Edit: Also, it’s a bit more complicated in terms of IP, but it is relevant to future works.
For example, fictional characters.
Let’s take Mickey Mouse as an example. Steamboat Willie is entering public domain, so the protections on the character as defined in that work is entering the public domain. But characterization of the figure in works still under copyright that have added unique details are still protected.
But the test for infringement of a fictional character is twofold. (1) Can the figure be copyrighted? (2) Is there infringement of unique characteristics?
That second part becomes much more difficult to enforce if you’ve been allowing millions of variations of your protected character when you initial work defining the character is no longer enforceable.
So if LoZ on the NES enters the public domain making ‘Ganon’ as a pig usable by people, but since that game there’s been tons of spinoffs by others having Ganon as a human before Nintendo had Ganon as depicted in OoT, then they’d have a much harder time enforcing copyright on Ganon being depicted as a human even if Ganon as a pig was no longer under copyright.
No lawyer is going to say “yeah, let 3rd parties use your IP willy nilly, I’m sure it will be fine and not bite us in the ass later on.”
For example:
Copyright protection is effectively never lost, unless explicitly given away or the copyright has expired. However, if you do not actively defend your copyright, there may be broader unauthorized uses than you would like. It is a good idea to pursue enforcement actions as soon as you discover misuse of your copyright protected material.
If you have experienced copyright infringement, you have the right to pursue a lawsuit. However, you only have a limited time frame during which to file a claim. This legal principle is called the “statute of limitations.” Ensuring that you file a claim to enforce your copyright within the statute of limitations is crucial. If you wait too long, you will lose the right to enforce your copyright and obtain your deserved damages.
So a fan project that you don’t enforce against for three years which eventually monetizes as competition without infringement trademarks would be a potential concern.
…You realize that none of that is setting precedent, it just means you can’t pursue, right? You still can’t lose the IP even in the worst-case scenario, and the first example you gave even says that.
Copyright protection is effectively never lost, unless explicitly given away or the copyright has expired.
You seem to just really strongly want to justify Nintendo’s actions, which are not the norm across the industry for how IP issues are handled…
Like yeah there’s shitty IP laws, and shitty trademark laws, but they don’t justify Nintendo’s specific reactions.
which are not the norm across the industry for how IP issues are handled…
Go ahead and cite whatever you think the ‘norm’ is then.
Where else do you see publishers turning a blind eye to unlicensed remakes of their games?
The difference isn’t Nintendo being more legal trigger happy, it’s that their stuff is way more often being used in unlicensed ways so they come up more often in stuff like this.
But there’s a ton of examples of the same being the ‘norm’:
-Everything related to Bethesda’s mod scene
-The entire Touhou doujin scene, even including sold games/music
-Sonic games which included fans being brought in for sonic mania
-Megaman and Street fighter have huge histories in modding. Pretty sure megaman has an entire fan-game for Zero’s orgin story
So…That gives us Bethesda, Sega, and Capcom at minimum for big players, and Touhou pretty much shows you aren’t going to lose your fucking IP over this.
No, Nintendo really does just do it more often than everyone else. You don’t gain that rep absolutely everywhere just on hearsay.
Bethesda is owned by Zenimax, and an officially licensed mod scene is completely different.
If you want to run the mods for Bethesda’s games, you need the retail software to do so.
I guarantee that if a group was creating a Morrowind remake that didn’t require owning some Bethesda core game that was being modded to achieve that, Zenimax’s lawyers would be quick to be on top of the issue.
It’s not like there’s not examples where Bethesda’s lawyers caused mods to be shut down where it involved redistribution of Bethesda game assets without needing to buy the game.
I’m pretty sure that only applies to trademark laws, not IP laws.
Zelda is trademarked
Edit: Also, it’s a bit more complicated in terms of IP, but it is relevant to future works.
For example, fictional characters.
Let’s take Mickey Mouse as an example. Steamboat Willie is entering public domain, so the protections on the character as defined in that work is entering the public domain. But characterization of the figure in works still under copyright that have added unique details are still protected.
But the test for infringement of a fictional character is twofold. (1) Can the figure be copyrighted? (2) Is there infringement of unique characteristics?
That second part becomes much more difficult to enforce if you’ve been allowing millions of variations of your protected character when you initial work defining the character is no longer enforceable.
So if LoZ on the NES enters the public domain making ‘Ganon’ as a pig usable by people, but since that game there’s been tons of spinoffs by others having Ganon as a human before Nintendo had Ganon as depicted in OoT, then they’d have a much harder time enforcing copyright on Ganon being depicted as a human even if Ganon as a pig was no longer under copyright.
No lawyer is going to say “yeah, let 3rd parties use your IP willy nilly, I’m sure it will be fine and not bite us in the ass later on.”
For example:
Edit 2: Or the statute of limitations:
So a fan project that you don’t enforce against for three years which eventually monetizes as competition without infringement trademarks would be a potential concern.
…yeah?
IP is different from trademark though. You’re using them interchangeably.
The main difference being IP doesn’t have a “challenge it or you lose it” rule.
See the edit to my comment. It’s not as clear cut as you might think, particularly when considering the enforcement across multiple works over time.
…You realize that none of that is setting precedent, it just means you can’t pursue, right? You still can’t lose the IP even in the worst-case scenario, and the first example you gave even says that.
You seem to just really strongly want to justify Nintendo’s actions, which are not the norm across the industry for how IP issues are handled…
Like yeah there’s shitty IP laws, and shitty trademark laws, but they don’t justify Nintendo’s specific reactions.
Go ahead and cite whatever you think the ‘norm’ is then.
Where else do you see publishers turning a blind eye to unlicensed remakes of their games?
The difference isn’t Nintendo being more legal trigger happy, it’s that their stuff is way more often being used in unlicensed ways so they come up more often in stuff like this.
But there’s a ton of examples of the same being the ‘norm’:
Zenimax
Activision
EA or this
Take Two
You must have an odd sense of ‘norm’
Lets see…
-Everything related to Bethesda’s mod scene
-The entire Touhou doujin scene, even including sold games/music
-Sonic games which included fans being brought in for sonic mania
-Megaman and Street fighter have huge histories in modding. Pretty sure megaman has an entire fan-game for Zero’s orgin story
So…That gives us Bethesda, Sega, and Capcom at minimum for big players, and Touhou pretty much shows you aren’t going to lose your fucking IP over this.
No, Nintendo really does just do it more often than everyone else. You don’t gain that rep absolutely everywhere just on hearsay.
Bethesda is owned by Zenimax, and an officially licensed mod scene is completely different.
If you want to run the mods for Bethesda’s games, you need the retail software to do so.
I guarantee that if a group was creating a Morrowind remake that didn’t require owning some Bethesda core game that was being modded to achieve that, Zenimax’s lawyers would be quick to be on top of the issue.
It’s not like there’s not examples where Bethesda’s lawyers caused mods to be shut down where it involved redistribution of Bethesda game assets without needing to buy the game.