Support NeoGAF

[Dascu]

Atlus may have some avenues other than copyright or trademark infringement, at least in the EU, for example with the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, by arguing that there 1) there is a commercial purpose (ads on the RPCS3 website), and 2) it's using Atlus intellectual property without permission and may be cause business damage.

I suspect there may be similar grounds in the USA for an injunction like this. Whether they really have a strong case is another matter, but indeed it's not like the website owners have the funds for legal recourse.

 

[FamousLastX]

I have a random question. I've been playing P5 for the last couple of months (going to beat it today) and the game has been blocked from streaming from the first day to the last. I thought there was talk that it was from a certain date on and that date had changed a couple of times? Did they just completely go back on that and decide to block the entire game?

Every single trophy that I get, it tells me it can't take a screenshot. Every time I boot the game it has to remind me that we're blocked. It's obnoxious over 90 hours.

Unfortunately that talk relates to those streaming using other means such as capture cards and the likes that they had those "restrictions" in place on. Share features directly via the PS4 have always been completely disabled for the entire game. It is obnoxious and one of my only real big disappointments with the game.

 

[Lucumo]

Thank you Atlus for promoting this awesome emulator

Yeah, didn't know that Playstation 3 emulation has come along in the past few years.

 

[jmga]

Atlus may have some avenues other than copyright or trademark infringement, at least in the EU, for example with the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, by arguing that there 1) there is a commercial purpose (ads on the RPCS3 website), and 2) it's using Atlus intellectual property without permission and may be cause business damage.

I suspect there may be similar grounds in the USA for an injunction like this. Whether they really have a strong case is another matter, but indeed it's not like the website owners have the funds for legal recourse.

The existence of ads doesn't mean there is a commercial purpose. All non-profit organizations need funding.

 

[Dascu]

The existence of ads doesn't mean there is a commercial purpose. All non-profit organizations need funding.

I know but explain that to a judge. Ads often are interpreted as an assumption of commercial purpose.

 

[GaimeGuy]

We live in a world where a multi million dollar company moved its office because a fortune teller told them so.(Square Enix)

We live in a world where a multi million dollar company spent millions on various projects just because they were fans of some developpers or games. (CyGames)

We live in a world where companies are run by humans with feelings and in a world where we saw decisions took by humans driven by these feelings.

Even though I think the Atlus-PC stuff is more about incompetence and being backward, I cant blame someone else thinking that.

Cygames even started an anime studio. They're bringing in way more money than they know what to do with.

 

[Seth]

gaf needs to get over the fact that companies can protect their property. Most dont do it situations like this, but if one wants to do it they can. Just like the AMR2 thing, nintendo can take that shit down if they want. And every other idiot who uses nintendos property is going to get their shit taken down. It CANT be a surprise at this point.

Atlus doesn't want their game all over an emulation site. They can force their content off if they want to. Fucking get over it.

 

[Kthulhu]

Yeah, didn't know that Playstation 3 emulation has come along in the past few years.

It's crazy. Makes me wonder what an official emulator from Sony would look like. Hopefully the PS5 will be backwards compatible.

gaf needs to get over the fact that companies can protect their property. Most dont do it situations like this, but if one wants to do it they can. Just like the AMR2 thing, nintendo can take that shit down if they want. And every other idiot who uses nintendos property is going to get their shit taken down. It CANT be a surprise at this point.

Atlus doesn't want their game all over an emulation site. They can force their content off if they want to. Fucking get over it.

To quote Angry Joe: Yeah they have the right, to be a fucking dick.

 

[MUnited83]

gaf needs to get over the fact that companies can protect their property. Most dont do it situations like this, but if one wants to do it they can. Just like the AMR2 thing, nintendo can take that shit down if they want. And every other idiot who uses nintendos property is going to get their shit taken down. It CANT be a surprise at this point.

Atlus doesn't want their game all over an emulation site. They can force their content off if they want to. Fucking get over it.

False. No, they can't legally do it. They don't have the right.
Doesn't stop them from being shitheads and threatening people into submission of course. But why would be such a corporate asslicker to the point of defending it?

 

[jmga]

gaf needs to get over the fact that companies can protect their property. Most dont do it situations like this, but if one wants to do it they can. Just like the AMR2 thing, nintendo can take that shit down if they want. And every other idiot who uses nintendos property is going to get their shit taken down. It CANT be a surprise at this point.

Atlus doesn't want their game all over an emulation site. They can force their content off if they want to. Fucking get over it.

Of course they can't do whatever they want just because it is their IP, there is a right called fair use in the US that allows you to use copyrighted material without the owner's approval and in EU it is even easier. Let aside the non-profit purpose.

Companies just take advantage of their economic position bullying individuals with court costs they cannot afford.

 

[shiyrley]

gaf needs to get over the fact that companies can protect their property. Most dont do it situations like this, but if one wants to do it they can. Just like the AMR2 thing, nintendo can take that shit down if they want. And every other idiot who uses nintendos property is going to get their shit taken down. It CANT be a surprise at this point.

Atlus doesn't want their game all over an emulation site. They can force their content off if they want to. Fucking get over it.

Please enlighten me on how they have the right to remove text on a website. Text.

The compatibility status of the game. Text. "The game runs well, the game has this glitch".

 

[Zelias]

Didn't know you could run P5 on a PS3 emulator. Thanks, Atlus!

 

[MUnited83]

Please enlighten me on how they have the right to remove text on a website. Text.

The compatibility status of the game. Text. "The game runs well, the game has this glitch".

They don't even have the right to remove the screenshots. Screenshots showing improvements in the emulator fall squarely under fair use.

 

[_Ryo_]

gaf needs to get over the fact that companies can protect their property. Most dont do it situations like this, but if one wants to do it they can. Just like the AMR2 thing, nintendo can take that shit down if they want. And every other idiot who uses nintendos property is going to get their shit taken down. It CANT be a surprise at this point.

Atlus doesn't want their game all over an emulation site. They can force their content off if they want to. Fucking get over it.

Atlus has absolutely ZERO legal right to remove the name of a game off of a compatibility list.

 

[LeleSocho]

Always more glad that i returned Persona 5 the moment i read about those stupid ass restrictions about streaming, they could make the best games ever but if they don't tone down the craziness they can forget about my money.

Hope Sega beats some sense into them.

 

[Dascu]

Please enlighten me on how they have the right to remove text on a website. Text.

The compatibility status of the game. Text. "The game runs well, the game has this glitch".

It is related to their game and it is potentially advertising and supporting an illegal reproduction of their product.

They don't even have the right to remove the screenshots. Screenshots showing improvements in the emulator fall squarely under fair use.

A judge in court is the only one who can say whether something falls under the USA's 'fair use' exception or not. They totally have the right to sue and try their luck in court if need be.

 

[guybrushfreeman]

gaf needs to get over the fact that companies can protect their property. Most dont do it situations like this, but if one wants to do it they can. Just like the AMR2 thing, nintendo can take that shit down if they want. And every other idiot who uses nintendos property is going to get their shit taken down. It CANT be a surprise at this point.

Atlus doesn't want their game all over an emulation site. They can force their content off if they want to. Fucking get over it.

Lol, it’s not clear they do have that right. So take your holier than thou attitude somewhere else, thanks. The legal precedent here is actually 100% against them. Someone posted the BLEEM! case earlier in which this kind of content (screenshots and accuracy descriptions) were legal.

How about, emulation is legal. Fucking get over it

 

[shiyrley]

It is related to their game and it is potentially advertising and supporting an illegal reproduction of their product.

A judge in court is the only one who can say whether something falls under the USA's 'fair use' exception or not. They totally have the right to sue and try their luck in court if need be.

"Potentially"

They need to remove the Persona 5 screenshots from the PS3 PSN store, I mean, they are potentially supporting people playing it on a pirated PS3

Please realise how ridiculous you are being

They don't even have the right to remove the screenshots. Screenshots showing improvements in the emulator fall squarely under fair use.

I know, but removing text is even more stupid and ridiculous and harder to defend. The defence force still tries tho, because reasons

 

[guybrushfreeman]

It is related to their game and it is potentially advertising and supporting an illegal reproduction of their product.

A judge in court is the only one who can say whether something falls under the USA's 'fair use' exception or not. They totally have the right to sue and try their luck in court if need be.

Saying someone has the ‘right to sue’ is meaningless. I could sue you at any time for any reason, it has no relation to the law

 

[MUnited83]

It is related to their game and it is potentially advertising and supporting an illegal reproduction of their product.

A judge in court is the only one who can say whether something falls under the USA's 'fair use' exception or not. They totally have the right to sue and try their luck in court if need be.

False again, it's not legal to have a site take down the very mention of a name of the game.
It's not advertising or supporting an illegal reproduction any more than the original PS3 version
There's already precedence in court for this. Atlus wouldn't ever win this.

Also lmao @"right to sue". Bruh, I have the "right to sue" you right now if I wished to. Means jackshit.

 

[Durante]

A judge in court is the only one who can say whether something falls under the USA's 'fair use' exception or not. They totally have the right to sue and try their luck in court if need be.

Actually, a judge has already decided:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=250043196&postcount=108

 

[Dascu]

"Potentially"

They need to remove the Persona 5 screenshots from the PS3 PSN store, I mean, they are potentially supporting people playing it on a pirated PS3

Please realise how ridiculous you are being

I know, but removing text is even more stupid and ridiculous and harder to defend. The defence force still tries tho, because reasons

Saying someone has the ‘right to sue' is meaningless. I could sue you at any time for any reason, it has no relation to the law

False again, it's not legal to have a site take down the very mention of a name of the game.
It's not advertising or supporting an illegal reproduction any more than the original PS3 version
There's already precedence in court for this. Atlus wouldn't ever win this.

Also lmao @"right to sue". Bruh, I have the "right to sue" you right now if I wished to. Means jackshit.

I am not defending Atlus here or saying that they would win in court. I'm saying they have enough legal grounds, across copyright, trademark and market law, to file a court order for injunction to remove the content. There is a difference between right to sue/procedural grounds for injunctive relief, and the actual merits on the substance.

Disclaimer: I'm a copyright lawyer.

Note: Bleem v Sony is indeed a relevant case, but I wonder if there haven't been newer cases in the mean time. And again, this does not mean that Atlus suddenly has no right to send a C&D. It just shows that RPCS3 should fight back. Case law also evolve over time. A decision from 15 years ago does not imply that any situation, admittedly similar, will lead to the same outcome.

 

[UrbanRats]

Always more glad that i returned Persona 5 the moment i read about those stupid ass restrictions about streaming, they could make the best games ever but if they don't tone down the craziness they can forget about my money.

Hope Sega beats some sense into them.

Had foegotten about that, lol.
What a bunch of clowns.

 

[guybrushfreeman]

I am not defending Atlus here or saying that they would win in court. I'm saying they have enough legal grounds, across copyright, trademark and market law, to file a court order for injunction to remove the content. There is a difference between right to sue/procedural grounds for injunctive relief, and the actual merits on the substance.

Disclaimer: I'm a copyright lawyer.

I think you need to review the BLEEM case. I don’t believe for a second there would be an injunction or they could possibly prevail in this case. There is precedent already and it is 100% against them

 

[Raw64life]

Props to Atlus for Streissand Effecting this emulator. More interest in emulation is always a good thing.

 

[Baraka Obama]

What's piracy got to do with it? This thread is about emulation.

The game came out less then a year ago so it is just another method of piracy.

 

[admiraltaftbar]

Actually, a judge has already decided:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=250043196&postcount=108

That was their use of screenshots though. It's technically untested for whether you can blatantly advertise a single product as working on your emulator and still get away with it. Plus there's no telling what a court would rule if they were taken to a state known for ruling in favor of bigger businesses which is all the rage now.

 

[LordRaptor]

Actually, a judge has already decided:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=250043196&postcount=108

That was a decision made for that particular product, which may or may not serve as precedent for future products making similar claims, but would need to go to a judge to decide.

"Fair Use" is saying "Yes, I did infringe on copyright, but I have a good reason to".
That ruling predates the DMCA, and courts today are significantly more corporate friendly.

 

[guybrushfreeman]

The game came out less then a year ago so it is just another method of piracy.

You know it was possible to pirate the game on PS3 even before release right? This thread has nothing to do with piracy. It is about emulation

 

[Stalwart]

You really can't have a single emulation thread lately without half of it being shitposts about piracy.

 

[sangreal]

That was a decision made for that particular product, which may or may not serve as precedent for future products making similar claims, but would need to go to a judge to decide.

"Fair Use" is saying "Yes, I did infringe on copyright, but I have a good reason to".
That ruling predates the DMCA, and courts today are significantly more corporate friendly.

no it doesn't

Connectix also beat Sony fwiw (again, post-DMCA)

 

[Fiendcode]

This sets an incredibly bad precedent and in response I'll no longer be purchasing Persona games (sorry Q2).

 

[Vital Tundra]

You know what? I think I’m done with Atlus products.

 

[LordRaptor]

no it doesn't

Connectix also beat Sony fwiw (again, post-DMCA)

you're right, my bad, I thought bleem was late 90s and DMCA was early 2000s.
e: the rest of my point stands though - its up to a judge to decide fair use not an infringer, and todays courts are more pro-corporation.

 

[Sami+]

Stop acting like you know the ins and outs of the entire legality of digital and ip right in 2017 just because theres a reference of a decades old case. The world has changed a fuck ton since then. This isnt a black and white scenario.

Not to mention, this was about them being petty. I never brought up the legality.

This isn't how American law works lmao

"Roe v Wade was decades ago the world has changed a lot since then"

 

[BigEmil]

Lol in those Reddit threads portbegging and acting so entitled to the game

 

[Glass Shark]

.

 

[ASilentProtagonist]

Lol in those Reddit threads portbegging and acting so entitled to the game

It's really baffling.

 

[Lucumo]

It's really baffling.

Yeah, one would understand if the game was any good but this...

 

[jmga]

That was a decision made for that particular product, which may or may not serve as precedent for future products making similar claims, but would need to go to a judge to decide.

No, that defeats the purpose of case laws.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent

 

[sixteen-bit]

Incredible to see how quickly PS3 emulation has progressed

 

[Linkark07]

Time to change those Atlus executives rotten hearts.

Being serious, Atlus really hates PC. While Sega said they wouldn't meddle inside Atlus, I seriously wish they did that right now. Those old Atlus executives don't want to change their obtuse point of view.

What's next? They will go and try to takedown the sites that help people emulate Persona 4, Persona 3 FES and Persona 3 Portable?

 

[Pooya]

You just gotta wait it out. Whoever old fart that is in charge will eventually retire and Sega will have yet another corporate restructure eventually that would hopefully get rid of Atlus autonomy. To think when acquisition happened people were happy about that, we can clearly see that Sega manages their properties better than Atlus now and it can only be good thing for growth of their properties.

 

[BiggNife]

I think this has less to do with Atlus not liking the PC and more Atlus not liking PC savvy people getting their game for free

Yeah. It's unquestionably this.

e: To be clear, this is most likely the reason why Atlus is doing this, whether or not it's legitimate is another argument entirely. "A publisher equates emulators with piracy" is far more plausible than "a publisher has some weird hate boner for the PC." There's even precedent for this sort of thing when you look at Sony and the Bleem stuff.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Atlus' recent assholishness with copyright is truly disappointing.

 

[MUnited83]

Can’t really say I’m shocked that Atlus doesn’t want information about their game on an emulation website, especially so close to its retail release. Honestly, I’m surprised more publishers don’t do this sort of thing.

Also, the idea that they “hate PC” is absolutely drawing the wrong conclusion from this.

You can pirate the game right now on modded PS3.



This post I just made a lot more "negative" information that lets people know it can be easily pirated.
Can't wait for Atlus to take down my fucking NeoGAF post.

 

[shiyrley]

You can pirate the game right now on modded PS3.



This post I just made a lot more "negative" information that lets people know it can be easily pirated.
Can't wait for Atlus to take down my fucking NeoGAF post.

*clears throat*

Persona 5 can be played from start to finish on RPCS3.

Now Atlus has to take down NeoGAF.

 

[Aeana]

That was their use of screenshots though. It's technically untested for whether you can blatantly advertise a single product as working on your emulator and still get away with it. Plus there's no telling what a court would rule if they were taken to a state known for ruling in favor of bigger businesses which is all the rage now.

It's not untested at all.

And there are screenshots on the back of all of those.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

This is the kind of thing that just isn't worth fighting about. Let Atlus have their odd request. It won't stop Persona 5 from functioning, and I'd much rather the team focus their energy/resources on improving the emulator itself.

 

[LordRaptor]

No, that defeats the purpose of case laws.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent

Judges rule on precedents as to whether they are relevant. Saying "Yes, I did infringe, but I had a reason to, it was the same thing as X vs Y" is still going in front of a judge to decide that.
Its legally the same (other than being a civil case) as "Yes, I killed that man, but it was in self defence, it was the same thing in X vs Y" - you don't automatically get to declare that its the same, it goes in front of a judge to decide.