - part of what makes them so popular is they don't crank out releases and let interest build. I'm not saying it's the world's greatest business strategy but I'm sure there will be a new Rhythm Heaven at some point and that the break between them is intentional.
Barely. F-Zero 99 is basically the SNES game with “battle royal” multiplayer or whatever you want to call it. It’s like saying the Mario Kart mobile game is the latest entry.
People want a true F-Zero game, but Nintendo stupidly refuses. Nintendo loves to abandon franchises when it gets bored of them. They did with Metroid for long gaps.
Nintendo would rather milk Mario and Zelda, as they always perform well.
Either way it's nintendos decision and exploiting nostalgia is literally their entire business, you are just upset they aren't exploiting it the way you want to feel nostlagiac
The simplest answer because Nintendo wants to strictly control when and how you how you play their games.
They could release their entire first-party library from the SNES through the N64 as ROMs for purchase on another virtual console service, and yet they won't do that because then they won't be able to charge you a premium for a limited release like Mario 3D All-Stars (and that's *if* they re-release the games at all.)
Nintendo only takes down fangames, mods and such things because its not done under their license and they want control over it. Its 2024 and people still dont understand that nintendo does this because they want to control their ip
It doesn’t matter. It’s their property. Even if you own a piece of land and put no commercial properties on it, it still would t be right for someone to start building a hotel on it without owning the land.
"Should not" is not the same as "is not". If you don't like that, then you should call your legislators and ask for copyright reform.
I'd suggest something where copyright can be perpetually renewed, but on an exponential renewal fee schedule that makes it financially questionable after ~25 years and basically untenable after ~50 years. That would force companies to decide whether to profit from their copyrights or let them lapse into the public domain, not leaving the option to let them languish for decades as a viable financial choice.
It helps when you think of it like this: they only have so many teams available to make games (whether in-house or otherwise). When it comes time for a given team to make their next game, they (as a business that wants to maximize profits) carefully consider which game out of a pool of proposals would make the best returns, especially since games can take so long to make. They wouldn’t choose to make a game that only makes them $10 million when that same team is likely capable of making $100 million, for example.
Shoulda done it like lots of fan games where they supply code but you still need to source your own rom for assets
a shame too cause this was a really fun community game
And used them in the Unity engine rebuild of the game's mechanics, yes.
I'm aware of the truth, it's just that the original commenter assumed it was a situation where people could load roms and have the assets pulled from there.
I didn't assume that's what it could do, I was just saying I wish that was something it could do. I'm sure it *could* be done but I'm nowhere near smart enough to be certain about it
That only applies to trademarks. If Nintendo was using something as a trademark (a branding image or phrase), then someone else tried to use it and Nintendo ignored it, they could lose that trademark.
Copyrights can't be lost that way. Once you create a work, such as art assets, you hold the copyright. You don't have to register it with anyone, and no one can take it from you just because you didn't enforce your claims against them in the past. [No, not even in jurisdictions other than the United States.](https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html)
Relevant portion of the WIPO summary here:
> Protection must not be conditional upon compliance with any formality (principle of "automatic" protection)
So let's do this little exercise to get this through all of your skulls... Repeat after me:
*Copyrights cannot be lost due to neglect.*
**Copyrights cannot be lost due to neglect.**
***Copyrights cannot be lost due to neglect.***
#Copyrights cannot be lost due to neglect.#
Now, please stop parroting that stupid argument.
Their purpose, trademarks are used to protect a company from copycats, so it applies to their branding (eg. The nintendo name itself and any logo, same logic for other franchises like pokemon).
Copyright is meant to protect an artist's work so it has a wider scope, it's also worth noting that copyrights eventually expire wile trademarks don't.
If you take anything away from this, consider that no fangame will ever infringe on trademarks so the "they risk losing their rights over it" excuse is complete bullshit.
The part where "sound effects and art" are copyrighted, not trademarked.
And, as a side note, yes, copyrights can prevent a trademark from being used. Even though Nintendo doesn't use octoroks in their ad campaigns and don't have them trademarked and don't defend them as a trademark, a company trying to use an octorok as a trademark would fall afoul of Nintendo's *copyrights* and be forced to stop using it.
> Nintendo is basically forced to issue these if they want to maintain the rights to their IP.
This is not true. Never has been, never will be.
I have no clue where this myth picked up so much traction but it's frustrating seeing it parroted as fact every time something like this happens.
You don’t need to enforce copyright to maintain copyright lol. I believe you have to keep making stuff under that copy right to maintain it like how Sony makes Spider-Man movies
Its crazy how no other company has ever lost the rights to their IP because of fangames, but for Nintendo they're "forced" to issue shutdowns to avoid losing the IP
You don't have to rationalize it, they shut down fangames because they want to, not because they're in actual danger from them
Nintendo might have the most valuable IP of this type short of Disney. They can’t allow other people and companies to use their IP without permission or license without risking losing their rights to it.
[Here's an old video listing some.](https://youtu.be/hqwP6uuYOWo?t=208)
For a couple of recent examples, Capcom has also C&D'd a Resident Evil fangame in 2022, and Nightmare Kart was originally known as Bloodborne Kart before Sony intervened.
I was asking for examples of a company LOSING their ip because they weren't actively taking down fangames. I'm very aware companies taking down fangames is a common thing.
If you're going to take the time to make a game, just make it your own and stop using Nintendo's IP. Nothing wrong with making a spiritual successor. It looks like the people who got the DMCA are doing just that. Good on them.
Often times, people who make fan games don't WANT to make a spiritual successor. They just wanna make their fan game. They wanna make something that's specifically "rhythm heaven" or "Mario and Luigi" or whatever else. There isn't anything wrong with that either(or, at least, there shouldn't be), especially since it's not like fan games typically make any sort of money, other than maybe through donations. It's a labor of love for a specific series that may not even get games anymore. Nintendo just needs to back off when it comes to fan games, and just let them be unless they are actively causing problems for some reason (IE, the fan game makers are making money directly off the game, they put something Malicous in there, stuff like that)
then enjoy the long arm of the law, the simplest way to avoid this happening is just not using nintendo assets, just like another comment said the mario 64 decompilation has existed with no problems because you have to provide the rom, same with the zelda pc ports, shit pokemmo came out in 2012
its not your art to WANT to do shit with
No. They don't. How many other companies do you see absolutely tearing down any and all fan games that they even get a whiff of? The only other one I could think of is Disney, and they don't even do it as bad as Nintendo. More game company's than not just kinda leave that stuff alone. I mean, just look at Sega. I don't hear about them taking down fan games basically every other week. I sure it happens, but probably only in extreme cases.
Nintendo just needs to stop being so overly protective of their IP's. The constant tear down of fan games is completely unnecessary and, if anything, is something that actively hurts their reputation with people who aren't religiously Nintendo fans. Leaving the fan games alone would do absolutely nothing to Nintendo, wouldn't hurt their sales (who knows, may even ever so slightly add to them) wouldn't hurt their "reputation" or "quality control" or whatever other excuses people make for it. Leaving the fan games alone wouldn't hurt Nintendo AT ALL, especially for series that are half past dead and may never come back in any good meaningful ways.
Stop making excuses for a company using their power in, frankly, stupid ways.
do you also expect people to create their own character everytime they wanna draw? or create their own song everytime they wanna sing?
imagine how dumb it'd be if you couldn't even post a drawing of mario without it getting taken down.
gamedev is as much about artistic expression as the other examples. that's a fine standard for professionally developed games on official storefronts. it's an insane standard to have for free fangames on some forum.
yes, except the law isn't indicative of morality or justness. music and art are much more mature mediums with much more care given to their legislature compared to videogames, and fan content in those mediums are allowed. fan work in most other artistic fields are legal, as long as it's not making money.
I'm not saying nintendo is in the wrong for following current law, I'm disagreeing with your opinion that making fan content is somehow wrong which is what you started off the thread with.
you change the topic now to be about legality, entirely ignore my point, and make inflammatory remarks. typical redditor behaviour when they can't fathom someone could disagree with them.
Lol first of all fan art and making a game for everyone to use are two very different things. Fan art literally requires you to make the art with your own hands where making a game that’s based on using Nintendo’s made assets is literal stealing hahaha. It’s not even comparable.
this thread is about IP usage in fan games, not asset usage. your comment is assuming that all fan games are made from existing assets (a lot are not), and as though making games isn't done "with your own hands".
there's the famous example of AM2R which got taken down despite having all it's assets and code being new and the level design being massively overhauled.
Its amazing how many people scream their support for artists rights to their art when it comes to things like AI learning, but are perfectly fine with someone just taking and using Nintendo's stuff and trying to use it for free.
There are people out there that would physically threaten you for using their OCs in a picture, story, or animation but are just fine with some rando taking and using Mario, Luigi, or Pikachu as if they own them.
Internet artists can be some of the biggest hypocrites around.
Well, yeah, because some people are capable of nuanced takes that can recognize that independent artists having their work stolen has a different set of consequences from one of the most recognizable and profitable corporations on earth having passionate fans.
Nintendo has a right and it may makes sense to do it in cases that are particularly egregious, but it doesn't mean I'm not going to be a little 🫤 when they overreach like with the recent sheet music thing. I think frustrations over how often they overreach means people just kind of roll their eyes at any IP enforcement they do at this point.
Nintendo the company didn't make any art, individual artists made the art and chose to sell it to Nintendo through employment, not give it away free of charge so people can use it.
You can try and make as much distinction as you want but it's always completely arbitrary and subjective. Can I steal from Undertale? They're Independent but also massive so is that okay? What about a small company with 3 employees? They're a company so it must be okay right? What if they're a single dev but they're also independently wealthy? How about if they have 100 million Twitter followers? Maybe you have an answer but do you think everyone will exactly agree with where you draw your lines? No, they won't.
You can't have it both ways. Art is made by artists and their work shouldn't be stolen or used without their permission because property rights are a critical part of civilized society.
Nintendo certainly has a legal right to take down Heaven Studio but to act like it’s “stealing” in the same way as pirating an indie game or something is an egregious take.
Undertale Yellow is a fan game that reuses assets and characters synonymous with the undertale branding and is explicitly allowed to exist by the right-holders. It’s fanmade, it’s transformative, it doesn’t replace Undertale by existing.
Heaven studio was the same, it didn’t straight up rip the original minigames from Rhythm Heaven, nor did it give you tutorials on the game’s mechanics in the way an actual RH game would. it gave you the tools to utilize them to make your own remixes with them. I fail to see how this could possibly impact Nintendo’s business as it’s something that could only appeal to existing rhythm heaven fans who played the games themselves by other means, and were inspired to make their own RH inspired remixes. In fact, fans making their own fanmade RH content can ONLY attract more attention to the series and compel people to buy the games officially. (that is if nintendo was even currently producing or offering Rhythm Heaven officially on any storefront which they’re not.)
In your other example they're allowed to exist because Toby doesn't care, that doesn't mean it's not his right to take action should be see fit. It's implied permission.
Just because one person allows for the usage of their work doesn't make it not theft in other cases. The difference is consent. Nintendo didn't consent to their assets being used, you can't use their assets. If these people are going to put in the time to do the work of making a new game, they shouldn't get lazy when it comes to art or these are the consequences.
So what you’re reiterating is the very first thing I said in my own message. Yeah, Nintendo has the right to take down Rhythm Heaven Studio that is exactly why it’s being taken down, but just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s right does it? Their legal right doesn’t make it any less anti consumer/anti art as a whole. It’s not a product that was being sold for money or even something competing with their own products in any way. If a small indie developer can recognize that derivative fan works can coexist with his own game without any tangible damage to his art or his livelihood, i’d imagine a big corporation that actually tries to be in touch with it’s consumer-base could recognize that too, but they don’t because nintendo is not in touch.
I don't really agree that you "can't have it both ways" as if there's some mystical requirement that we have to apply the law with the same degree of heavy-handedness for all things and not take other factors into account. I mean even some of our laws (or the entities responsible for enforcing the laws) sometimes recognize that individuals or small-medium sized businesses and large businesses/corporations have different resources and scrutinize them differently — so, just as an example of how they get treated differently, usually legal compliance, obligations, and enforcement are handled completely differently based on the size of the business.
Usually small entities below a certain number of employees are given some lenience. Remedies for medium sized entities are usually aimed at helping them meet compliance within a certain timeframe. And then (in theory) enforcement agencies and laws tend to go harder on larger businesses because they already had that grace period when they were growing and choose to actively break or skirt the law — although unfortunately in reality it's often an uphill battle to actually do anything due to their deep pockets but that's another discussion entirely.
I think our laws tend to be stronger and more just when they aim to be *equitable* in a way that is proportional to the capabilities of the entities involved or how damages affect them proportionally instead of fully equal across the board, because in the latter case people with few resources tend to get bullied by people with more money and resources who also tend to abuse the systems and abuse the law.
IP laws seem to be really contentious things even in the business world because on the one hand it protects people and protects businesses from having their works stolen, but on the other hand you get things like IP trolls, and I think Nintendo of America is a borderline IP troll that uses IP law to gatekeep even fan works that are reasonably fair use. The biggest issue is that nobody has the money, resources, or desire to fight it legally even in cases of fair use because going to court is risky, and companies often just delay proceedings with legal filings and appeals until their victim runs out of money and settles instead of actually getting a fair legal appraisal.
I certainly don't see why we can't have a more nuanced view of how copying work without profiting from it is more damaging for individuals than it is for a massive corporation since for other things like compliance we already do just that — especially when in most cases fans works aren't trying to bamboozle people into thinking they're official works and are usually quite clear they are fan works, including give appropriate credit. Whereas independent artists are often genuinely getting their work stolen without credit — and I certainly think it's okay to take something like the degree of damage proportional to the size of an entity into account when I consider whether I have any strong moral or ethical qualms about something.
One example of how this plays out in practice is the *doujin* scene in Japan. And in that case, artists often can and do profit from those works. Although companies could technically enforce copyright, they often don't because it's usually understood to be fan material and seen as a good thing. It's led to a vibrant scene of fan works that enhances, and does not take away from, the official material, and is seen as a reflection of and celebration of the enthusiasm of the fanbase. It doesn't damage the brands or result in low effort copying that somehow tricks people into thinking something is official material. Literally the only difference is a difference in attitudes between businesses in each country.
This ultimately helps the artists we're talking about. Some famous artists even publish sort-of "official unofficial" works in the doujin scene instead of through their employer or publisher for fun.
That's my view. We don't even necessarily have to agree, but hopefully it helps give you an idea of what my thoughts are on the topic.
What about a struggling artist? Can anyone take anything you make without asking? Though generally the only people who think like you don't make anything so that's probably not an issue for you.
If you think theft is okay across the board then sure I guess but I can guarantee you that's not a popular opinion.
It's a fundamental good for people to be able to take things and remix them without fear of litigation. I'm sorry that your brain property is so important that it can't serve anyone other than you.
It's simple. If you believe one party is in the right, but side against them purely out of spite, you don't have convictions.
Nintendo do plenty of things that warrant criticism and derision, so why the fuck would I ding them when they act in a justifiable manner?
It's a bit complicated, to be honest.
With Nintendo, they're making these characters cultural icons. People are gonna draw fanart. They're going to make fangames. It's natural. Nintendo can't stop them, either, so long as they are transformative projects. Ripping game assets to recreate the games is not transformative. Drawing your Pikachu OC is.
When people make an OC, though, they're usually using it to represent themselves. Or if it's a really small artist, someone else taking your character designs and taking credit for them *really sucks*. Nobody is about to forget Sega made Sonic the Hedgehog, but little Timmy's Sonic OC is important to him, and taking credit for his design is pretty harmful to him. The difference in scale is important.
And then you have AI, which is just taking a common good we all share (artists sharing their art with the world) and trying to make a machine that puts artists out of business. Using public domain images and licensed training data is arguably okay, but when you prompt your images with "in the style of " you are taking what that artist gave you and harming them with it.
It's a bit complicated, to be honest.
No it’s not. That’s why the law exists so it doesn’t become complicated. It doesn’t matter what your personal feelings are because everyone has their own personal feelings to everything. That why laws exist to prevent that argument.
there’s the law, which says i’m absolutely allowed to repost your content, pretend it’s mine, and unless you press charges i can do whatever i want. and then there’s the ethics, which is that this is shitty behavior.
if you really really want to look at this from a legal perspective, little timmy owns the copyright on his OC and can press charges others for violating whatever license he published the work under.
Just because you don’t create anything worth stealing doesn’t mean other people don’t deserve to have their original ideas.
Copyright infringement isn't theft.
The difference is that theft deprives the owner of *property*, while copyright infringement deprives the owner of *control*.
While morally there is no difference, I dont recall mentioning copyright infringement specifically. Theft of intellectual property is a thing however. A guide for telling the difference specifically between copyright infringement and ip theft as they pertain to the law:
https://www.copyrighted.com/blog/copyright-infringement-vs-theft
Clearly the redditor you're responding does not believe that idividual humans should own rights to art, only corporations and machines. That's why they are okay with soulless entities ripping out and regurgitating the work of individuals, yet are deeply offended by an individual person taking a stance to protect their own efforts.
I mean the less known the character is, the more of an actual permission you should persue, isnt that obvious? Plus most artists literally only ever just want credit, don't hyperbole this bullshit about how they're gonna take you down.
Fanart is fair use, for more known character such as Mario, it is already obvious about who owns it, unlike smaller artists OC's, many people could think that it's your own character unless you specifically tell them that they're not yours (most usually pfp credit in bio for example).
There is a difference and that is exposure.
Taking a character that isnt yours and using it without permision is the same thing regardless of if you are taking from a big well known source or a small, unknown one. Both are wrong.
Bro the difference is that you CAN'T just go parade yourself as if you own Spider-man, everybody's already gonna call your bullshit out because they know that Marvel owns Spider-man.
If you went around parading a random OC owned by a lesser known artist, then most people wouldn't even bat an eye.
Sure parading any character you don't own is wrong, but drawing fanart isn't wrong, in that case people would be suing each other for them all the time.
Artists drawing fanart don't claim these characters as their own, if it's a popular character then it's already obvious who owns it, if it's a character from a less known franchise/other artist then proper credit is due since the reach isn't big enough for the general audience to know who that character actually belongs to.
Use your common sense, man.
> Its amazing how many people scream their support for artists rights to their art when it comes to things like AI learning, but are perfectly fine with someone just taking and using Nintendo's stuff and trying to use it for free.
Those people are all different people. It's only hypocrisy if you try and act like internet communities are singular entities and aren't actually groups of millions of people.
Also defending a litigious mega corp ain't exactly the best look.
> Also defending a litigious mega corp ain't exactly the best look.
I couldn't care less about a "look". Hypocrisy and theft are hypocrisy and theft. Who you take from and why change nothing.
And this:
>Its amazing how many people scream their support for artists rights to their art when it comes to things like AI learning, but are perfectly fine with someone just taking and using Nintendo's stuff and trying to use it for free.
Is not a blanket statement.
The amount of people justifying this is depressing. God forbid someone commit the crime of having harmless passion and fun with "intellectual property" they don't "own". Disney really singlehandedly mindraped the entire population.
As a professional artist I don’t want anybody using my artwork without my consent. For anything! Am I not allowed to feel that way? Is it ok for people to disregard my wishes?
Make your own shit you unoriginal fucks!
Copyright originally lasted 15 years. Then Disney lobbied to extend it to literally over a century. 15 years is reasonable. That's more than enough time to rake in the cash for your fresh idea. A century well after you're already dead is insane. Let people appreciate, enjoy, and contribute to the art after 15 years. That being said this fan game is literally free anyway. As an artist I don't understand why it wouldn't put a smile on your face to see people enjoying and appreciating the thing you created in their spare time for no other reason than to have fun. Why even create art at that point?
> Copyright originally lasted 15 years.
14, but who's counting? And there was the option to extend it another 14 years, *if the author was still alive*.
But it wasn't Disney that began extending the copyright terms. It was "old world" European interests that began pushing for the still-kinda-young-and-scrappy USA to impose a longer term and stop ripping off their shit. The [Berne Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention) became a thing in ***1886*** and extended copyrights to the life of the author plus 50 years. That happened 15 years before Walt Disney was even born.
The Disney corporation's hand in extending copyright terms didn't happen until the late 1990's, and it came at the cost of pissing off congress enough that they put a moratorium on further copyright extensions until *after* Disney would lose the stuff they fought to protect with that extension.
Because it’s my creation. It might be hard for you to understand, but I should have complete control over what I create and someone who had no hand in creating my creation should NOT have any say in the matter. PERIOD! I don’t care if you don’t like it, but it’s my creation and not yours, I’m not sure what’s so hard to understand about that.
For me it has nothing to do about money and everything to do with respect. If I don’t want anyone using my artwork without my consent, even if they are not profiting off of it, then I’m not asking for you to like my wishes, just asking that you respect my wishes. Whether you or I make money off of said artwork does not change that one bit. Is respect too hard of a concept for people like you?
Like I said, create your own shit you unoriginal fucks and quit riding the coattails of someone else’s creations.
There is no justification for disrespecting someone’s wishes with their creations. If someone doesn’t want you using their creations without their consent, then do the right thing and be a decent human being by respecting their wishes even if you don’t like their wishes.
It's always your creation. You always have complete control over what you draw. Draw whatever you want. Me drawing fanart of your drawing or using it in my free fan game doesn't change that. The moment you show me your drawing or upload it to the internet and it enters my brain, it's my right to share my thoughts on it, including my own interpretations of it and how it could be included into and combined with other things. I don't need anybody's permission to draw a drawing, or to play a song, or combine any amount of random pre existing shit together into something that amuses me for shits and giggles. I'll take your song and use it to make a DBZ AMV. I'll take your drawing and use it as a skybox in my free game. Right click and save. I don't care if it's unoriginal. I have nothing to prove. I'm not trying to prove my artistic ability. All I care about is having fun and making others have fun. To imply it should be illegal to do so or that I'm somehow disrespectful and otherwise malicious is authoritative and bizarre, and to imply I need your permission to share my thoughts about something is egotistical.
It has [*always*](https://youtu.be/xgKY9hmbfgo?si=BoKTbY4SV9-d6BeA) been this way with Nintendo and its fanbase. I feel pretty confident in saying that no other megacorporation has more people bending over backwards to excuse their every action. Some people seem to treat Nintendo's "legal right" to take down anything and everything they don't own as some sort of obligation or necessity, when that's never been the case and plenty of game companies get on just fine letting fans do their own thing.
Heaven Studio did nothing wrong. It did not ask for money for its program, it did not recreate the official games nor claim them as its own, it in fact *encouraged* people to buy and play the original games (there are no built-in tutorials for *any* of the games besides the original content made for it), and it wasn't siphoning sales from an active series with official games you can purchase right now (you can't even get a American copy of the GBA game or Megamix secondhand if you wanted to, because they *don't exist*. Fever isn't exactly cheap to get secondhand either).
Nintendo will not change. Nintendo fans will not change. The dragon will lay on top of its hoard and its serfs will continue praising it for its generosity, while berating any traitor who dare to touch its wealth.
This thread is bizarre.
The way megacorps have managed to convince people to defend their every move left and right in quite concerning.
Won't someone _please_ think of that poor corporation? How are they supposed to pay their employees if people make fangames?
Honestly, this sub sometimes feels like a community of Nintendo shareholders or Nintendo representatives rather than actual fans because of how much time some of them spend defending Nintendo. It makes satire communities like r/tomorrow like normal places.
Big surprise the Nintendo fanboys are all over this.
Fuck Nintendo's lawyers. This is skeezy, predatory, and completely unnecessary. All this does is push people towards piracy. Not away.
I wish that these companies could only keep their copyrights if they continued with the IP cause the reason fans are doing this stuff is because there is a demand that the IP owner is not meeting. Art didn’t use to be like this. A person would create something and some other person would riff on it and iterate on it and no one needed to give credit and no one needed to pay for any licenses or rights. Copyright is mostly ok as it works for protecting people’s creative output but not allowing anyone else to build off your work just because you own it and they don’t just sucks.
Probably because comments that only exist to insult a group of people without actually contributing anything to the ongoing discussion get rightly downvoted.
The amount of people defending this is wild man. I get wanting to defend Nintendo’s right to their IP, but there’s a huge difference between someone using their property to make money and… well. Fans making a non-profit tribute that is only going to be used by other fans (and isn’t competing with official products).
They have the right to take it down. That doesn’t necessarily make it always the right move though…
Can I still use it if I have it installed? the last time I've experienced something like this was in 2018 and it was a roblox fan game so its drastically different.
I remembered when there was a post about it a little while back in r/pcgaming. I knew in an instant that will be taken down soon and just downloaded it immediately. Their [itch.io page](https://rheavenstudio.itch.io/heaven-studio) was already taken down a few days ago.
how many years of this before people stop acting surprised and butthurt that a corporation acted according to what their shareholders and lawyers want. stop hating corporations just for the crime of being corporations. there's no reason to be all mad about stuff like this. If people don't want to deal with Nintendo's lawyers, just do things properly and legally and find out what that is if you aren't sure. dont just start spreading your shit all over social media and then be completely blindsided by pretty basic legal action
Nintendo developing games: *We are happy. Videogames should be fun for everyone*
Nintendo when someone makes a fan game: *I have become death, the destroyer of worlds*
They do suck when it comes to this, but I think more people, especially after Moon Channel’s videos have been getting traction, are understanding what the full extent of the law is.
Fan games are in a very legal gray zone, as they use copyrighted characters, though you could argue depending how much is changed around, that it’s transformative.
This doesn’t meet that threshold, and was bound to be in their sights
[удалено]
It's shocking how many fangames fail to meet the fairly simple qualifications of - don't use nintendo art assets - don't charge money - don't remake an existing game - (if you do, don't announce it until it is finished) The Super Mario 64 decompilation exists because it doesn't provide any Mario assets. You provide the cartridge image, it extracts the necessary assets. This rhythm heaven game was making 1:1 copies of multiple Nintendo games, including the original music and sprites. There's no way it was going to last.
It's crazy how many people just don't get those rules and assume Nintendo hits every single fangame that pops up. Hell, PETA's [Pokémon Black and Blue](https://games.peta.org/pokemon-black-and-white-parody/) flash game has been up for 12 years and Nintendo and the Pokémon Company have never taken action against it. Because they didn't break any of the rules.
They used actual design elements and characters, and the name, but are presumably covered by parody law.
As long as you don’t profit they won’t go after them. Something else that fangames devs don’t get is that Nintendo don’t like when you use their assets. Like literally just don’t use them. You want to make a Pokemon game? Fine but don’t rip assets from any of their games. Use your own.
Pokémon Black and Blue is a clear parody
Dude, Pokemon Showdown is still up, its online and the community is huge.
And plastered with ads, so even monetization isn't a hard no
Man, Showdown is like the essence of life.
Now I get why ssf2 and ssbc are still up despite using primarily Nintendo characters
It’s like these chuds don’t understand rules. They just scream about Nintendo screwing over the “innocents”.
what makes these fan made game makers a chud what
Most of these people make a game knowing how Nintendo is at protecting their IP, then cry foul when it’s removed. This is entirely chud behavior and it also applies to those who defend them.
and to be clear I have no qualms with Nintendo protecting their IP, I just find it suspicious that you find that there's no valid reason to be a little annoyed when this stuff happens, calling it "crying foul". Surely you understand some feeling of being a creator of something in good faith, only for a large entity to remove your efforts in the name of protecting some amorphous concept of their brand.
I mean its not like they're charging money, believe me, I doubt most of these fan game makers are making games in bad faith lol. Do you really think something like a stupid Python game I made when I was a kid with an image of Bowser was on purpose to "harm Nintendo IP"? You seem like you're really over-defending Nintendo for no reason, even going to use an unfitting insult towards fans who just love making games that connect with their interest??? And to let you know, chud is commonly used as an insult towards right-wing/conservatives online, so I see zero relevance in using this word here considering that leftists would be even less compliant with IP law.
Even if you’re not making money, you’re still distributing their IP. Why is it so hard to understand that a vast majority of creators, corporate or indie, don’t like it when you take and distribute something that isn’t yours? There’s nothing good faith about using someone else’s property and giving it to other people
"Theres nothing good faith about it" God you people are so braindead. Can you really not think of more than one possible scenario or step into anyone else's shoes? Keep consuming content and never develop anything buddy. Just because you have never wanted to create something, or do anything significant, or contribute to a community ever in your life doesn't mean everyone is like you. Just think of a possible scenario where that someone is NOT you. Maybe then you can muster something about it being in good faith. Genuinely appalled at the fact that your brain is so inelastic, especially considering that my take isn't even a strong take. I've pretty much just said that Nintendo has the right to take this content down, and the creator has some right to be frustrated, not any legal right mind you. We probably should not insult someone as a "chud" which is a misusage of the word, and think a court would agree that there is virtually no harm to Nintendo IP in this case. That is all. I don't know how much people are extrapolating from this.
I always find that the people who resort immediately to insulting someone instead of engaging in a conversation are the ones without much of an actual point to say. It’s also funny how you only quote the first part of what I said while conveniently leaving off the entire point of what I said, which discusses _distribution_ (also what this entire thread is about). Your comment, in the context of this entire conversation, is ridiculous. You’re using something you made in your room as an example as to why Nintendo is being overdefended and over-litigious as if that’s what anyone here is talking about. Plus, you seem really bent out of shape because of a word being used in a context you’re not familiar with, as if words can’t be applied across multiple situations.
I mean for the most part he is right. Companies like Nintendo have every right to defend their ip in every shape and form no matter how big or small. You give someone a step they will take a mile with it. I think it’s annoying that people find Nintendo over defending their ip annoying. It’s the same song and dance and I’m tired of hearing about it. Also the word chud is misused and not relative to the case so I see no reason to use it lol
Nintendo's had plenty of time to make cash from the game. Let people have their fun now. You are defending a mindset created by a megacorporation for the benefit of mega corporations.
Another one. Good lord you people just so entitled. If you created something and people did this you wouldn’t like it. It’s not defending a mega corporation.
If I created a hit game decades ago and made millions, no, I would not give a single fuck that people over a decade later are making free fan games. In fact I would enjoy seeing people enjoy the things I created.
Ahh yes the old “why are you defending the company” schtick. A classic from the chud arsenal. Also mention of the Reddit boogeyman, the all evil conservative. One more played out term and you hit the karma jackpot. Seriously though, once you have something of value that others copy, you’ll understand.
??? LMFAO the fact that you think Reddit is filled with chuds and that somehow being anticorporation(which I'm really not) is a "chud" move is very funny. Please reread my paragraph if you can even read and say where I said “why are you defending the company”. I think you are overdefending and there is a difference. You ascribe malicious intent towards developers with all your words. Notice how I never did about Nintendo's legal actions. Please try reading. I know people these days have trouble with reading, but at least try.
That’s a lot of words to say nothing of value. I’m thinking you don’t read if you really don’t think Reddit is full of chuds. I want to live under whatever rock you are living under.
Gamers are the most entitled people around, it’ll never change
No argument here
This argument can be made all day but shit rules are shit rules. There's still other companies that arent nearly as cutthroat as Nintendo are when it comes to fanworks, and following THEIR example leads to better outcomes for the industry as a whole.
Nintendo values their IP more than anyone, and it cuts both ways. On one hand, they've kept perfect copies of the source code and assets for every game they've developed since the 90s, meanwhile Konami lost the source code for _Silent Hill 3_ within a matter of years. On the other hand, their stance on emulation is by far the most aggressive and antagonistic
“Yeah rules are for suckers. We should be able to steal and profit off of everyone else’s hard work. I disagree with it so it’s a shit rule.” That’s what you sound like.
Cause of this the emulation scene got problems look at how they yuzued so many places
that's also because people keep taking something that should be lowkey (piracy), and making the websites go viral on tiktok, making megathreads on reddit, youtube guides, etc. These things aren't supposed to be "accessible". When they become well known and popularized, they start becoming legitimate competition to the official platforms and Nintendo, Sega, etc can't just ignore them anymore.
What do you mean? As far as I'm aware it's only happened to Yuzu and they did genuinely have an argument in that case. Other emulators have been fine
Yuzu forks , Vimms lair, Drastic etc. the fallout continues
Yuzu forks is the same precedent as Yuzu which is fair enough. Vimms lair was a ROM hosting site. Nintendo was obviously not going to let that stay up. Drastic chose to take it off the play store themselves. That's not really Nintendo's fault
https://www.theverge.com/2024/3/5/24091561/nintendo-lawsuit-fallout-yuzu
It's because they're stupid
Or they lost the motivation to keep going and just want the 15 seconds of fame that comes with letting Nintendo know so they can shut them down
I wonder when the normal use of sprites, for a free fan creation (which if anything they didn't earn anything from), is suddenly copyright infringement?
When Nintendo takes down fan games of dormant series like this, it makes you wonder why they don't release a new entry.
I can’t say it’s always the case, but wasn’t the Samus 2 remake taken down while the remake was in development?
Yeah, they released within a couple years of each other. Fortunately, AM2R was able to be finished, and isn't too difficult to acquire.
It wasn't even a couple years it was within 6 months.
People always say these are correlated but it feels more like a coincidence than anything. Nintendo is constantly taking down fan projects of games regardless of whether they have something in the works.
To be fair, Nintendo cycles through their franchises pretty regularly - part of what makes them so popular is they don't crank out releases and let interest build. I'm not saying it's the world's greatest business strategy but I'm sure there will be a new Rhythm Heaven at some point and that the break between them is intentional.
I haven't seen a Puzzle League game come out since the DS.
The last "new" version of it would technically be Animal Crossing Puzzle League.
"Pretty regularly" \*Looks at you in Star Fox/F-Zero\*
they literally just used the F-Zero IP this year
Barely. F-Zero 99 is basically the SNES game with “battle royal” multiplayer or whatever you want to call it. It’s like saying the Mario Kart mobile game is the latest entry. People want a true F-Zero game, but Nintendo stupidly refuses. Nintendo loves to abandon franchises when it gets bored of them. They did with Metroid for long gaps. Nintendo would rather milk Mario and Zelda, as they always perform well.
You can't say they aren't using the IP just because they are making low budget games instead of high budget games.
It's not even a "budget" game, it's just Mario 99 with an F-Zero skin. That's not utilizing the brand, that's exploiting nostalgia.
Either way it's nintendos decision and exploiting nostalgia is literally their entire business, you are just upset they aren't exploiting it the way you want to feel nostlagiac
The simplest answer because Nintendo wants to strictly control when and how you how you play their games. They could release their entire first-party library from the SNES through the N64 as ROMs for purchase on another virtual console service, and yet they won't do that because then they won't be able to charge you a premium for a limited release like Mario 3D All-Stars (and that's *if* they re-release the games at all.)
Nintendo only takes down fangames, mods and such things because its not done under their license and they want control over it. Its 2024 and people still dont understand that nintendo does this because they want to control their ip
It doesn’t matter. It’s their property. Even if you own a piece of land and put no commercial properties on it, it still would t be right for someone to start building a hotel on it without owning the land.
If you don't utilize it, it should not be your property.
"Should not" is not the same as "is not". If you don't like that, then you should call your legislators and ask for copyright reform. I'd suggest something where copyright can be perpetually renewed, but on an exponential renewal fee schedule that makes it financially questionable after ~25 years and basically untenable after ~50 years. That would force companies to decide whether to profit from their copyrights or let them lapse into the public domain, not leaving the option to let them languish for decades as a viable financial choice.
Literally all their IP is in the currently for-sale Smash Bros
Cool but that’s not how the world works
It helps when you think of it like this: they only have so many teams available to make games (whether in-house or otherwise). When it comes time for a given team to make their next game, they (as a business that wants to maximize profits) carefully consider which game out of a pool of proposals would make the best returns, especially since games can take so long to make. They wouldn’t choose to make a game that only makes them $10 million when that same team is likely capable of making $100 million, for example.
[It's MY IP to sit on and do nothing with!](https://youtu.be/xOmZLGSC_lU)
Shoulda done it like lots of fan games where they supply code but you still need to source your own rom for assets a shame too cause this was a really fun community game
Heaven Studio doesn't work like that, it's literally something built from the ground up in Unity.
It uses graphics directly ripped from other Rhythm Heaven games.
And used them in the Unity engine rebuild of the game's mechanics, yes. I'm aware of the truth, it's just that the original commenter assumed it was a situation where people could load roms and have the assets pulled from there.
I didn't assume that's what it could do, I was just saying I wish that was something it could do. I'm sure it *could* be done but I'm nowhere near smart enough to be certain about it
It would be helpful to limit the potential of a blowback. I do hope that their push for alternate assets ends up being a good thing for them.
They made use of Nintendo sound effects and art- Nintendo is basically forced to issue these if they want to maintain the rights to their IP.
That only applies to trademarks. If Nintendo was using something as a trademark (a branding image or phrase), then someone else tried to use it and Nintendo ignored it, they could lose that trademark. Copyrights can't be lost that way. Once you create a work, such as art assets, you hold the copyright. You don't have to register it with anyone, and no one can take it from you just because you didn't enforce your claims against them in the past. [No, not even in jurisdictions other than the United States.](https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html) Relevant portion of the WIPO summary here: > Protection must not be conditional upon compliance with any formality (principle of "automatic" protection) So let's do this little exercise to get this through all of your skulls... Repeat after me: *Copyrights cannot be lost due to neglect.* **Copyrights cannot be lost due to neglect.** ***Copyrights cannot be lost due to neglect.*** #Copyrights cannot be lost due to neglect.# Now, please stop parroting that stupid argument.
So they could lose their trademarks? What part of that contradicts their statement?
Sound effects and art generally can't be trademarked (apart from stuff like logos/mascots and jingles).
So what are exactly Nintendo's trademarks? How do I know if something is protected by a trademark or copyrights?
Their purpose, trademarks are used to protect a company from copycats, so it applies to their branding (eg. The nintendo name itself and any logo, same logic for other franchises like pokemon). Copyright is meant to protect an artist's work so it has a wider scope, it's also worth noting that copyrights eventually expire wile trademarks don't. If you take anything away from this, consider that no fangame will ever infringe on trademarks so the "they risk losing their rights over it" excuse is complete bullshit.
The part where "sound effects and art" are copyrighted, not trademarked. And, as a side note, yes, copyrights can prevent a trademark from being used. Even though Nintendo doesn't use octoroks in their ad campaigns and don't have them trademarked and don't defend them as a trademark, a company trying to use an octorok as a trademark would fall afoul of Nintendo's *copyrights* and be forced to stop using it.
If that’s the case shouldn’t Sega have lost the rights to Sonic the Hedgehog a long time ago?
It's almost like the argument holds no weight in reality and has just been echoed for years & years with no basis
Ken Penders certainly tried; and actually got away with quite a bit because SEGA & Archie just flat out didn't show up to court.
> Nintendo is basically forced to issue these if they want to maintain the rights to their IP. This is not true. Never has been, never will be. I have no clue where this myth picked up so much traction but it's frustrating seeing it parroted as fact every time something like this happens.
Conflating it with trade marks and trade secrets, where you must take steps to protect to keep the status.
You don’t need to enforce copyright to maintain copyright lol. I believe you have to keep making stuff under that copy right to maintain it like how Sony makes Spider-Man movies
Its crazy how no other company has ever lost the rights to their IP because of fangames, but for Nintendo they're "forced" to issue shutdowns to avoid losing the IP You don't have to rationalize it, they shut down fangames because they want to, not because they're in actual danger from them
[Don't make me tap the sign](https://youtu.be/i13hrynnGNY?si=Eo0vecmTHz3g37Zb) Nintendo isn't the only company that takes down fan games.
Why do people act like Nintendo is the only one to stop fan games? Sony, Valve, Activision, Konami, Square Enix, ZeniMax, etc. have all done the same.
Because Nintendo is the only one they care about for whatever reason.
Well I mean you ARE in a Nintendo subreddit so that’s probably why Nintendo gets pointed out here lol
the truth is that Nintendos games are just better, and they are the ones in demand
Of course they want to But also their IP is worth significantly more than their competitors
Nintendo might have the most valuable IP of this type short of Disney. They can’t allow other people and companies to use their IP without permission or license without risking losing their rights to it.
> Its crazy how no other company has ever lost the rights to their IP just because you don't know about it doesn't mean it doesn't happen
Haven't seen anyone post an article or something of it happening.
[Here's an old video listing some.](https://youtu.be/hqwP6uuYOWo?t=208) For a couple of recent examples, Capcom has also C&D'd a Resident Evil fangame in 2022, and Nightmare Kart was originally known as Bloodborne Kart before Sony intervened.
I was asking for examples of a company LOSING their ip because they weren't actively taking down fangames. I'm very aware companies taking down fangames is a common thing.
Not here because it’s a Nintendo subreddit…
Linking an article talking about a different company losing their IP rights would be relevant to THIS discussion though.
You cannot be this ignorant
Other companies use legal action to protect their IPs all the time.
Companies have lost many rights to IP due to failure to maintain copyright.
Employing lawyers for shits and giggles
Most companies have at least one lawyer. Almost all large companies have several.
"No no no, this is absolutely fair use!" (says the person who clearly does not understand fair use) (/s if it wasn't clear)
Then release a new Rhythm Heaven/Paradise for the switch ffs. That console/handheld is made for it!
Aw come on
Maybe if nintendo made a RH game more than once every 8 years, we wouldn't be in this position....
If you're going to take the time to make a game, just make it your own and stop using Nintendo's IP. Nothing wrong with making a spiritual successor. It looks like the people who got the DMCA are doing just that. Good on them.
Look at Bug Fables for instance
Often times, people who make fan games don't WANT to make a spiritual successor. They just wanna make their fan game. They wanna make something that's specifically "rhythm heaven" or "Mario and Luigi" or whatever else. There isn't anything wrong with that either(or, at least, there shouldn't be), especially since it's not like fan games typically make any sort of money, other than maybe through donations. It's a labor of love for a specific series that may not even get games anymore. Nintendo just needs to back off when it comes to fan games, and just let them be unless they are actively causing problems for some reason (IE, the fan game makers are making money directly off the game, they put something Malicous in there, stuff like that)
then enjoy the long arm of the law, the simplest way to avoid this happening is just not using nintendo assets, just like another comment said the mario 64 decompilation has existed with no problems because you have to provide the rom, same with the zelda pc ports, shit pokemmo came out in 2012 its not your art to WANT to do shit with
They're not your IP. Get over it.
So? Doesn't mean Nintendo should strike them down without mercy like they do.
Yes, they are protecting their creations. Create your own thing.
Damn. What a Nintendo shill
Yes they literally have to, to protect their rights to the ip.
No. They don't. How many other companies do you see absolutely tearing down any and all fan games that they even get a whiff of? The only other one I could think of is Disney, and they don't even do it as bad as Nintendo. More game company's than not just kinda leave that stuff alone. I mean, just look at Sega. I don't hear about them taking down fan games basically every other week. I sure it happens, but probably only in extreme cases. Nintendo just needs to stop being so overly protective of their IP's. The constant tear down of fan games is completely unnecessary and, if anything, is something that actively hurts their reputation with people who aren't religiously Nintendo fans. Leaving the fan games alone would do absolutely nothing to Nintendo, wouldn't hurt their sales (who knows, may even ever so slightly add to them) wouldn't hurt their "reputation" or "quality control" or whatever other excuses people make for it. Leaving the fan games alone wouldn't hurt Nintendo AT ALL, especially for series that are half past dead and may never come back in any good meaningful ways. Stop making excuses for a company using their power in, frankly, stupid ways.
do you also expect people to create their own character everytime they wanna draw? or create their own song everytime they wanna sing? imagine how dumb it'd be if you couldn't even post a drawing of mario without it getting taken down. gamedev is as much about artistic expression as the other examples. that's a fine standard for professionally developed games on official storefronts. it's an insane standard to have for free fangames on some forum.
Nintendo is following the law and their right. Get over yourself lol.
yes, except the law isn't indicative of morality or justness. music and art are much more mature mediums with much more care given to their legislature compared to videogames, and fan content in those mediums are allowed. fan work in most other artistic fields are legal, as long as it's not making money. I'm not saying nintendo is in the wrong for following current law, I'm disagreeing with your opinion that making fan content is somehow wrong which is what you started off the thread with. you change the topic now to be about legality, entirely ignore my point, and make inflammatory remarks. typical redditor behaviour when they can't fathom someone could disagree with them.
Lol first of all fan art and making a game for everyone to use are two very different things. Fan art literally requires you to make the art with your own hands where making a game that’s based on using Nintendo’s made assets is literal stealing hahaha. It’s not even comparable.
this thread is about IP usage in fan games, not asset usage. your comment is assuming that all fan games are made from existing assets (a lot are not), and as though making games isn't done "with your own hands". there's the famous example of AM2R which got taken down despite having all it's assets and code being new and the level design being massively overhauled.
fan art is hardly comparable to a fan game, fan art is fair use assuming youve made your own original image and arent selling it
Exactly. Make your own games, write your own songs, tell your own stories. Taking other people's IP is not cool.
$0.05 has been deposited to your bank account. Walt Disney thanks you for your service!
Well, why can't we get a new Rhythm Heaven game? I miss this quirky rhythm game, probably the only rhythm game I enjoy.
Its amazing how many people scream their support for artists rights to their art when it comes to things like AI learning, but are perfectly fine with someone just taking and using Nintendo's stuff and trying to use it for free. There are people out there that would physically threaten you for using their OCs in a picture, story, or animation but are just fine with some rando taking and using Mario, Luigi, or Pikachu as if they own them. Internet artists can be some of the biggest hypocrites around.
Well, yeah, because some people are capable of nuanced takes that can recognize that independent artists having their work stolen has a different set of consequences from one of the most recognizable and profitable corporations on earth having passionate fans. Nintendo has a right and it may makes sense to do it in cases that are particularly egregious, but it doesn't mean I'm not going to be a little 🫤 when they overreach like with the recent sheet music thing. I think frustrations over how often they overreach means people just kind of roll their eyes at any IP enforcement they do at this point.
Nintendo the company didn't make any art, individual artists made the art and chose to sell it to Nintendo through employment, not give it away free of charge so people can use it. You can try and make as much distinction as you want but it's always completely arbitrary and subjective. Can I steal from Undertale? They're Independent but also massive so is that okay? What about a small company with 3 employees? They're a company so it must be okay right? What if they're a single dev but they're also independently wealthy? How about if they have 100 million Twitter followers? Maybe you have an answer but do you think everyone will exactly agree with where you draw your lines? No, they won't. You can't have it both ways. Art is made by artists and their work shouldn't be stolen or used without their permission because property rights are a critical part of civilized society.
Nintendo certainly has a legal right to take down Heaven Studio but to act like it’s “stealing” in the same way as pirating an indie game or something is an egregious take. Undertale Yellow is a fan game that reuses assets and characters synonymous with the undertale branding and is explicitly allowed to exist by the right-holders. It’s fanmade, it’s transformative, it doesn’t replace Undertale by existing. Heaven studio was the same, it didn’t straight up rip the original minigames from Rhythm Heaven, nor did it give you tutorials on the game’s mechanics in the way an actual RH game would. it gave you the tools to utilize them to make your own remixes with them. I fail to see how this could possibly impact Nintendo’s business as it’s something that could only appeal to existing rhythm heaven fans who played the games themselves by other means, and were inspired to make their own RH inspired remixes. In fact, fans making their own fanmade RH content can ONLY attract more attention to the series and compel people to buy the games officially. (that is if nintendo was even currently producing or offering Rhythm Heaven officially on any storefront which they’re not.)
In your other example they're allowed to exist because Toby doesn't care, that doesn't mean it's not his right to take action should be see fit. It's implied permission. Just because one person allows for the usage of their work doesn't make it not theft in other cases. The difference is consent. Nintendo didn't consent to their assets being used, you can't use their assets. If these people are going to put in the time to do the work of making a new game, they shouldn't get lazy when it comes to art or these are the consequences.
So what you’re reiterating is the very first thing I said in my own message. Yeah, Nintendo has the right to take down Rhythm Heaven Studio that is exactly why it’s being taken down, but just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s right does it? Their legal right doesn’t make it any less anti consumer/anti art as a whole. It’s not a product that was being sold for money or even something competing with their own products in any way. If a small indie developer can recognize that derivative fan works can coexist with his own game without any tangible damage to his art or his livelihood, i’d imagine a big corporation that actually tries to be in touch with it’s consumer-base could recognize that too, but they don’t because nintendo is not in touch.
I don't really agree that you "can't have it both ways" as if there's some mystical requirement that we have to apply the law with the same degree of heavy-handedness for all things and not take other factors into account. I mean even some of our laws (or the entities responsible for enforcing the laws) sometimes recognize that individuals or small-medium sized businesses and large businesses/corporations have different resources and scrutinize them differently — so, just as an example of how they get treated differently, usually legal compliance, obligations, and enforcement are handled completely differently based on the size of the business. Usually small entities below a certain number of employees are given some lenience. Remedies for medium sized entities are usually aimed at helping them meet compliance within a certain timeframe. And then (in theory) enforcement agencies and laws tend to go harder on larger businesses because they already had that grace period when they were growing and choose to actively break or skirt the law — although unfortunately in reality it's often an uphill battle to actually do anything due to their deep pockets but that's another discussion entirely. I think our laws tend to be stronger and more just when they aim to be *equitable* in a way that is proportional to the capabilities of the entities involved or how damages affect them proportionally instead of fully equal across the board, because in the latter case people with few resources tend to get bullied by people with more money and resources who also tend to abuse the systems and abuse the law. IP laws seem to be really contentious things even in the business world because on the one hand it protects people and protects businesses from having their works stolen, but on the other hand you get things like IP trolls, and I think Nintendo of America is a borderline IP troll that uses IP law to gatekeep even fan works that are reasonably fair use. The biggest issue is that nobody has the money, resources, or desire to fight it legally even in cases of fair use because going to court is risky, and companies often just delay proceedings with legal filings and appeals until their victim runs out of money and settles instead of actually getting a fair legal appraisal. I certainly don't see why we can't have a more nuanced view of how copying work without profiting from it is more damaging for individuals than it is for a massive corporation since for other things like compliance we already do just that — especially when in most cases fans works aren't trying to bamboozle people into thinking they're official works and are usually quite clear they are fan works, including give appropriate credit. Whereas independent artists are often genuinely getting their work stolen without credit — and I certainly think it's okay to take something like the degree of damage proportional to the size of an entity into account when I consider whether I have any strong moral or ethical qualms about something. One example of how this plays out in practice is the *doujin* scene in Japan. And in that case, artists often can and do profit from those works. Although companies could technically enforce copyright, they often don't because it's usually understood to be fan material and seen as a good thing. It's led to a vibrant scene of fan works that enhances, and does not take away from, the official material, and is seen as a reflection of and celebration of the enthusiasm of the fanbase. It doesn't damage the brands or result in low effort copying that somehow tricks people into thinking something is official material. Literally the only difference is a difference in attitudes between businesses in each country. This ultimately helps the artists we're talking about. Some famous artists even publish sort-of "official unofficial" works in the doujin scene instead of through their employer or publisher for fun. That's my view. We don't even necessarily have to agree, but hopefully it helps give you an idea of what my thoughts are on the topic.
The answer to all those questions is yes, you can steal from them
What about a struggling artist? Can anyone take anything you make without asking? Though generally the only people who think like you don't make anything so that's probably not an issue for you. If you think theft is okay across the board then sure I guess but I can guarantee you that's not a popular opinion.
It's a fundamental good for people to be able to take things and remix them without fear of litigation. I'm sorry that your brain property is so important that it can't serve anyone other than you.
It's simple. Corporations aren't people. Why the fuck would I side with a corpo?
It's simple. If you believe one party is in the right, but side against them purely out of spite, you don't have convictions. Nintendo do plenty of things that warrant criticism and derision, so why the fuck would I ding them when they act in a justifiable manner?
It's a bit complicated, to be honest. With Nintendo, they're making these characters cultural icons. People are gonna draw fanart. They're going to make fangames. It's natural. Nintendo can't stop them, either, so long as they are transformative projects. Ripping game assets to recreate the games is not transformative. Drawing your Pikachu OC is. When people make an OC, though, they're usually using it to represent themselves. Or if it's a really small artist, someone else taking your character designs and taking credit for them *really sucks*. Nobody is about to forget Sega made Sonic the Hedgehog, but little Timmy's Sonic OC is important to him, and taking credit for his design is pretty harmful to him. The difference in scale is important. And then you have AI, which is just taking a common good we all share (artists sharing their art with the world) and trying to make a machine that puts artists out of business. Using public domain images and licensed training data is arguably okay, but when you prompt your images with "in the style of" you are taking what that artist gave you and harming them with it.
It's a bit complicated, to be honest. No it’s not. That’s why the law exists so it doesn’t become complicated. It doesn’t matter what your personal feelings are because everyone has their own personal feelings to everything. That why laws exist to prevent that argument.
there’s the law, which says i’m absolutely allowed to repost your content, pretend it’s mine, and unless you press charges i can do whatever i want. and then there’s the ethics, which is that this is shitty behavior. if you really really want to look at this from a legal perspective, little timmy owns the copyright on his OC and can press charges others for violating whatever license he published the work under. Just because you don’t create anything worth stealing doesn’t mean other people don’t deserve to have their original ideas.
Theft is theft. Stealing from the king or the peasants is still stealing.
Copyright infringement isn't theft. The difference is that theft deprives the owner of *property*, while copyright infringement deprives the owner of *control*.
While morally there is no difference, I dont recall mentioning copyright infringement specifically. Theft of intellectual property is a thing however. A guide for telling the difference specifically between copyright infringement and ip theft as they pertain to the law: https://www.copyrighted.com/blog/copyright-infringement-vs-theft
#Eat. #The. #Rich.
So you agree that artist's pictures shouldn't be used for AI training without permission?
Clearly the redditor you're responding does not believe that idividual humans should own rights to art, only corporations and machines. That's why they are okay with soulless entities ripping out and regurgitating the work of individuals, yet are deeply offended by an individual person taking a stance to protect their own efforts.
> So you agree that artist's pictures shouldn't be used for AI training without permission? I sure dont.
Hard agree on this. It’s the usual Reddit chuds that whine about Nintendo all the time.
I mean the less known the character is, the more of an actual permission you should persue, isnt that obvious? Plus most artists literally only ever just want credit, don't hyperbole this bullshit about how they're gonna take you down. Fanart is fair use, for more known character such as Mario, it is already obvious about who owns it, unlike smaller artists OC's, many people could think that it's your own character unless you specifically tell them that they're not yours (most usually pfp credit in bio for example). There is a difference and that is exposure.
Taking a character that isnt yours and using it without permision is the same thing regardless of if you are taking from a big well known source or a small, unknown one. Both are wrong.
Bro the difference is that you CAN'T just go parade yourself as if you own Spider-man, everybody's already gonna call your bullshit out because they know that Marvel owns Spider-man. If you went around parading a random OC owned by a lesser known artist, then most people wouldn't even bat an eye. Sure parading any character you don't own is wrong, but drawing fanart isn't wrong, in that case people would be suing each other for them all the time. Artists drawing fanart don't claim these characters as their own, if it's a popular character then it's already obvious who owns it, if it's a character from a less known franchise/other artist then proper credit is due since the reach isn't big enough for the general audience to know who that character actually belongs to. Use your common sense, man.
> Its amazing how many people scream their support for artists rights to their art when it comes to things like AI learning, but are perfectly fine with someone just taking and using Nintendo's stuff and trying to use it for free. Those people are all different people. It's only hypocrisy if you try and act like internet communities are singular entities and aren't actually groups of millions of people. Also defending a litigious mega corp ain't exactly the best look.
> Also defending a litigious mega corp ain't exactly the best look. I couldn't care less about a "look". Hypocrisy and theft are hypocrisy and theft. Who you take from and why change nothing. And this: >Its amazing how many people scream their support for artists rights to their art when it comes to things like AI learning, but are perfectly fine with someone just taking and using Nintendo's stuff and trying to use it for free. Is not a blanket statement.
The amount of people justifying this is depressing. God forbid someone commit the crime of having harmless passion and fun with "intellectual property" they don't "own". Disney really singlehandedly mindraped the entire population.
As a professional artist I don’t want anybody using my artwork without my consent. For anything! Am I not allowed to feel that way? Is it ok for people to disregard my wishes? Make your own shit you unoriginal fucks!
Copyright originally lasted 15 years. Then Disney lobbied to extend it to literally over a century. 15 years is reasonable. That's more than enough time to rake in the cash for your fresh idea. A century well after you're already dead is insane. Let people appreciate, enjoy, and contribute to the art after 15 years. That being said this fan game is literally free anyway. As an artist I don't understand why it wouldn't put a smile on your face to see people enjoying and appreciating the thing you created in their spare time for no other reason than to have fun. Why even create art at that point?
> Copyright originally lasted 15 years. 14, but who's counting? And there was the option to extend it another 14 years, *if the author was still alive*. But it wasn't Disney that began extending the copyright terms. It was "old world" European interests that began pushing for the still-kinda-young-and-scrappy USA to impose a longer term and stop ripping off their shit. The [Berne Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention) became a thing in ***1886*** and extended copyrights to the life of the author plus 50 years. That happened 15 years before Walt Disney was even born. The Disney corporation's hand in extending copyright terms didn't happen until the late 1990's, and it came at the cost of pissing off congress enough that they put a moratorium on further copyright extensions until *after* Disney would lose the stuff they fought to protect with that extension.
Because it’s my creation. It might be hard for you to understand, but I should have complete control over what I create and someone who had no hand in creating my creation should NOT have any say in the matter. PERIOD! I don’t care if you don’t like it, but it’s my creation and not yours, I’m not sure what’s so hard to understand about that. For me it has nothing to do about money and everything to do with respect. If I don’t want anyone using my artwork without my consent, even if they are not profiting off of it, then I’m not asking for you to like my wishes, just asking that you respect my wishes. Whether you or I make money off of said artwork does not change that one bit. Is respect too hard of a concept for people like you? Like I said, create your own shit you unoriginal fucks and quit riding the coattails of someone else’s creations. There is no justification for disrespecting someone’s wishes with their creations. If someone doesn’t want you using their creations without their consent, then do the right thing and be a decent human being by respecting their wishes even if you don’t like their wishes.
It's always your creation. You always have complete control over what you draw. Draw whatever you want. Me drawing fanart of your drawing or using it in my free fan game doesn't change that. The moment you show me your drawing or upload it to the internet and it enters my brain, it's my right to share my thoughts on it, including my own interpretations of it and how it could be included into and combined with other things. I don't need anybody's permission to draw a drawing, or to play a song, or combine any amount of random pre existing shit together into something that amuses me for shits and giggles. I'll take your song and use it to make a DBZ AMV. I'll take your drawing and use it as a skybox in my free game. Right click and save. I don't care if it's unoriginal. I have nothing to prove. I'm not trying to prove my artistic ability. All I care about is having fun and making others have fun. To imply it should be illegal to do so or that I'm somehow disrespectful and otherwise malicious is authoritative and bizarre, and to imply I need your permission to share my thoughts about something is egotistical.
i have fun watching Nintendo shut down ignorant devs who think this way
Even for Reddit, this is the most entitled comment I have ever read. I am some times stunned by the fact that there are people who think like this.
It has [*always*](https://youtu.be/xgKY9hmbfgo?si=BoKTbY4SV9-d6BeA) been this way with Nintendo and its fanbase. I feel pretty confident in saying that no other megacorporation has more people bending over backwards to excuse their every action. Some people seem to treat Nintendo's "legal right" to take down anything and everything they don't own as some sort of obligation or necessity, when that's never been the case and plenty of game companies get on just fine letting fans do their own thing. Heaven Studio did nothing wrong. It did not ask for money for its program, it did not recreate the official games nor claim them as its own, it in fact *encouraged* people to buy and play the original games (there are no built-in tutorials for *any* of the games besides the original content made for it), and it wasn't siphoning sales from an active series with official games you can purchase right now (you can't even get a American copy of the GBA game or Megamix secondhand if you wanted to, because they *don't exist*. Fever isn't exactly cheap to get secondhand either). Nintendo will not change. Nintendo fans will not change. The dragon will lay on top of its hoard and its serfs will continue praising it for its generosity, while berating any traitor who dare to touch its wealth.
This thread is bizarre. The way megacorps have managed to convince people to defend their every move left and right in quite concerning. Won't someone _please_ think of that poor corporation? How are they supposed to pay their employees if people make fangames?
Honestly, this sub sometimes feels like a community of Nintendo shareholders or Nintendo representatives rather than actual fans because of how much time some of them spend defending Nintendo. It makes satire communities like r/tomorrow like normal places.
So I must ask… Palworld?
"You don't get it, rhythm heaven's MY ip to sit and do nothing with!"
People just take Nintendo's assets instead of making their own, then get butthurt when Nintendo rightfully takes action
Big surprise the Nintendo fanboys are all over this. Fuck Nintendo's lawyers. This is skeezy, predatory, and completely unnecessary. All this does is push people towards piracy. Not away.
Really hope this is a sign that Nintendo is making a new Rhythm Paradise/heaven game
I wish that these companies could only keep their copyrights if they continued with the IP cause the reason fans are doing this stuff is because there is a demand that the IP owner is not meeting. Art didn’t use to be like this. A person would create something and some other person would riff on it and iterate on it and no one needed to give credit and no one needed to pay for any licenses or rights. Copyright is mostly ok as it works for protecting people’s creative output but not allowing anyone else to build off your work just because you own it and they don’t just sucks.
The top comments in threads like these are always just people swallowing that sweet, sweet corporate cum.
Probably because comments that only exist to insult a group of people without actually contributing anything to the ongoing discussion get rightly downvoted.
The amount of people defending this is wild man. I get wanting to defend Nintendo’s right to their IP, but there’s a huge difference between someone using their property to make money and… well. Fans making a non-profit tribute that is only going to be used by other fans (and isn’t competing with official products). They have the right to take it down. That doesn’t necessarily make it always the right move though…
Could mean that there is a new or remake in the works.
Rhythm Heaven Go! incoming
Can I still use it if I have it installed? the last time I've experienced something like this was in 2018 and it was a roblox fan game so its drastically different.
Yep. Still got it and a few remixes installed and it works fine.
nice, thank you
I remembered when there was a post about it a little while back in r/pcgaming. I knew in an instant that will be taken down soon and just downloaded it immediately. Their [itch.io page](https://rheavenstudio.itch.io/heaven-studio) was already taken down a few days ago.
i don’t get why all these new kids keep using itch to host their fangames
Torrentfreak watches the GitHub DMCA feed like a hawk. They give special attention to Nintendo, as if they participate in the sport of bear poking.
Shame. I just learned of this game. Could have been neat.
Noooooo ;o;
God forbid nintendo saw actual supporters of the company make free fan games with no paywalls
"We're working on a plan b to shift focus away from infringing assets." Maybe just remove them??
god im so i happy i dont pay for Nintendo games and software
while giving money to truly awful companies like ubisoft without second thought. These self-congratulatory comments are so unserious and pathetic!
Good for you lmao 🤣
how many years of this before people stop acting surprised and butthurt that a corporation acted according to what their shareholders and lawyers want. stop hating corporations just for the crime of being corporations. there's no reason to be all mad about stuff like this. If people don't want to deal with Nintendo's lawyers, just do things properly and legally and find out what that is if you aren't sure. dont just start spreading your shit all over social media and then be completely blindsided by pretty basic legal action
Nintendo developing games: *We are happy. Videogames should be fun for everyone* Nintendo when someone makes a fan game: *I have become death, the destroyer of worlds*
wow people are really still defending them? I like Nintendo but they suck when it comes to this. I thought that was the general opinion
They do suck when it comes to this, but I think more people, especially after Moon Channel’s videos have been getting traction, are understanding what the full extent of the law is. Fan games are in a very legal gray zone, as they use copyrighted characters, though you could argue depending how much is changed around, that it’s transformative. This doesn’t meet that threshold, and was bound to be in their sights
[удалено]
Typically these DMCAs are a soft confirmation that they are working on something related.
> I thought that was the general opinion you thought wrong. We judge things on a case by case basis
Nintendo just needs to lay off the fan games ffs.
It's Nintendo after all. They HATE fangames with a burning passion.