What happens if Nintendo publish this thing as theirs, giving no credit to the idiots that it made it?

What happens if Nintendo publish this thing as theirs, giving no credit to the idiots that it made it?

Other urls found in this thread:

am2r.freeforums.org/dmca-counter-claim-t1496-40.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Nintendo's reputation would be even further down the shitter

they make amibos, I don't think that they care about reputation.

money, they will make money?

Not possible. Stop thinking up idiotic hypotheticals just so you can shitpost.

The original creators still have some copyright to some elements of the game so it's not going to happen.

Can you, like, stop being a fucking idiot, OP? I know you're on your lunch break in high school, but just stop.

lunch break at job.

Copyright of what? It is a rom hack (even when they say it doesn't)

If it is not, why don't they publish it? People can pay for that

Why would they? Vanilla Metroid 2 is still vastly superior than a fangame that lazily recycles assets from other games.

this.

Have they done it before?

They could have published while still giving the creators credit.

Its not a rom hack. That would mean they hacked a rom to create it.

>It's a rom hack

Just shut the fuck up and get off this site you waste of space.

Call it whatever you want. The code is not original.

What lines of code did he take and from where?

No.

a little thing called the internet exists. people would dig and find where things come from.

lol are you retarded?

There is no way in this world you can completely rip off someone else's work and not pay them for it even if it uses your assets. The work itself still belongs to the person who created it.

In fact, most of the stuff these fag developers try to pull only works because people are to pussy to go to court or sucking their dick so hard that they just let them take it. Most developers would get fucked if it went to court trying the shit they do now.

well, some if and else from an abandonware called supermetroid

I still don't get why they don't sell it (or make it free) with other names and characters

>Implying the creator doesn't have ownership over his own custom made assets and code
>This is the current population of Sup Forums

Fuck this board

That's okay, some of us like eating shit.

yes, I know that.
And that is the reason why I asked about it, to see if anybody gives me a answer why it is bad what nintendo did it

So? It's not like knowledge changes anything by itself. People no longer act on knowledge, it's seen as an entitled, juvenile and stupid behavior to stand up and change your behavior based on the acquisition of new knowledge.

I think that nintendo would make money free of charge and thats it.

>Metroid 2
>Good

Wew. Metroid 2 was my first Metroid game and even I think it's pretty shitty

>Lazily recycles assets from other games

Most graphical assets are custom

is there proof that it has Stolen Assets?

Not him, but the game clearly uses assets from zero mission and fussion. idk about the rest, but a lot of the gameplay is just like a super metroid hack too, regarding samus movement

You know graphical assets and code aren't interchangeable words, right?

You know that you are supposed to read till the end of the sentence and not only half of it, right?

is this a serious post

yes

>Physics are similar to other games
>Therefore they probably took the code from a SNES game for all things regarding movement physics and used it in a custom built program in C++ for PC that uses Gamemaker as its base
>This is Sup Forums now

I mean fuck it plays more like Zero Mission than Super Metroid anyways

>Most graphical assets are custom
They're a combination of Super, Fusion and ZM.
About 5% of the game is original.

OP is fucking retarded.

Proof?

why?

It isn't the most clever question, I know, but I need to know why it is ok why that they did is ok and nintendo is the bad guy.

The game.

so no proof

If someone takes part of your work and part of their work and puts them together for profit without your consent, they have broken the law
If you do the same, you have broken the law

Regardless of the fact that he used unoriginal assets for his game, he still used an amount of original code, which belongs to him by law. If he wanted to, he could at any time take that code, rip out all the Metriod assets, and repackage it as "Space Adventure Woman" and sell it for profit. In fact, MANY companies have done exactly that, ripping out licensed assets and repackaging a game when they lose a license. Because some of the code is still his, that precludes Nintendo from ever using the whole project without his consent.

>Copyright of what? It is a rom hack (even when they say it doesn't)
It 100% made by scratch in a difference program software.
First anti-Maniafags, now Re:Metroid 2? Again, go back to class, underage.

>Apparently anything that's like the source makes it a romhack of the source and not just autistically re-invented.
I guess Humans aren't Humans now because they aren't the first Human that popped up.

First time I post in this thread, but,
Prove it.

Post AM2R screens alongside old Metroid screenshots with the same graphical assets.

Because I fucking tried to find some reused tiles, but I only found really similar assets at best, nothing actually stolen.

So come on, prove what you're saying. Otherwise shut the fuck up.

Nintendo is legally okay with sending out the DMCA (maybe, depending on Fair Use which the developer would never have the resources to prove in court). Everyone's just calling Nintendo fucking cunts for what they did since they risk absolutely nothing with their IP by letting it live, and other companies are completely okay with fans creating fan works with their property provided they are free and make it known they aren't official

Plus in your example Nintendo is "publishing" (i.e. selling) someone else's work. The fact that you think you think the two situations are comparable is funny

Its not a romhack. Its a GMS project I believe.

The proof is literally in the games user. If you don't want to look at it, fine, but it doesn't change facts.

Not really possible, creators have inevitable rights when they create something.

The creator owns the copyright on it OP. Under current IP law for all signatories of the Berne Convention, copyright automatically goes to the creator of anything. Note, a common source of confusion on the net even amongst people who should know better is how this applies to unauthorized derivative works. Having an unauthorized derivative work of someone else's copyright/trademark DOES NOT mean that they get a copyright on the derivative work. The derivative work still belongs to whomever created it. What it means is that there's a conflict, and it can't be legally distributed at all, by anyone, unless the two IP holders come to an agreement. The derivative work is infringing upon the original IP, but it's still a creative (in the legal sense, the courts do not care about Sup Forums's opinion on whether it's "creative enough") work in its own right as well.

In the old days when copyright was limited like it's supposed to be Metroid 2 would have gone into the public domain in 2010 and the public would then be free to make new things based off of it. Now that copyright is effectively infinite that doesn't happen which is too bad and a violation of the purpose and spirit of copyright, but at least for now it still doesn't mean all derivative works are somehow automatically confiscated. There are affirmative defenses in some cases too but those don't apply here.

tl;dr: Nintendo would have to negotiate with the guy if they wanted to publish it. They can themselves prevent it from being published, but a right to prevent infringement is not the same thing as a right to commit infringement of their own.

>GMS project

Started out as that, then over time became its own thing entirely as DoctorM64 learned to actually code

AM2R is copyrighted by the people who made it, that's why

Did you know even fan translations are copyrighted? It's why Nintendo can't just use the Mother 3 translation, even though the owner has given permission

>It 100% made by scratch in a difference program software.
Yeah, and 60% of the music and graphics are ripped straight from other Metroid games

>n-no! It's just so obvious they're stolen I don't need to point out how!
You don't need to keep doing this; at this point it's pretty obvious you're just a delusional Nintendo shill, or a falseflag Sonypony trying to make Nintenyearolds look even worse.

>proof is in the game
>I'm unable to prove it
Sup Forums

>It's why Nintendo can't just use the Mother 3 translation, even though the owner has given permission
What? By "owner" do you mean the copyright holder, as in the fan who made the translation? Because they absolutely could "give Nintendo permission" to the extent of letting them use it. For that matter they could just plain put it directly into the public domain if they wanted at which point anyone could use it for anything. Or put it under an ultra permissive license or whatever.

Come on man, have you even played Zero Mission?

>Yeah, and 60% of the music and graphics are ripped straight from other Metroid games

You don't need to lie user, all the soundtracks are either completely new or arrangements of past Metroid songs that contributors themselves did

>Yeah, and 60% of the music and graphics are ripped straight from other Metroid games
[citation needed]
Or are you actually confusing fanmade music as official music? Because if you seriously are, than every remix on Youtube is copyright infringing.

That's BS and you know it user. Nintendo doesn't have to follow that rhetoric.

>Nintendo takes the game and publishes it
>gives no credit to Doctor Mario
>if he tries to claim copyright over derivative, they take him to court and delay the proceeding for 50 years, bleeding him dry
>Nintendo gets away scott free
Thanks to our broken court system.

Yes. That's why I know AM2R doesn't have reused tiles, surely not 90% like that other user said.

Feel free to post two screen where it's clear that they stole assets, man

They can use the translation simply with a contract since the owner has given permission

You are just too naive regarding software building. The most important thing a dev learns to do is ctrl+c and ctrl+v

>Shitendo
>caring about their reputation

Good one

>Tries to refute with Zero Mission
>Post cropped sized of AMR2
Kill yourself user.

Your memory sucks.

Still Looking for proof

Funny thing is I just looked at some Chozo ruin tiles and while they do look similar (since they were going for that style), they aren't all the same

Only thing that likely are the same are the bird head platforms

I can actually see slight difference between them.
They aren't ripped, that's recreating the sprites, even I can do that.

Not that user, but see:

I made a quick search and found this on the official forums, where they discuss the cease and desist from nintendo:

"...Judging by the fact you literally just made an account and just made a single post, it is fairly logical to assume you are quite unfamiliar with AM2R's development. While you can spend all the time in the world making speculation about AM2R, the fact remains that all assets (baring text) -- sprites, gameplay, code, sound effects, music, and features -- in AM2R were not copied from Nintendo. Every single asset was coded from the ground up (or drawn in the case of sprites) by DoctorM64 and his assistants (or in the case of the sprites, assisted by the community). Legally speaking, these are not mere carbon copies of Nintendo copyrighted assets, and instead represent what is considered 'Fair Use' under Title 17 USC ยง107..."

Source: am2r.freeforums.org/dmca-counter-claim-t1496-40.html

//Thread closed

>That's BS and you know it user
No, that is 100% legally correct.

>b-b-buh big corp money
>muh corrupted system
No, not in this case user. Nintendo would be committing utterly flagrant, willful commercial copyright infringement on a mass scale. And Nintendo having lots and lots of money is precisely the point. He'd have zero issue finding a very good lawfirm who'd cheerfully take the case on a contingency basis for a solid percentage of just the amount of statutory damages Nintendo would be liable for.

I know it's a popular meme, but at least in the USA open/shut cases do not actually drag on for "50 years". A few years? Sure, sometimes if it's complex enough. But there are limits to the number of possible appeals and do-overs, and the courts do not actually like to indulge contentless shit at higher levels. They will sanction attorneys who go to far, and flat out deny review unless there is a solid colorable argument. Appeals being granted is not a right, and courts do think about their own workloads too.

You're suffering from confirmation bias user: your views on cases are being shaped by what gets publicity, but the cases that get publicity in the media tend to be that way precisely because they're UNUSUAL. The common every day 99% of cases get zero media attention because that's the normal.

This is all moot though because Nintendo has non-moron attorneys so they'd never ever get even close to such a stupid decision.

...

You can't plagiarize work that has already been plagiarized and submitted as "fan made content."

It's Nintendo's own intellectual property, redesigned and resubmitted to the audience as a fan made remaster, the worst Nintendo would do is take the game directly and try to publish it under a Wii Virtual Console title, but they wouldn't publish it as their own game, since it is already their own game with tons of copyright infringement slapped all over it.

Nope. WRONG AGAIN.

There would be a fuck ton of money at stake and no shortage of lawyers would be happy to take the case for a portion of the reward. Usually 30%.

Lawyers have established this kind of deal exactly for cases that have high potential but don't have the capital upfront to deal with it.

Nintendo wouldn't dare do it because they'd be out millions by the end.

>Again, go back to class, underage.
But I know that I am older than you... :(

I don't think it works like that. Given the similarities, i think the burden of proof is on you. I want proof that this is the one that is different from all the rest. Please, give me the proof that everything was made from scratch.

what case authority are you basing your argument on?

>Custom made-assets and custom code are all owned by Nintendo because they were used in a Nintendo fan game

Never become a lawyer

The right to ownership stated on the back of the Metroid Prime box.

>>Custom made-assets
Swing and a miss

you made the clam that it has stolen assets so the burden of proof is on you

Not him, but

>Samus Aran
>Metroids
>Sr388
>her gunship

Just for starters. Those are stolen assets.

>Game said to be almost all (if not completely all) custom assets
>Person says they used ripped assets
>It's somehow on the people that said they made custom assets to show that every single assets is custom, and not for the person accusing them of theft to show the example of theft

What the fuck

He can't publish it, because his work infronges on Nintendo's copyright, but he still owns 100% right on AM2R. He owns AM2R forever. He just can't do anything with it (at all, whatsoever).

>no u: the counter-argument
Holy shit this underage "LE EPIN" shitposting.

cheeky

Can you prove it?

We can all agree that Nintendo has done some shitty things, but they wouldn't even do this.

Not those anons, just want to say that's not how Fair Use works. I agree and argued earlier that AM2R apparently uses 100% originally created assets, but it's still a derivative work. It's using Nintendo's designs, level design, etc, albeit as an independent reimplementation. If he'd made his own character designs though and world then it'd be entirely his own. As an affirmative defense, I don't think AM2R would satisfy the multipart test of Fair Use. It's non-profit, but it's also not educational, commentary, parody, political etc. Metroid is an entirely fictional universe, there is no public interest or issue of facts, which significantly strengthens Nintendo's claim. AM2R is obviously substantially derivative, right down to the name, the entire point of the project is a new version of Metroid 2 to a modern generation and to give long time fans a fun experience.

So no I don't think AM2R has any Fair Use defense here that'd be successful in court. But that doesn't change the fact that it's copyrighted by the creator and not Nintendo either.

Correct. This is correct.

That's intellectual property not graphical assets you retard

because you say so?

provide evidence

The name Metroid is copyrighted by Nintendo. By using it, he stole their copyright.

why the fuck can't nintendo just let these guys drop it on the eshop like steam and black mesa

You can't copyright ideas. So if they recreate metroid, there is nothing to stop them. It's just ideas and coding. Nintendo owns the phrase "Metroid" and terms like that but those are just words.

Copyrights extend usually only to sales and distribution. You can rip off anyone provided you don't sell it for profit, at which point you are arguably piggybacking off their copyright. If they Changed the name to "Booper Wetroid" they would be free and clear.

To publish it Nintendo would still have to contract the devs for their work, further they would need to acquire permission to use their work. Really the devs have the advantage in that the game is their own creation but clearly shy from going to court.

It's complicated, but the solution is basically the solution is the devs not to take money for the project and Nintendo to pull the stick out their ass.

Because Nintendo is always behind on the times from a corporate standpoint

They make good games, but they way they run and manage everything is the fucking worst

No, the burden is always on the defendant side. I make a case that it looks similar enough. The physics and movement look the same, there is jurisprudence for the situation, etc. It's up to you to demonstrate that a game that has all the signs of having stolen content is actually entirely original.
Also, when I say "this looks the same" you say "lalala there is no proof I won't listen" only criminals or morons think thats a valid response.

Nintendo is too proud and too retarded to admit fault on their behalf.

that answer my silly question

But that not the conversion wear talking about if he did or did not steal assests

No, they are not "stolen assets". They're independent, unauthorized implementations of a design and trademark that Nintendo owns IP rights too. So the case is that the guy who made them owns the copyright on them, because he made them. But they're also infringing upon Nintendo's IP. Result: nobody can distributed them at all unless all parties came to an agreement. Nintendo can prevent distribution, but they cannot then commit infringement themselves. IP rights exist precisely in the form of "preventing distribution", and in the of damages a party is considered to be made whole purely through monetary compensation. There is no transfer of IP rights as part of infringement cases.

The burden of proof is on the person who makes the claims

>a toy company makes toys
Yes how awful of them

There's not a single developer or company that does that with a relevant franchise.

Why is it somehow Nintendo's job to be the first?

Nintendo did the wrong thing DMCA'ing this. But at the same time, it's not a big deal. AM2R is cool and all but it's not as great as many people keep parrotting.
I can see them being so starved for Metroid games they start praising the first mediocre fangame they get, maybe just to spite Nintendo. But really, I'd rather play Zero Mission for the 10th time over AM2R for a second run.

So yeah, Nintendo goofed hard but AM2R is not that good to create all this rage and shitflinging.
Sometimes, all of this seems the usual and monthly "let's find a reason to shit on Nintendo" routine. Like censorship which Nintendo got a lot of shit for, when companies like NISA or Capcom can do even worse and get a quarter of the shit Nintendo got.

he literally gave a fucking example you cretin