Pokémon Company Shuts Down Popular Minecraft Mod: Pixelmon

#52
Wait, can they even do that? It's a non-profit mod of an existing game. I thought that was fair game.
Nintendo views free games that have a large amount of notoriety as a monetized commercial product for some reason and Nintendo knows these people aren't going to afford fighting them in court.

https://waypoint.vice.com/en_us/article/43yzpm/nintendo-explains-why-they-didnt-focus-on-indie-games-at-e3 said:
Waypoint: How are you talking about monetization here, because with AM2R, that was a game that anyone could download for free, and again I think, for fans, there was this notion of, "go talk to that person," or "go talk to other fan creators" and see if there's a way to not kill that project, to investigate the ideas that happening there that are exciting, who knows.

Reggie: But again, to differentiate this, we have had conversations with entities that started as fans and became more of a business partner. Those conversations happen all the time, but again, when something transitions to a commercial product, and that's what [AM2R] was—there wasn't a charge, but it was now a commercial product.

Waypoint: I guess I need... what's the definition of "commercial product" for Nintendo?

Reggie: Well, again, it's all about... How do we protect our intellectual property? How do our creators, like Mr. Sakamoto, who created Metroid, and Nintendo control that intellectual property so that we can drive where it's going, versus someone else driving where it's going.

That's where the line is very clear for us. And again, we could go on to YouTube and a variety of different places and see fans doing interesting things with our IP. But when it turns to driving the direction of the IP, or somehow monetizing or becoming a commercial project, that's where for us, the line has been crossed.
 
#53
IIRC Pokemon Prism (a mod of one of the GBC games) was on the same line but Pokemon Company shut that down too. I think there was document detailing the takedown but I don't know if that was real or not.
As someone that was on the team, yes it was real.

See the above post, I'm assuming that was the reason.
 
#55
So you using photos and logos you haven't licensed in any way is "fair use" but people doing similar to make a free game isn't "fair use"? How so?

Even if your avatar is fair use and a game isn't, you're still not "respecting the IP". Don't you feel ashamed for that?
 
#62
Wait, can they even do that? It's a non-profit mod of an existing game. I thought that was fair game.
its fair use if you make the mod, its not if you distribute it publically

Well in this case the dude is literally ripping whole assets for his avatar, while this mod team made their own models for the Pokemons.
you always do this crazy bit where you pretend everything is the same
 
#65
its fair use if you make the mod, its not if you distribute it publically



you always do this crazy bit where you pretend everything is the same
This is fair use even if you distribute it publically. Hell, fair use is literally abouting distributing works publically.

Oh, they aren't the same. Factually , the one ripping of assets to put on a avatar is worse than the one recreating a creation in their own way. Factually, this is no different from fan art or fan fiction.
 
#68
Well in this case the dude is literally ripping whole assets for his avatar, while this mod team made their own models for the Pokemons.
The mod uses custom models while the avatar are straight rips from a source
You guys are comparing 2 entirely different things then making a judgement call on which one is worse.

One is a mod that is using an existing IP with their likeness to Pokemon as a mod (using pokemon to gain downloads and help build its popularity etc). The other is a person using an image on a forum board. I guess an arguement could be made that both could get taken down via copyright claims but the mod would get the most attention. Why these both are treated as the same thing is mind boggling.
 
#69
Factually , the one ripping of assets to put on a avatar is worse than the one recreating a creation in their own way.


Factually, this is no different from fan art or fan fiction.
Its like you moved to another planet. To who, exactly? The executives and investors of Nintendo? Lawyers? Who thinks using avatars on a forum is worse than creating a fan mod that infringes on copyright? Who thinks a mod for Minecraft using copyrighted content is the same as drawing a picture? And no, by the way, it's not fair use. You can't take someone else's copyrighted content and make your own thing and give it away, not even for free. This is how rappers get sued years later for songs that were on free mixtapes, it doesn't matter if it was free or not. It's their copyright to control.
 
#70
Its like you moved to another planet. To who, exactly? The executives and investors of Nintendo? Lawyers? Who thinks using avatars on a forum is worse than creating a fan mod that infringes on copyright? And no, by the way, it's not fair use. You can't take someone else's copyrighted content and make your own thing and give it away, not even for free. This is how rappers get sued years later for songs that were on free mixtapes, it doesn't matter if it was free or not. It's their copyright to control.
Avatars on a forum are definitely worse if you actually look at the laws. What values executives and investors of Nintendo give to it is frankly irrelevant.

"Getting sued" also means jackshit. You can sue anyone for pretty much anything. TPC could sue people for doing motherfucking fanart right now. They could sue people for using fucking Pokémon avatars ffs. Actually winning the case, now that's a completely different matter. Feel free to actually link to a case where a rapper actually lost a case where he got sued about a free song he made.
 
#74
I think Pokemon Go and Sun/Moon sort of solved that problem a while ago.
I dont think it did. There are tonnes of kids who gateway into Pokemon via minecraft and roblox and the truth is a lot of them wouldnt have done it otherwise.

Minecraft really never dented the Pokemon company in any way so im guessing its a Samus returns situation where it could potentially hurt profits based on something in the works.
 
#75
I've heard this before, but could be wrong. Defenders could point to cases that weren't shut down as precedent that they are not violating copyright or ip.

IP and copyright laywer talking?
You've heard terribly wrong. It has literally zero to do with IP, to begin with. What you're thinking about is trademarks and even then that doesn't obligate you to go after free fan content at all.. Which, you know, is why Harry Potter still belongs to JK Rowling, Mega Man to Capcom, Sonic to SEGA, Half Life to Valve. If what you said had a single shred of truth any of these would have lost their rights ages ago.
 
#76
The Pokemon Company doesn't make money selling avatars to internet forums (does anyone?).
The Pokemon Company makes money selling games, games that are being ripped off and given out for free.

The Pokemon Company loses no money by people using their characters as avatars.
The Pokemon Company loses money if people play a free Pokemon game-mod instead of buying a Pokemon game they actually make.

Unless you're arguing legal technicalities the two aren't even in the same league.
 
#78
You've heard terribly wrong. It has literally zero to do with IP, to begin with. What you're thinking about is trademarks and even then that doesn't obligate you to go after free fan content at all.. Which, you know, is why Harry Potter still belongs to JK Rowling, Mega Man to Capcom, Sonic to SEGA, Half Life to Valve. If what you said had a single shred of truth any of these would have lost their rights ages ago.
I did mean trademarks but you're not a trademark lawyer correct?

I'll wait for a legal opinion. :)
 
#79
The Pokemon Company doesn't make money selling avatars to internet forums (does anyone?).
The Pokemon Company makes money selling games, games that are being ripped off and given out for free.

The Pokemon Company loses no money by people using their characters as avatars.
The Pokemon Company loses money if people play a free Pokemon game-mod instead of buying a Pokemon game they actually make.

Unless you're arguing legal technicalities the two aren't even in the same league.
The money they make or not is irrelevant, they are still legally in the wrong.

TPC also sells art books. Should they go against fan artists too?
I did mean trademarks but you're not a trademark lawyer correct?

I'll wait for a legal opinion. :)
You don't need to be one to be aware of simple facts. You can very easily look this up for yourself. As well as seeing the shitload of companies that allow for fangames and mods. Again, why haven't they lost their rights so far?
Dark magic?
 
#81
The Pokemon Company doesn't make money selling avatars to internet forums (does anyone?).
The Pokemon Company makes money selling games, games that are being ripped off and given out for free.

The Pokemon Company loses no money by people using their characters as avatars.
The Pokemon Company loses money if people play a free Pokemon game-mod instead of buying a Pokemon game they actually make.

Unless you're arguing legal technicalities the two aren't even in the same league.
I might be wrong since i have no "real" knowledge of the laws and the way fan mods affect the company game sales however i have real doubts that fans can make a good enough game that fans just skip the official content
I mean if fans can make a better game "for free" than the payed game the company makes then that company should really take a look at their production.

if i remember correctly, pirating pokemon games is easy as pie yet they still sell a lot. If pirating doesn't seem to reduce the sales why would a free fan game on another platform reduce the sales?
 
#82
The Pokemon Company doesn't make money selling avatars to internet forums (does anyone?).
The Pokemon Company makes money selling games, games that are being ripped off and given out for free.

The Pokemon Company loses no money by people using their characters as avatars.
The Pokemon Company loses money if people play a free Pokemon game-mod instead of buying a Pokemon game they actually make.

Unless you're arguing legal technicalities the two aren't even in the same league.
But my fan games!

If only there were some way that an independent game developer could take core ideas and elements from a famous video game franchise and build an original work around it. It sure would be swell to live in a world where people could create finished products that put their own little twist on classic games and franchises of yore. But alas, such a world does not exist. Truly this is the darkest timeline.
 
#83
The money they make or not is irrelevant, they are still legally in the wrong.

TPC also sells art books. Should they go against fan artists too?

You don't need to be one to be aware of simple facts. You can very easily look this up for yourself. As well as seeing the shitload of companies that allow for fangames and mods. Again, why haven't they lost their rights so far?
Dark magic?
Instead of the snark, you could perhaps provide some citations and what not.

Your examples are not countering my claim. I didn't say it would lead to losing trademark, but that it might be difficult to defend in similar cases.

A valid example would be a company shutting down some mods but not others, for example.
 
#84
But my fan games!

If only there were some way that an independent game developer could take core ideas and elements from a famous video game franchise and build an original work around it. It sure would be swell to live in a world where people could create finished products that put their own little twist on classic games and franchises of yore. But alas, such a world does not exist. Truly this is the darkest timeline.
Then they get attacked by idiotic fanboys for "ripping off " their favorite franchise, like we're seeing now with Icons: Combat Arena
 
#85
Instead of the snark, you could perhaps provide some citations and what not.

Your examples are not countering my claim. I didn't say it would lead to losing trademark, but that it might be difficult to defend in similar cases.

A valid example would be a company shutting down some mods but not others, for example.
A example... Of what? What you think can happen to a trademark literally can't happen.
 
#86
Then they get attacked by idiotic fanboys for "ripping off " their favorite franchise, like we're seeing now with Icons: Combat Arena
Or, you know, not. I guess your argument might make sense if you just ignore the dozens of celebrated indie games that wear their inspiration on their sleeve.

I am struggling to see why we should give a shit about a fan game or fan mod when these people are clearly capable of putting out their own work using similar concepts. Was there some part of the process where Team Meat thought, "Shit, we're just two nobodies making a game in our spare time, no one will pay attention to us! Better slap Mario in there!"

I'm starting to get the feeling that the reason these developers latch on to an IP that they have had no part of creating or marketing is because nobody would give their work a second look without it. Have some faith in your damn product.
 
#88
Some people here really believe it is legal to rip of content of a popular company, give it a little spin and sell it, or even give it away for free?

So every little would-be developer can simply copy popular gaming icons and make its own game with it and give it away, to get really fast a lot of attention?

Reality check necessary.
 
#89
Or, you know, not. I guess your argument might make sense if you just ignore the dozens of celebrated indie games that wear their inspiration on their sleeve.

I am struggling to see why we should give a shit about a fan game or fan mod when these people are clearly capable of putting out their own work using similar concepts. Was there some part of the process where Team Meat thought, "Shit, we're just two nobodies making a game in our spare time, no one will pay attention to us! Better slap Mario in there!"

I'm starting to get the feeling that the reason these developers latch on to an IP that they have had no part of creating or marketing is because nobody would give their work a second look without it. Have some faith in your damn product.
Wait why the fuck are you talking about Mario and Team Meat? They're nothing even remotely alike.
Also lmao at "why should we give a shit about a fan game or fan mod". Fan games and fan mods are many times better, or even much, much better than the original products.
Some people here really believe it is legal to rip of content of a popular company, give it a little spin and sell it, or even give it away for free?

So every little would-be developer can simply copy popular gaming icons and make its own game with it and give it away, to get really fast a lot of attention?

Reality check necessary.
It is legal. In fact, it's also legal to write fan fiction or draw fan art. I know this seems like a crazy concept for you, but those are the facts.
 
#92
Wait why the fuck are you talking about Mario and Team Meat? They're nothing even remotely alike.
Also lmao at "why should we give a shit about a fan game or fan mod". Fan games and fan mods are many times better, or even much, much better than the original products.
Gee, sounds like a reason why a company might see these things as competition then.

Don't like the Super Meat Boy comparison? Cool. How about Freedom Planet and Sonic? Salt and Sanctuary and Dark Souls? Bloodstained and Castlevania? Shovel Knight and the unholy lovechild of Mega Man and Ducktales? Yooka Laylee and Banjo Kazooie? Poi and Super Mario Sunshine? Axiom Verge and Metroid? Let's try not to fall down the indie Metroidvania hole or we'll be here all day.

But maybe things are different in your universe where a Red Bull logo on a forum avatar is a capital offense.
 
#94
Wait why the fuck are you talking about Mario and Team Meat? They're nothing even remotely alike.
Also lmao at "why should we give a shit about a fan game or fan mod". Fan games and fan mods are many times better, or even much, much better than the original products.

It is legal. In fact, it's also legal to write fan fiction or draw fan art. I know this seems like a crazy concept for you, but those are the facts.
It is legal up until the owner of the IP decides otherwise. They are also within their legal right to have it taken down. They don't HAVE to. But that doesn't mean they can't. It's okay to not like their decision but you're actually full of shit if you think that they have no legal standing.
 
#95
It is legal. In fact, it's also legal to write fan fiction or draw fan art. I know this seems like a crazy concept for you, but those are the facts.
More like alternative facts. Depends on the country and the project and how it is used. Something like this Minecraft mod is substantial different from some fan fiction stories or fan art, obviously.
 
#96
Gee, sounds like a reason why a company might see these things as competition then.

Don't like the Super Meat Boy comparison? Cool. How about Freedom Planet and Sonic? Salt and Sanctuary and Dark Souls? Bloodstained and Castlevania? Shovel Knight and the unholy lovechild of Mega Man and Ducktales? Yooka Laylee and Banjo Kazooie? Poi and Super Mario Sunshine? Axiom Verge and Metroid? Let's try not to fall down the indie Metroidvania hole or we'll be here all day.

But maybe things are different in your universe where a Red Bull logo on a forum avatar is a capital offense.
Sonic? You mean the franchise where SEGA just hired a fan modder to make a official game? That franchise? That's the one you want to talk about?
Yeah the fucking fan modder should just have gone ahead and done his own thing, oh yes, absolutely, that makes a lot of sense, oh so much sense, it's overflowing with sense, it's amazing.
I never said that a avatar is a "capital offense". Just don't say shit about "respecting the IP" when you don't give a single shit about actually "respecting the IP"
It is legal up until the owner of the IP decides otherwise. They are also within their legal right to have it taken down. They don't HAVE to. But that doesn't mean they can't. It's okay to not like their decision but you're actually full of shit if you think that they have no legal standing.
Factually speaking, they don't have legal standing. What they do have is power to bully people with their massive army of lawyers and making sure people will waste several years of their life fighting against it. They do nothing but abuse this fact.

More like alternative facts. Depends on the country and the project and how it is used. Something like this Minecraft mod is substantial different from some fan fiction stories or fan art, obviously.
It's a work made by fans. There is no difference in the slightest. TPC also sells artbooks and prints, btw.
 
#97
A example... Of what? What you think can happen to a trademark literally can't happen.
In my previous post, I asked for what kind of example I was asking.

What do you think I think can happen to a trademark? Because you attacked a strawman in your previous post.

Wait why the fuck are you talking about Mario and Team Meat? They're nothing even remotely alike.
Also lmao at "why should we give a shit about a fan game or fan mod". Fan games and fan mods are many times better, or even much, much better than the original products.

It is legal. In fact, it's also legal to write fan fiction or draw fan art. I know this seems like a crazy concept for you, but those are the facts.
There is a reason why they will choose to go after mods on minecraft (minecraft is sold for money). If fans were selling fan art, they might also get a C&D.
You really are quite over the top and assert to be correct while the points people are making are going over your head.
Pseudo-intellectuals are hilarious.
 
In my previous post, I asked for what kind of example I was asking.

What do you think I think can happen to a trademark? Because you attacked a strawman in your previous post.



There is a reason why they will choose to go after mods on minecraft (minecraft is sold for money). If fans were selling fan art, they might also get a C&D.
You really are quite over the top and assert to be correct while the points people are making are going over your head.
Pseudo-intellectuals are hilarious.
Minecraft is being sold, the mod isn't. What the hell are you talking about exactly? Are you confused? You think the modders own Minecraft now? The mod isn't a "commercial product"
You think a trademark can be lost because of free fan games and mods. This is literally factually false.
Funny to see you calling anyone else a "pseudo-intellectual", that's quite rich.
You really want to believe this, so go on and believe it ;) makes no difference anyway.
Those are the facts. Feel free to argue otherwise. Why would fan art be different when TPC sells art books?