• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Project AM2R getting legally slammed by Nintendo; file hosts hit with DMCA notices

Madao

Member
Apr 3, 2010
7,876
0
0
panama
www.youtube.com
I still feel justified in assuming Nintendo wouldn't shut the project down. They didnt stop it from being made nor released. Saying they didn't know it existed until it launched is implausible - I made a post here stating Baby Park was the best MK track and Bill Trinen almost immediately tweeted a link to the post in agreement. You bet your ass he and others have read the AM2R thread, and that's just here on GAF.

I think the reason they shut it down, an act which is really unprecedented as far as Nintendo and nonprofit fangames go, is because of this:

They expected it to launch and be a nice little diversion for fans. One dude from Argentina working on a little project is fine - the interest could even work in their favour towards pushing Federation Force sales. Only....that's not what happened. The game launched, and got near unprecedented cover and acclaim around the internet to the point of numerous fans and publications outright stating AM2R is better than anything Nintendo could ever make - and many of them essentially offering it as a direct alternative to Federation Force. The game was getting more positive and thorough coverage than expected to the point of it being viewed as the REAL Metroid game out of the two (sad that it's come to this point).

Nintendo didn't act until they realised the game was so good it was making them look bad. And not only that, making their equivalent Metroid product this month seem a joke.

That's why they did what they did. Otherwise, it would still be up.

even if Nintendo has all the laws in their favor, they created this mess by not making the Metroid game people actually wanted.

if they had actually made a Metroid 2 remake themselves 10 years ago, AM2R wouldn't even exist. this game exists because Nintendo gave the middle finger to fans and now they're mad because people created a way to satisfy their demands themselves. what a bunch of jokers.

i guess the only mistake people made was becoming Nintendo fans.
 
Feb 19, 2007
14,452
35
1,225
They ignored them for 5 years, announced Federation Force, tried to double down on, saying fans were "confused" about it (aka 'you don't know shit') and fans STILL hated it. Fans knew what they wanted after 5 years (now 6) and it wasn't a chibi-looking multiplayer/online focused spin-off on the 3DS near the end of its' life-cycle. THAT is what Nintendo ignored. Not paying attention to your fanbase to try and gather where you've gone wrong after a failure is lunacy. It's insanity that Federation Force, like Other M, is the producer's "dream game" for the series, considering how the last one of those went.

That's a lot of overdramatization for "they made a game you were not interested in instead of what you wanted". The rest is just people making it out to be some kind of major offense as if there was some sort of relationship beyond them buying games that are made.
People love the grandstanding these days but not everything has to be a symbol, hashtag or campaign or whatever the fuck with a larger meaning. To me, Federation Force is just a game that I don't intend to buy. Because I'm sane.
 

EatinOlives

Member
Oct 23, 2011
16,849
0
0
That's a lot of overdramatization for "they made a game you were not interested in instead of what you wanted". The rest is just people making it out to be some kind of major offense.
People love the grandstanding these days but not everything has to be a symbol, hashtag or campaign or whatever the fuck with a larger meaning. To me, Federation Force is just a game that I don't intend to buy. Because I'm sane.

Cute, but you would do well to empathize with others instead of implying they're insane.

Take away this "grandstanding" or whatever you want to call it and you're left with the reality that Nintendo is at the bottom of the gaming industry's totem pole by a pretty wide margin. We can sit around and postulate why Nintendo can't seem to catch a break. Or, just maybe, we can point out the issues and mistakes that Nintendo makes on a constant basis that create an overall experience that people just don't want to have anything to do with. Nintendo would be wise to see the red flags for what they are.
 

Bastardo

Member
Jan 23, 2014
130
0
0
Everybody in this thread makes it seem clear cut that this is copyright infringement, but it is not so clear cut, unless this was ever contested in court or AM2R uses actual art from Nintendo-produced games.

Wikipedia says (Fangames article):
"Some companies shut down fangames as copyright infringements."

This is not a legal statement, but rather the justification companies use to send C&D letters. In other words: Companies said it's infringing a right of theirs and that's why the derivative work has to be taken down. In case of reused assets of existing games this is clear cut and definitely illegal. In case of completely novel work using existing intellectual property there is a much finer specification in the fan art article of wikipedia. It reads:

--- Fanart article begins ---
The legal status of derivative fan made art in America may be tricky due to the vagaries of the United States Copyright Act. Generally, the right to reproduce and display pieces of artwork is controlled by the original author or artist under 17 U.S.C. § 106. Fan art using settings and characters from a previously created work could be considered a derivative work, which would place control of the copyright with the owner of that original work. Display and distribution of fan art that would be considered a derivative work would be unlawful.

However, American copyright law allows for the production, display and distribution of derivative works if they fall under a fair use exemption, 17 U.S.C. § 107. A court would look at all relevant facts and circumstances to determine whether a particular use qualifies as fair use; a multi-pronged rubric for this decision involves evaluating the amount and substantiality of the original appropriated, the transformative nature of the derivative work, whether the derivative work was done for educational or noncommercial use, and the economic effect that the derivative work imposes on the copyright holder's ability to make and exploit their own derivative works. None of these factors is alone dispositive.

--- Fanart article ends ---

In other words: While the broad category of derived works is unlawful, fair use is allowed. In case of AM2R this can be argued both ways: While the existence of AM2R might be argued to hurt Nintendo in its sales of a) the GB Metroid 2 and b) a not-yet-existing self-made remake, one could also argue that its existence brings fresh wind to the franchise and would actually boost the sales of a) the still-not-existing remake and b) merchandise.

My opinion: It's not really clear, whether AM2R constitutes fair-use, it's a fine line, but here's the deal: Nobody in this thread can actually answer this question, only a court can. And unless this matter has been settled in court, please don't accept the statement that AM2R is definitely illegal.

And finally, if you disagree with me: Read the above in Jim Sterling's voice.
 

Comfort Jones

Banned
Sep 8, 2013
3,244
0
0
Everybody in this thread makes it seem clear cut that this is copyright infringement, but it is not so clear cut, unless this was ever contested in court or AM2R uses actual art from Nintendo-produced games.

Wikipedia says (Fangames article):
"Some companies shut down fangames as copyright infringements."

This is not a legal statement, but rather the justification companies use to send C&D letters. In other words: Companies said it's infringing a right of theirs and that's why the derivative work has to be taken down. In case of reused assets of existing games this is clear cut and definitely illegal. In case of completely novel work using existing intellectual property there is a much finer specification in the fan art article of wikipedia. It reads:

--- Fanart article begins ---
The legal status of derivative fan made art in America may be tricky due to the vagaries of the United States Copyright Act. Generally, the right to reproduce and display pieces of artwork is controlled by the original author or artist under 17 U.S.C. § 106. Fan art using settings and characters from a previously created work could be considered a derivative work, which would place control of the copyright with the owner of that original work. Display and distribution of fan art that would be considered a derivative work would be unlawful.

However, American copyright law allows for the production, display and distribution of derivative works if they fall under a fair use exemption, 17 U.S.C. § 107. A court would look at all relevant facts and circumstances to determine whether a particular use qualifies as fair use; a multi-pronged rubric for this decision involves evaluating the amount and substantiality of the original appropriated, the transformative nature of the derivative work, whether the derivative work was done for educational or noncommercial use, and the economic effect that the derivative work imposes on the copyright holder's ability to make and exploit their own derivative works. None of these factors is alone dispositive.

--- Fanart article ends ---

In other words: While the broad category of derived works is unlawful, fair use is allowed. In case of AM2R this can be argued both ways: While the existence of AM2R might be argued to hurt Nintendo in its sales of a) the GB Metroid 2 and b) a not-yet-existing self-made remake, one could also argue that its existence brings fresh wind to the franchise and would actually boost the sales of a) the still-not-existing remake and b) merchandise.

My opinion: It's not really clear, whether AM2R constitutes fair-use, it's a fine line, but here's the deal: Nobody in this thread can actually answer this question, only a court can. And unless this matter has been settled in court, please don't accept the statement that AM2R is definitely illegal.

And finally, if you disagree with me: Read the above in Jim Sterling's voice.

Excellent post.

Honestly one of these days I think one of these will go to court. I think people absolutely have the right to make fan works for free. IMO they're just as valuable to your ip as mods, maybe even more so, and can produce potential devs that can help expand your IP's reach.

It's a good thing Black Mesa and Sonic Mania (and all the Sonic fangames those devs made leading up to it) exist for both the IP and the fans of it.
 

Pancakes R Us

Member
Aug 24, 2007
6,711
2
0
I'm sure AM2R will probably get more downloads than Federation Force will get sales.

Maybe that's why Nintendo gives such a shit about this? It's taking away interest from an official title in the same IP? Even if we can all unanimously say that game is not what people want at all from the IP?
It's hard to take away interest from a title that doesn't have any in the first place.
 

Metal B

Member
Jul 2, 2007
3,920
0
0
I haven't played it myself yet, but from some footage I saw AM2R uses some artwork taken directly from Zero Mission.
Also the Level-Design, story and premise from Metroid 2 (*duh") and Game-Mechanics from many different Metroid games.

Nintendo can't just win with the Metroid franchise, no wonder they ignore it. If the make good Games, they don't sell enough, to make them profitable. If they don't make games or try to experiment with the series, the vocal minority cries loud. If they make one game (from nine) that sucks, they always get hit over the head with it. If someone else releases a fan game and they have to protect there IP (for legal reasons), they are the bad guys.
I can see, why Nintendo doesn't want to create games for it anymore.
 

Branduil

Member
Sep 20, 2006
64,604
2
0
Excellent Eriador
Also the Level-Design, story and premise from Metroid 2 (*duh") and Game-Mechanics from many different Metroid games.

Nintendo can't just win with the Metroid franchise, no wonder they ignore it. If the make good Games, they don't sell enough, to make them profitable. If they don't make games or try to experiment with the series, the vocal minority cries loud. If they make one game (from nine) that sucks, they always get hit over the head with it. If someone else releases a fan game and they have to protect there IP (for legal reasons), they are the bad guys.
I can see, why Nintendo doesn't want to create games for it anymore.

There is no evidence that any game in the series besides Other M was unprofitable.
 

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Dec 5, 2005
51,659
6
0
I still feel justified in assuming Nintendo wouldn't shut the project down. They didnt stop it from being made nor released. Saying they didn't know it existed until it launched is implausible - I made a post here stating Baby Park was the best MK track and Bill Trinen almost immediately tweeted a link to the post in agreement. You bet your ass he and others have read the AM2R thread, and that's just here on GAF.

I think the reason they shut it down, an act which is really unprecedented as far as Nintendo and nonprofit fangames go, is because of this:

They expected it to launch and be a nice little diversion for fans. One dude from Argentina working on a little project is fine - the interest could even work in their favour towards pushing Federation Force sales. Only....that's not what happened. The game launched, and got near unprecedented cover and acclaim around the internet to the point of numerous fans and publications outright stating AM2R is better than anything Nintendo could ever make - and many of them essentially offering it as a direct alternative to Federation Force. The game was getting more positive and thorough coverage than expected to the point of it being viewed as the REAL Metroid game out of the two (sad that it's come to this point).

Nintendo didn't act until they realised the game was so good it was making them look bad. And not only that, making their equivalent Metroid product this month seem a joke.

That's why they did what they did. Otherwise, it would still be up.

I get the frustration with current Metroid that would lead to such a sentiment.... but I don't really believe this.

I fully believe many people within Nintendo are flattered by the fan game. They appreciate it and they appreciate the enthusiasm from fans. Some of them are playing it right now, illuminated by the glow of it on their PC screen.... They wouldn't dare bring it up at the company meeting in the morning, but they're smiling as they play. Regardless of how good they feel about their own 30th anniversary efforts (or lack thereof), the appreciate the fans. They are fans themselves.

It's staff lawyers that have to go ahead and kill this project, and PR gets in line with this and forces employees to never speak of it.

It's not some personalistic spite to shut this down. It's the faceless law machine churning away and destroying all that which has not been legally sanctioned. Humans can dig a fan game... but lawyers? Their legal logic can't allow it.
 

LincolnTunnel

Member
Jun 22, 2012
547
0
0
Everybody in this thread makes it seem clear cut that this is copyright infringement, but it is not so clear cut, unless this was ever contested in court or AM2R uses actual art from Nintendo-produced games.

Wikipedia says (Fangames article):
"Some companies shut down fangames as copyright infringements."

This is not a legal statement, but rather the justification companies use to send C&D letters. In other words: Companies said it's infringing a right of theirs and that's why the derivative work has to be taken down. In case of reused assets of existing games this is clear cut and definitely illegal. In case of completely novel work using existing intellectual property there is a much finer specification in the fan art article of wikipedia. It reads:

--- Fanart article begins ---
The legal status of derivative fan made art in America may be tricky due to the vagaries of the United States Copyright Act. Generally, the right to reproduce and display pieces of artwork is controlled by the original author or artist under 17 U.S.C. § 106. Fan art using settings and characters from a previously created work could be considered a derivative work, which would place control of the copyright with the owner of that original work. Display and distribution of fan art that would be considered a derivative work would be unlawful.

However, American copyright law allows for the production, display and distribution of derivative works if they fall under a fair use exemption, 17 U.S.C. § 107. A court would look at all relevant facts and circumstances to determine whether a particular use qualifies as fair use; a multi-pronged rubric for this decision involves evaluating the amount and substantiality of the original appropriated, the transformative nature of the derivative work, whether the derivative work was done for educational or noncommercial use, and the economic effect that the derivative work imposes on the copyright holder's ability to make and exploit their own derivative works. None of these factors is alone dispositive.

--- Fanart article ends ---

In other words: While the broad category of derived works is unlawful, fair use is allowed. In case of AM2R this can be argued both ways: While the existence of AM2R might be argued to hurt Nintendo in its sales of a) the GB Metroid 2 and b) a not-yet-existing self-made remake, one could also argue that its existence brings fresh wind to the franchise and would actually boost the sales of a) the still-not-existing remake and b) merchandise.

My opinion: It's not really clear, whether AM2R constitutes fair-use, it's a fine line, but here's the deal: Nobody in this thread can actually answer this question, only a court can. And unless this matter has been settled in court, please don't accept the statement that AM2R is definitely illegal.

And finally, if you disagree with me: Read the above in Jim Sterling's voice.

This is absolutely not a case of fair use. It's not a fine line at all. It is not transformative. It lifts substantial material from the original work. The story, level designs, and character designs, as well as game mechanics, make up the heart of the original game. While it has not been made for commercial use, it has a clear potential economic affect. It is a remake of an already existing game that is still available for sale. It doesn't matter that Nintendo has not made a remake. As long as a potential market exists for them to sell a remake or sell the existing game, the fan remake would be infringing on their copyright.
 

Merc_

Member
Sep 6, 2014
3,732
1
0
I never thought I would say this after the pain that was the death of the Dreamcast but I hope and pray that the NX dies the death it deserves and Nintendo bows out of the hardware business to become a third party software developer. This isn't 1985. Nintendo needs to wake up and get with the times or GTFO of the console market.

I'm pretty sure that if Nintendo got to the point where they decided to go third party they would probably just stick to making games about their highest selling IP's.

I guess if you never want to see another Metroid game again then this is an ideal future.
 

MouldyK

Member
Apr 22, 2014
3,750
0
340
London, England
So if I was to make a game which is like Metroid 2, but change the Character, Names and Sprites to resemble my own ideas...

...but keep the level design...would that be prone to Copyright Infringement?
 

petran79

Banned
Sep 17, 2012
10,401
1,794
910
After trying the game,I am honestly baffled why they shut it down. I thought gfx would have the level of Sonic Fan Remix., but here I see something between GBC and GBA graphics.

They were probably afraid someone would port it to 3DS, Wii and Wii U Homebrew, embarassing them even more.
 

Metal B

Member
Jul 2, 2007
3,920
0
0
There is no evidence that any game in the series besides Other M was unprofitable.
Right, some were actually profitable. Metroid Prime would be such a game. But after each succees the follow-ups go into a downwards spiral The series overall never reached a level, which Nintendo want or need it to be (or fans believe it to be). That's why we had two long breaks for the series and Nintendo tried to experiment with Mother M and Federation Force.
Yes, we don't know for sure, but Nintendos action speak against the view, that Metroid is a profitable franchise.

So if I was to make a game which is like Metroid 2, but change the Character, Names and Sprites to resemble my own ideas...

...but keep the level design...would that be prone to Copyright Infringement?
Yes.
 

KingBroly

Banned
Mar 18, 2015
23,759
1
0
This is absolutely not a case of fair use. It's not a fine line at all. It is not transformative. It lifts substantial material from the original work. The story, level designs, and character designs, as well as game mechanics, make up the heart of the original game. While it has not been made for commercial use, it has a clear potential economic affect. It is a remake of an already existing game that is still available for sale. It doesn't matter that Nintendo has not made a remake. As long as a potential market exists for them to sell a remake or sell the existing game, the fan remake would be infringing on their copyright.

It also lifts stuff (mechanics, enemies and art assets) from Zero Mission, Fusion and makes ties to Super. This is not fair use. At all.
 

TheBryanJZX90

Member
May 4, 2012
5,506
2
435
Everybody in this thread makes it seem clear cut that this is copyright infringement, but it is not so clear cut, unless this was ever contested in court or AM2R uses actual art from Nintendo-produced games.

Wikipedia says (Fangames article):
"Some companies shut down fangames as copyright infringements."

This is not a legal statement, but rather the justification companies use to send C&D letters. In other words: Companies said it's infringing a right of theirs and that's why the derivative work has to be taken down. In case of reused assets of existing games this is clear cut and definitely illegal. In case of completely novel work using existing intellectual property there is a much finer specification in the fan art article of wikipedia. It reads:

--- Fanart article begins ---
The legal status of derivative fan made art in America may be tricky due to the vagaries of the United States Copyright Act. Generally, the right to reproduce and display pieces of artwork is controlled by the original author or artist under 17 U.S.C. § 106. Fan art using settings and characters from a previously created work could be considered a derivative work, which would place control of the copyright with the owner of that original work. Display and distribution of fan art that would be considered a derivative work would be unlawful.

However, American copyright law allows for the production, display and distribution of derivative works if they fall under a fair use exemption, 17 U.S.C. § 107. A court would look at all relevant facts and circumstances to determine whether a particular use qualifies as fair use; a multi-pronged rubric for this decision involves evaluating the amount and substantiality of the original appropriated, the transformative nature of the derivative work, whether the derivative work was done for educational or noncommercial use, and the economic effect that the derivative work imposes on the copyright holder's ability to make and exploit their own derivative works. None of these factors is alone dispositive.

--- Fanart article ends ---

In other words: While the broad category of derived works is unlawful, fair use is allowed. In case of AM2R this can be argued both ways: While the existence of AM2R might be argued to hurt Nintendo in its sales of a) the GB Metroid 2 and b) a not-yet-existing self-made remake, one could also argue that its existence brings fresh wind to the franchise and would actually boost the sales of a) the still-not-existing remake and b) merchandise.

My opinion: It's not really clear, whether AM2R constitutes fair-use, it's a fine line, but here's the deal: Nobody in this thread can actually answer this question, only a court can. And unless this matter has been settled in court, please don't accept the statement that AM2R is definitely illegal.

And finally, if you disagree with me: Read the above in Jim Sterling's voice.

No, this isn't even close to fair use.
 

indask8

Member
Feb 25, 2016
302
0
230
France
So if I was to make a game which is like Metroid 2, but change the Character, Names and Sprites to resemble my own ideas...

...but keep the level design...would that be prone to Copyright Infringement?

If the level design is 1:1 possibly, otherwise no, they are a lots of metroidvania games out there, I don't think you can copyright an empty room with a platform in the middle with an enemy circling around it.
 

Conan-san

Member
Jan 28, 2009
3,600
181
825
Given how the fan-base has been over Fed Force this just rings numb to me. The truest incarnation of nature taking it's course.

They'll be making Attenborough videos about this one day.
 

LincolnTunnel

Member
Jun 22, 2012
547
0
0
So if I was to make a game which is like Metroid 2, but change the Character, Names and Sprites to resemble my own ideas...

...but keep the level design...would that be prone to Copyright Infringement?

Yes. If the level design is ripped completely from Metroid 2, It's easy enough for Nintendo to argue that the level design is an important and memorable portion of the original work. Reusing it in a different game does not re-contextualize it in a way that adds value or insight to the original work. If you're selling the game, it has a clear potential economic effect.
 

yanipheonu

Member
May 8, 2014
6,321
0
0
I mean, have no illusions people, Nintendo always had the right to take this down, and almost certainly would.

The victory was getting this onto the internet. Now, those who want to play can at least search for mirrors. It now exists, and it's hard to scrub that from the internet completely.

There are plenty of fan projects that get DMCA'd before they even make it off the ground. I'm just glad this was playable.
 

Rich!

Member
Dec 16, 2009
29,967
3
0
Yes. If the level design is ripped completely from Metroid 2. It's easy enough for Nintendo to argue that the level design is an important and memorable portion of the original work.

But it isn't.

Pretty clear you haven't played it.
 

Metal B

Member
Jul 2, 2007
3,920
0
0
Yes. If the level design is ripped completely from Metroid 2. It's easy enough for Nintendo to argue that the level design is an important and memorable portion of the original work.
If not, it would be a sad message for gaming and its view as an art form. Level-Design is one of those media exclusive feature of gaming, which makes it special (like a scene in movies).
 

LincolnTunnel

Member
Jun 22, 2012
547
0
0
But it isn't.

Pretty clear you haven't played it.

What are you talking about? The post I was responding to had nothing to do with whether the remake uses the exact level design. It was asking the hypothetical question of whether or not it would be copyright infringement to create a game that changes the plot and visual details but reuses the exact level design.
 

casiopao

Member
Jan 27, 2013
7,639
0
440
Of course they can make concessions. Just like other companies such as Sega, Valve, and Capcom have done. That they have instead chosen this path shows just how little they think of the Metroid fanbase, and how unconcerned they are with cultivating any kind of healthy fan-creator relationship.

U mean, the SEGA which kills Streerts of Rage Remake?
 

Bastardo

Member
Jan 23, 2014
130
0
0
This is absolutely not a case of fair use. It's not a fine line at all. It is not transformative. It lifts substantial material from the original work. The story, level designs, and character designs, as well as game mechanics, make up the heart of the original game. While it has not been made for commercial use, it has a clear potential economic affect. It is a remake of an already existing game that is still available for sale. It doesn't matter that Nintendo has not made a remake. As long as a potential market exists for them to sell a remake or sell the existing game, the fan remake would be infringing on their copyright.

With your post you imply that I think it is fair-use. I don't want to imply either here. I just want to say that unless the statements you and I made are settled on in court, or there is a precedent case, we cannot be sure.

You are making reasonable statements. If you, for example, would have said: "It uses art or data assets from Super Metroid", I would have immediately told you: "Yes, you are right, this is definitely copyright infringement and not fair-use.", but the elements you state above, to my knowledge, have not yet been used in a fair-use court case, because these cases usually don't proceed beyond the initial C&D letter, so there is no precedent here to my knowledge.
If you have the knowledge of a precedent case, where something similar to AM2R went to court, please let me know.
 

Eolz

Member
Jun 1, 2014
10,193
20
535
I get the frustration with current Metroid that would lead to such a sentiment.... but I don't really believe this.

I fully believe many people within Nintendo are flattered by the fan game. They appreciate it and they appreciate the enthusiasm from fans. Some of them are playing it right now, illuminated by the glow of it on their PC screen.... They wouldn't dare bring it up at the company meeting in the morning, but they're smiling as they play. Regardless of how good they feel about their own 30th anniversary efforts (or lack thereof), the appreciate the fans. They are fans themselves.

It's staff lawyers that have to go ahead and kill this project, and PR gets in line with this and forces employees to never speak of it.

It's not some personalistic spite to shut this down. It's the faceless law machine churning away and destroying all that which has not been legally sanctioned. Humans can dig a fan game... but lawyers? Their legal logic can't allow it.

You're romanticizing this way, way too much.
And if they were impressed, I can guarantee you they would contact him for something else than a C&D.
 

theclaw135

Member
Oct 1, 2014
1,463
558
560
Excellent post.

Honestly one of these days I think one of these will go to court. I think people absolutely have the right to make fan works for free. IMO they're just as valuable to your ip as mods, maybe even more so, and can produce potential devs that can help expand your IP's reach.

It's a good thing Black Mesa and Sonic Mania (and all the Sonic fangames those devs made leading up to it) exist for both the IP and the fans of it.

In the long run I believe going to court is what needs to be done. As much as it may ruin so many existing fan works, it'll establish clearer boundaries for future creators.

Another thing is that copyright holders with concerns about a work, should get in touch and try to work things out earlier in its development. Waiting this long comes off as insulting no matter the legal situation.
 
Jul 28, 2014
13,406
25
415
Gonna avoid all this discussion, but I'm just gonna tell you guys if you use the Wayback machine on the dev's site to when he first released the game, those download links will still work. Cheers.
 

Agent_Carnage

Member
Jan 28, 2015
1,577
120
510
Yes. If the level design is ripped completely from Metroid 2, It's easy enough for Nintendo to argue that the level design is an important and memorable portion of the original work. Reusing it in a different game does not re-contextualize it in a way that adds value or insight to the original work. If you're selling the game, it has a clear potential economic effect.

Metroid 2 level design is different. Some areas are similar but there are many new areas to explore.
 
Nov 1, 2015
1,070
0
0
This is absolutely not a case of fair use. It's not a fine line at all. It is not transformative. It lifts substantial material from the original work. The story, level designs, and character designs, as well as game mechanics, make up the heart of the original game. While it has not been made for commercial use, it has a clear potential economic affect. It is a remake of an already existing game that is still available for sale. It doesn't matter that Nintendo has not made a remake. As long as a potential market exists for them to sell a remake or sell the existing game, the fan remake would be infringing on their copyright.

Just want to interject, whilst I agree with most of what you're saying, you can't patent (Or really have all that much control over) game mechanics. E.g, If I wanted to make a first-person puzzle game that involved moving around using portals, I absolutely could. This is why Zynga was (is) able to get away with ripping off games like Tiny Towers wholesale.

So if I was to make a game which is like Metroid 2, but change the Character, Names and Sprites to resemble my own ideas...

...but keep the level design...would that be prone to Copyright Infringement?

Very likely would be infringement. This is what happened with Nintendo vs "The Great Giana Sisters". Whilst no lawsuit took place, Nintendo strongly encouraged the developers to withdraw the game from sale, citing obvious copyright infringement as a reason.
 

PtM

Banned
Jan 7, 2015
6,153
18
405
Isnt Mushroom Kingdom Fusion still getting updated? Isnt Fox In Space still getting more episodes? Not to mention Mother 4 still in development.

How big and spread around does a fan project need to get to be taken down?
"Coverage by games media" big.
 

Nostremitus

Member
Mar 24, 2012
8,873
2
0
Seoul, ROK
Sega, Valve, ID software all see talented fans develop great products with their engines (Sonic engine redone, amazing Doom mods, Counter Strike, Portal, Black Mesa), and not only do they not take the projects down they promote them and in several cases hire the dev on to their company.

So yeah Nintendo is clueless. If they gave two shits about the IP they were "protecting" a fan shouldn't have had to release an amazing Metroid 2 remake.
The difference is that this is a fanmade copy of a game Nintendo still sells, its not like they just made their own fan made metroid game, they copied the entire game. That's a very important difference. Nintendo did not, as far as I know, DMCA the Project M or Super Mario Bros Wii projects. That's because the fanmade projects were not simply replacing sales of the existing game from a legal standpoint.

Isnt Mushroom Kingdom Fusion still getting updated? Isnt Fox In Space still getting more episodes? Not to mention Mother 4 still in development.

How big and spread around does a fan project need to get to be taken down?
Apparently it needs a be a complete copyreproduction of the game instead of a fan project based on a game.
 

Arkanius

Member
Jun 14, 2010
5,551
5
635
Lisbon, Portugal
The difference is that this is a fanmade copy of a game Nintendo still sells, its not like they just made their own fan made metroid game, they copied the entire game. That's a very important difference. Nintendo did not, as far as I know, DMCA the Project M or Super Mario Bros Wii projects. That's because the fanmade projects were not simply replacing sales of the existing game from a legal standpoint.


Apparently it needs a be a complete copyreproduction of the game instead of a fan project based on a game.

Project M has more chances at taking sales from Smash WiiU than Metroid 2 losing sales to AM2R
 

LordRaptor

Member
Aug 20, 2015
9,769
579
520
Just want to interject, whilst I agree with most of what you're saying, you can't patent (Or really have all that much control over) game mechanics.

You actually can, it's just most people don't.
Crazy Taxis floating 3D arrow pointing towards destination is actually patented.
 
Jan 18, 2014
3,515
2
0
Project M has more chances at taking sales from Smash WiiU than Metroid 2 losing sales to AM2R

Ehh I really wouldn't say that considering the dumpster fire that is the original Metroid 2. That is probably the worst a Nintendo game has aged. Even with the few problems AM2R has, it runs laps around the original, which will surely have some kind of an effect on sales.
 

beril

Member
Aug 25, 2010
3,993
0
0
I still have no idea why people would spend years working on a clear case of copyright infringing game. With all that time and effort poured into it they could have created a more interesting original product, but of course it wouldn't get a tenth of the exposure.
 

PtM

Banned
Jan 7, 2015
6,153
18
405
I still have no idea why people would spend years working on a clear case of copyright infringing game. With all that time and effort poured into it they could have created a more interesting original product, but of course it wouldn't get a tenth of the exposure.
Maybe they are fans.
 

GhostTrick

Banned
Jan 11, 2012
16,576
13
0
I still have no idea why people would spend years working on a clear case of copyright infringing game. With all that time and effort poured into it they could have created a more interesting original product, but of course it wouldn't get a tenth of the exposure.



Thing is, even if Nintendo got it down, it'll keep living. Links will keep spawning. The game exist and is released. Now it's spreading.