TWEET TWEET TWEET

The Scrubs in OoT clearly don't have arms, however at the very least the Deku ruling class in MM do have arms.

Even better
That was commissioned by Bui, it's his paw-loving furret slut

Making a mod is extremely fucking easily compared to making an entire game from scratch. They require vastly, extremely different levels of effort and input, you don't know what you're on about, shut up until you do.

Legally they have to. All companies do. If they don't show they're making an effort to defend their IP's from being used by other people the legal system can remove their ownership of it. It's fucking retarded, but there you go that's the shitty way it is. And that why fan games SHOULD BE KEPT A FUCKING SECRET until they release.

It's a different story with a mods, though. That a legal system by legal system case. I'm not sure what Japan's laws are with mods, but all the C&D's they send out are usually for fan games build from the ground up and not mods, so I think this is going to make it through okay (unless he starts doing something stupid and starts charging money for it or something).

Stop spreading this meme. It showed up constantly in AM2R threads

Actually, here's an interesting article on trademark for retards, it's somewhat relevant
tfwiki.net/wiki/Trademark

...

What the fuck is wrong with you?

Laws are penultimate memes, user. You can't avoid them forever.

Gettoudda here.

You're imagining that user. I'm simply explaining that they have to do it. Whether they hate doing it or love doing it is not the point I'm making, nor am I fiddling Sympathy For The Devil for them.

user you can literally just go somewhere else. Stop trying to be profound, you're an idiot.

Your bait is bad, and you should feel bad. As for the metroid thing the only way nintendo could lose an IP would be if they had not made a game in forev…. oh that's why they did it.

See

if nintendo lets a fan put out a game set in Hyrule then it makes it harder for them to sue another company if they publish a game set in Hyrule. It's not fucking complicated.
It's not fucking complicated to file the serial numbers off and set a mod in not-Hyrule with not-Dekus, either.

Wrong.

Not really. I wish that were the fucking case but no, not really that's not how it works. You can lose control of an IP in a single country. Games Workshop almost lost their 40k trademark/copyright in Germany when those guys made their fan movie ages back, resulting in a firebombing campaign of C&D's by Games Jewshop. Conan the Barbarian is owned by Paradox in Sweden but it's public domain in Australia and the UK.

Just because you don't like the laws doesn't make acknowledging their existence bait, user. Accept it or don't, whatever.

They don't have to, they just have to defend their IP.
Stopping people from selling products with their IP is defending it.
Stopping fan games is not.
No proper court in the United States is going to void your copyright/trademark because of fan creations, not a single fucking one.
Under that logic: fan art, fan music and cosplaying should also all be C&D'd.

Actually, where does it specifically state this? I'm not an expert on trademark law (I'm not in any sort of legal field), but if someone not only uses a term, but uses it in the same field the term originated from, doesn't that genericize the term? That would make it hard to trademark, which would explain why NoA is so upset over it, America's trademark laws are pretty strict while Japan's are very loose from what I can tell.

M-more Dekus please!!

Here's what the Deku army looks like in-game proper.

You also have to defend how your product is represented. That's key to copyright law as well.

Technically yes, and many companies tried (ESPECIALLY DISNEY) in the past but the sheer volume makes it unrealistic to enforce. Nintendo still does it with Pokemon though, that's why Paheal autocorrects pokemon to porkyman - nintendo demanded it change the tag to avoid it getting brought up in search results for pokemon and they had to. Roblox also C&D'd Shadman over a edgelord image he drew rather recently. And I think Overwatch at least tried to limit the amount recently too.

Most companies however have bit the bullet and the legal systems mostly accepts that certain fan creations are just too numerous to be stopped. Fan games, however, crop up in dramatically fewer numbers so it's seen as more feasible.

Laws aren't so much black and white absolutes as they are shades of grey. It's a confusing mess sometimes.

You better be just some user, and not Neph.

Looks like you got your wish, user.

Now here's the Lizalfos army.

Didn't this guy ragequit like an autist once Hyrule Warriors came out because it wasn't DARK AND SERIOUS enough for him or something?

Just an user, honest.

Nah. You're thinking of the fit he threw over Skyward Sword.

Yes, but then he apologized to everyone, and started working on it again. I missed that little slice of autism.

To be fair, Skyward Sword was shit.

Deku's you say?

LI-ZUL-FOS?

It wasn't dark enough for him, he didn't like the lighter tone it had compare to Twilight Princess iirc.

I like Zelda's design from Skyward Sword, though. Easily Top 3 Zelda Designs for me.

Do you think Birdo or a Deku Scrub would win at a blowjobbing contest

Faggot
rule34.paheal.net/post/list/deku_scrub/1
rule34.paheal.net/post/list/deku_link/1

I've known perfectly normal people who randomly spaz out like that at times.
I'll never understand why people go through tardrage sometimes.

Indeed, which makes his spergout forgivable. From what I understand, he made Hylia into a misguided or villainous "false goddess" as a lingering polemic.

Tomayto tomahto?

First one the best.

It's not. If you don't protect your copyright you lose it. If some other company puts out something with your copyright, you try to sue, and they can prove that you have not protected it and let it fall into public use, then they'll win.

Birdo. Deku Scrub is made of wood. Dry, hard, wood.

Pic related.

Wrong, you can only lose copyright if you have not used the IP recently. Now stop being a faggot.

ITT: Deku scrubs, gay, and copyright law

I know Hyrule Warriors did it but fucking NigSek did it first.

friendly reminder most of these were never intended to release anyway and are either people padding their portfolios or employees working off shift to drum up media attention.

BotW Zelda better be somewhere in that top 3.

These are the worst faces ever, jesus

When people get DMCAs why don't they just ignore them? I mean as long as the account they mail it to has no real world identification and you're not retarded to link yourself to it, you should be fine.

What the fuck?

Because most people are retarded, and have their personal information all over this stuff.

NigSek?

"These"?

I dunno, user, would you like to be sued unto oblivion?

take one cursory glance at this guy's channel and tell me if you think this guy isn't retarded.

Doing decently for a retarded guy, if that's the case.

I can guarantee you as long as you don't have easily found identifying facts on your account, you're fine. Nintendo probably stops thinking about whatever it is the moment they send the DMCA.

I mean, you think they're gonna waste the money and resources to try and hunt down and prosecute someone? Sending a DMCA is easy, effortless, and only requires one click of a button on their part. It's just meant to scare you and because of faggots with facebook it works.

Hell, if you wanted to be really smart, just post updates on an anonymous image like here and don't have anything but a tripcode assigned to you. Where will a company send the DMCA then?

Most people are normalfags who have twitters and youtubes and want people to actually play their game. Even if they only posted on a burner account on some fandom related forum, the owners of the site would totally sell them out because they're giant faggots who love Nintendo and don't want their site's shit kicked in.

Huh. So I guess it wasn't nearly so effective before Faceberg.

If you have to use Twitter or such then just upload and manage activity from those accounts on public wifi. Like a library or fast food place or something. Easy.

Volvagia wasn't a generic unit in HW, you're thinking of Volga who was still a unique-appearance character as well as serving as the game's Lu Bu.

Most people are fucking retards, unfortunately. I'd just release it when it was done and fuck off, personally. It would be a good mystery too. Like that guy who made Yume Nikki, is he dead or what? We'll never know.

It's in the Top 4.

Volga is a hero unit for the Lizalfos here. In fact, he was in the OP trailer.

Ha, sure, "public"
Disable WPS

Oh please, user!
If they even put in a modicum of effort they wouldn't have to steal the likeness of a popular franchise to garner attention.

Yeah but he's talking about Volvagia being a generic unit in HW, when Volvagia never appeared.

There's nothing original about this

You must admit that the man's autism is something to behold. Most units are lifted from various enemies and NPCs found throughout the games.

Ah, right.

Do the Rito still look like big bird?

It isn't
They're a pretentious faggot who's convinced their shit doesn't stink.

...

He makes them himself I'm pretty sure. They seem like the same quality of the games he makes outside of that.

What are you going to do to stop me?

Who cares?

This must be art of the worst timeline where Zelda is turned into a nigger

I like Midna's and the Links faces on the right, everything else is meh.

The fact that this art exists means we live in the worst timeline in real life, too. We need some valiant pointy-eared hero to go back in time and fix this.

It is. Let me palate cleanse you.

Why not a Samurai?

They have multiple skeleton factions, if you're down for that. Also,

More like beak-nosers.

Whatever gets the job done. This timeline has been garbage since at least 2007, if not before. It needs to go.

Samurai are foolish

Literally thousands of designs for Samurai Link exist.

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? SUPER SAIYANS ARE FOOLISH!

What's the difference?

Have you ever had your mind blown by something completely retarded and obvious?

You can trace almost everything that led to the world going to shit back to the Sheikah too.

To be fair
Zelda shouldn't have been a retard and fucked with it.

True, but ultimately it can be traced back to the Sheikah producing a Hero over-reliant on technological assistance. Had the Guardians and Divine Beasts not been created to assist a Hero that really shouldn't have needed it they wouldn't have been around to ultimately get picked up and used against them by Ganon, and Hyrule wouldn't have fallen as a country.

Zelda fucked with the cycle, too, come to think of it, if she'd just let Link die they probably would've gotten help within 20 more years instead of in 100.

That's kind of like blaming the guy who invented screwdrivers for all the people that end up getting stabbed by them.
Ultimately it's Zelda's fault.

Not really, it's more akin to blaming the guy that left a doomsday device laying around after it ended up being used by somebody with malicious intent.

Guardians are but a logical upgrade of the concept, either by sheer range or by mobility.

But the Guardians literally aren't doomsday devices. They were totally autonomous until, because of zelda's research, were modified to be remotely controllable. Which led to Ganon then being able to remote into them and murder everyone until link got the fuck up, ran into the castle and killed ganon with a potlid.

XD

A weapon system, then.

Is this still being made by that extremely edgy fucker who whined about Hyrule Warriors being too silly? The one who thinks "mature" means "dark and edgy"? The one behind this travesty?

No, he whined about Skyward Sword being too immature.

No, he definitely whined about how ridiculous Link flinging the world around with the ball and chain in a Hyrule Warriors trailer was.

What's wrong with this one?

That's the gun is responsible for the shooting argument. Stop being wrong. Breath of the Wild is all zelda's fault and she's a stupid cunt.

You mean aside from the art style and character proportions?

Yes. Isn't it a fairly solid game in the mold of classic Star Fox (or at least getting there)?

It's less Star Fox and more Freespace (which it's built off of). I'm not saying that's a bad thing. Maybe I'm mis-remembering, but I swear he was bringing back Kursed for the game.

I thought this guy quit because when hyrule warriors was announced he went and had a tard fit about how it wasn't dark like his total war mod and quit.

Well she's a woman.

Wooooooww how was I supposed to know that would happen.

...

...

Patreon is funding his spare time; he just so happens to be using it to make a fan game. How is that bad? Fuck off with the astroturfing

Neither side is wrong or right

Nintendo is not in the right because they are abusing intellectual property laws against their fans. They are also not in the wrong though because they never set the precedent to do that

The fans aren't in the right either because they shouldn't expect Nintendo to not do anything to protect their intellectual property. The fans making these fan games must be aware of the risks

If you want to change things bitching like an autist is not the right way to do it, diplomacy is the only way to solve this issue, either through Nintendo themselves or through legislation to prevent corporate abuse of IP law

What part of this is "abusing" instead of just regular old "using"?

Yeah, and Zuckenberg created that charity out of his kind heart, not to evade taxes at all.

...

An ancient RPGmaker2000 game with actually good prerendered 3D sprites that was a prequel to Ocarina of Time for some reason, where two headed Bowser (Nigrob and Sekpook are the names of the heads, NigSek is the name of the organism) fights the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse and the Ocarina bosses. I haven't thought of this in like a fucking decade.

god forbid people draw inspiration from something they love. kind of like how you draw inspiration from poop

Drawing inspiration from ≠ using the same characters

Duchamp posts here?

Well, evidently he got over it, as the mod's still going.

it can be

It can't.
If you use the same character you're not drawing inspiration from nothing, you're using the same fucking characters.
Drawing inspiration would mean having a not-Deku faction fighting in not-Hyrule agains the not-Lizalfos and so on.
Just like Warcraft was not-Warhammer.

I don't even see why you'd make this mod. It'd be like a Mario or Metroid total war conversion, it's not remotely the scope or tone of the game. Zelda has never been about big military clashes and the setting is design accordingly. It's not like making a strategy game out of Halo or Suikoden, which is at least consistent with the setting.

but youre using those characters in another story

Not about, true, but they've been featured in the backstories, and there are plenty of factions to work with.

I hope he gets that DMCA notice soon

I would direct you to take a closer look at image one (checked)

WHEN MAKING A FANGAME YOU HAVE ONE FUCKING JOB

ONE JOB

There, you said it, you're using those characters, not drawing inspiration from them.

You do not seem to understand the concept of being an autistic-level fan of something. The game would be meaningless for them without the character – the author couldn't give less of a shit about the game if it didn't contain the characters he loves. A fantastic, well thought out game with incredible mechanics, novel approaches and extreme amounts of content would, in their eyes, be vastly inferior to an all around mediocre game in RPG maker that features their favourite character. The entire effort would be meaningless without the usage of the IP for them, which is why they cannot leave the IP out of it, despite risking a DMCA, as should they leave the IP out, most, if not every member of the dev team would immediately lose any interest whatsoever in making the game and would simply quit. The goal of a fan game is not to make a game, but to make an autistic tribute to the IP it concerns.

I honestly think that the ones who don't "get" (or pretend not to) why one would make a fan-game are the real autistic ones.

...

It's been almost 10 years now, I don't think nintendo has any real confidence it will ever be done so they don't feel threatened by it.

Those first two are fucking gold.

Jesus christ, I feel like an idiot.

Many times.
A toothbrush is called that because it's a brush for your teeth
I don't know how I don't realise these things sooner

MY DICK SAYS "FAN GAME" IS A-OKAY.

Which?

...

Slavs are delicious! Add some pepper in that motherfucker and MM MMM MMM!!!!!!

...

Is this the LOL thread?

aah no it hurts stop

I need Midna to sit on my face

Girls riding you while giving you the finger make me rock hard.

Is that a particularly large genre of porn?

Not just a genre, just a thing sometimes found.

You should see the Fairies and Zora. Monstergirl central.

You mean furbait central

I don't know what is more odd, what he considers a Zelda fairy or the fact that he tried to make a faction out of Labrynna.

...

...

U wot m8? Think you need to get your eyes checked.

I'd say his take on Fairies, since he made a bunch of them human-sized as opposed to the laughing giantesses we all know and love/fear in addition to their background. What's wrong with Labrynna, though?

Monstergirls are furry, stop memeing

That's all good, but it's not an excuse to not use proper terminology.

No. These are furry.

I don't get this guy's decisions.
And, to top it all off, he can't model characters for shit. Look at what he did to poor Ruto.

Good, she was stinkiest Zelda waifu anyways.

Strangely, he does a better job with Midna.
I take it you mean things like the Gohma?
Yeah, not going to defend that. As far as I can tell, it's a continuation of his earlier fangames. The only advantage to be found in those is the music. While this results in some good units, it's really best to just play this mod in campaign mode.

?

As for the minions, maybe he thought it would be too much to cram into one faction. Or maybe he wanted to represent each "tribe" seen working for the guy.

Not a fan of fish, I see.

Wasn't this the guy who made total war zelda and put Cia in a burka?

Yes to the first, dunno about the second.

I want to smell Deku Link's feet!

I want them up my ass

The Darknuts where wolf people in windwaker, but they didn't have snouts as far as I know.

Attribute most of his bad decisions to autism user.

No he just put her in a robe as far as I know. She kept the bird mask.

Die.

I want them in my mouth

Wolf people or jackal men. Thankfully this makes them no less badass than they were in WW and TP.

I even played one in a tabletop game once. Was pretty fun catching characters' attention with silence and a turn of the helmet.

Yeah, sure

wow, and I thought liking pregnant women was weird

Wanna ERP, user?

Not weird, just bad

Are you asking me if I want to yiff?

Yes :3

I mean, it's just Deku Link, there's not really much to talk about him. His feet are .. they're okay? Not like his big sweaty ass

Then sit on my face, user
Do whatever it takes to put me in my place
and post discord

Pokemon Prism 9 years before getting DMCA'd, AM2R was 8 years before the DMCA hit. The amount of time it's gone without getting fucked is irrelevant. Nintendo will get you eventually unless you do something like what the Mother 4 team is doing and rebranding it into something unique. Which honestly all fan projects should do that. You don't get anally raped and you can make money off of it

Well I mean, I also want to get bulled by Deku Link, just like you do Bui, so it's hard for me to dominate you. S-sorry

:^(
We can bully each other

Why not bully ITT?

because it wouldn't be anonymous since you namedropped me :c
add my alt: pensi#3222

I mean things like the green Gorons. An entire faction based on the fact that the Goron sprites in a gbc game were tinted green. The Storm Zoras aren't any better.

TP is very much an exception to the series, and even then, it still had shit like the Oocas and the clowns.

From what I understand looking at the earlier posts in this thread, dubsman, Neph is doing things differently from those unfortunates.

…Wut? This is the first I've heard of it. Only reason I can think of that existing is an overdone joke. You sure it wasn't just a unit?

Eh? Weren't OoT and MM only slightly less grit?

The Gorons of Rolling Ridge, one of the newest factoins. They aren't literally green, just foliage-covered, but their entire existence is based on this sprite from OoA.

They were very colorful games, especially MM. The 3DS remakes even more so.

And here's another faction I'm talking about that's just completely made up. They aren't playable, but it's still incredibly silly that they even exist in the game.

Which was a terrible decision. The world in MM was surreal, turning the vibrancy up t 11 was a terrible way to continue that vibe.

And the color was a part of that. It served as a contrast to the dark, depressing stories in the game. You have this colorful mask on the surface, but under that surface layer are lots of people going through very tough times and a world on the verge of death. It works far better than what TP tried, which feels more muddy than weird and alien. The color also serves to be trippy at times, which is appropriate, considering Link came across Termina in a very Alice in Wonderland way.

Very rarely was vibrant color used in MM. At least compared to how the remake treated it. The remake is trash aesthetically compared to the original. Even the OoT remake suffered with that but the textures weren't quite as important for the type of game it was and stuck a bit more closely to the original except when it was to fix a conveyance issue. How anybody can defend the moon in the MM remake is beyond me.

I agree that the moon is shit.

The swamp, the Deku palace, Clock Town, the observatory, the field, Great Bay, the pirates, the ranch, all the bosses, Kafei, a majority of the items, the game's namesake, etc. Yeah, you had the effectively dead and dry Ikana Canyon and the mountain that was covered in white until you beat Goht, but the game was not at all afraid to be colorful, most of the time. Even the first gold skultula house has quite a bit of color to it. Just look at the original official art. Lots of color that's made to pop out with heavy black shading. Aside from the goofy moon and giving the bosses all eyeball weak points, it's very clear that the n64 game is what the devs could do (they pushed the console hard enough to require the ram expansion, for fuck's sake, something only one other game did), while the 3ds game is what the devs wanted to do. You may not prefer it, but it is what it is.

I'm not saying the original game wasn't colorful. It was just rarely vibrant and that they made it way to vibrant in the remake. The games use of color in MM was much more spread out or blurred because of the texture sizes though. Whether it was the intention for devs or not, the remake suits the game worse for it. And I would never say the Great Bay, The pirate fortress or the Swamp were vibrant at all. The Swamp looked like an actual swamp, boring and dull with a few sharply colored plants/fungus. And the Great Bay often looked like it was sick with constant overcast. For the most part though I will say there's a lot of improvements with the game on a technical level with lightning and such. But art direction wise it just doesn't mesh well enough. And I'm one of those fags that thinks that the low poly count actually meshes well into the game because it can make things inherently uncomfortable to look at. Much like the games plot is uncomfortable to think about. I don't feel like it needed to have a more contradictory tone to match the gameplay. The tone and graphics fit the shit that occurred in the world. Like Link having to go through excruciating pain every time he had to put on a mask. Also Pirates Fortress was in no way vibrant. It's peak of colors were in the Captains champers and otherwise it was grey wall/metal with some red and beige paint.

I meant the actual pirates with their deep purple garb.

Yea well they're pirates. Course they'd be looking rich and vibrant.

and making something new with them

So? That's not drawing inspiration.

how is it not?

read

should we go in circles or agree to disagree?

I'm not the one in denial about the meaning of a word.
If you want to claim to be inspired by something, your creation has to resemble what you were inspired by, not be exactly it in another situation.

He was inspired to make a mod that overhauled the game in a way as to use pre-existing characters from another game. The use of the word is correct by a semantic point. And the actual assets themselves such as thinking of ways to apply the gameplay elements by making custom made instruments of war appropriate for a certain race is definitely something that could be considered inspired.

What you couldn't call this game is completely original.

youre saying that by nature of being a fan game there was no inspiration involved. there was no motivation, nothing to spark the fire

I mean it's a cool design but why?

You have a point there.

You don't.

It's still wood though. All the goo that it shoots out doesn't make it's hole not-wood.

For starters IIRC the only military forces from there that we see are unassuming guards visually. I have no idea where he got the lion motif from. Also IIRC in the modern time the queen's royal line lost most relevance with and though Ralph serves one of the goddess' as a knight, he is not in a position of leading a nation and ultimately by the end of the game the queen commissioned statues of link, a Hylian hero and IIRC Zelda the princess of Hyrule is also free entry into Labrynna indicating perhaps that Labrynna is a vassal state, an associated state, or some other kind of subservient entity to hyrule.

This is pretty much not Zelda at all at this point. It's just some dude who's too uncreative to justify his own setting.

havent i always?

tfw no deku boyfriend

I think N64 Zelda was actually darker than TP. TP feels superficially dark. Sure it has a lot of washed out colours, but there's nothing as genuinely grim and unsettling as the bottom of the well, the shadow temple, or like anything in MM.

This. Nintendo tried to appease fanboys who wanted the gritty look back after WInd Waker and ended up making a "dark" world like an emo would. I will say the Arbiter Grounds did a lot to redeem it though.

Wasn't that part of the "just a prank, bro" that Majora pulled on the place, together with enraging the sealife?

see

Ah. Well, all I knew is that Labrynna was its own entity in the Oracles games, and had its own knights. Also a vague memory of a pirate ship with cannon puzzles. Never actually played those two, just saw my friend do it.
Vassal or protectorate sounds appropriate.

All those bones and the sword demon tell me hundreds if not thousands of people met their deaths there. Plus, you know, an entire kingdom reduced to spirits after their ruler was overthrown was pretty unpleasant. Or the incestuous overtones of Zant's interactions with Midna.

He isn't related to Midna.

I wouldn't want my brand associated with such autism either. Still better than what real Fagtendo is making

STOP REPLYING TO THE FUCKING BAIT YOU IMBREED MONGOLOID!
ONCE WAS ENOUGH!

He did something like that I think. There might have been a contextual reason why the place looked so fucking gross all the time but it always rains on the second day so that probably has a lot to do with it.

Intellectual property is the most cancerous, Jewish thing to ever exist.

Hm? I thought they were part of the same royal family, if not brother and sister.

Ikana got fucked through reigniting the old war, if I remember right. Then again, as a kid I never reached the place.

Zant was merely an advisor to the royal family, which was why he was so pissed off.

Where did that explanation come in? I could've sworn they were related.

I don't know shit about the whole advisor thing, as far as I could tell in the game he was said to be a 'candidate' and that's as much as we know, but he got passed over. We don't know enough about the setting to say if monarchs are chosen from the same family, class, similar traits, etc. so any chance of them being related isn't ABSURD but at the same time it isn't likely, maybe a cousin at best but otherwise I'd say Zant was just a fucker that got overlooked when they were handing out crowns since he was a autistic manchild.

The only good argument for IP, with a few exceptions, is that it can incentivize individuals to make something that they otherwise would't have been able to profit off of. So I agree that it is awful when this is used to help massive corporations maintain their already near monopolistic power. Frankly, I want IP done away with just to destroy Hollywood, fuck (((them))).

...

Deku princess is horribly underrated.

can I get a sauce?

I would definitely buy it.

...

Go away Neph, finish your mod.

Is this the same guy who had an autistic breakdown from Hyrule Warriors?

...

Nice damage control

Damage control? As in you mean I should keep it going every month till a GOOD LoZ game comes out?

You're going to be paying him for a long time then. I generally make it a rule not to support people who who don't have the experience or can't make something from scratch.

It's a TW:M2 mod
no DMCA

I don't know where I got the advisor thing from. Maybe I misinterpreted something from the game. But, I know for sure there's no indication there's any blood relation between Midna and him.

theres no such thing as bait

Fuck off commie kike.

...

Fuck off other commie kike. Go get your own ideas instead of steal others to maximize your shekel growth.

>it's okay for kike multinationals to pretend that information has the properties of physical objects in order to reap eternal profits on something that should have entered the public domain, AT MAXIMUM, when the creator died
Jewish capitalism is just as bad as Jewish communism. Fuck you.

Profiting from your ideas? Fuck that jewish shit, ammirite my fellow Holla Forums users? Intellectual property should be protected by the law, so the authors can profit from their ideas, as they should. Otherwise if we didn't protect original works we would end up like the Chinese where 90% everything they make are shallow copies with no other purpose other than to make easy money. It would devolve into a cesspit of copycats and derivativeness where nobody progresses as an artist. Promoting originality and punishing thieves is what any righteous society would do. While I agree the current US copyright law has been bent to serve multimillionaire corporations, removing it would be like treating a broken bone by amputating it.
Back to
>>>Holla Forums

So where should we roll it back to? Is seventy years of free money for writing a song good enough? Oh, what's that, the Mouse is about to expire? Let's up it to a hundred and forty just for the hell of it, can't stop the Jew from making his shekels!

Copyright and trademarks were Jewish cancer from minute fucking one, and they grow like cancer too. Patents are slightly less shit tier because they refer to the actual creation of a physical object and don't last six gorillion years.

It has become fashionable to toss copyright, patents, and trademarks—three separate and different entities involving three separate and different sets of laws—plus a dozen other laws into one pot and call it “intellectual property”. The distorting and confusing term did not become common by accident. Companies that gain from the confusion promoted it. The clearest way out of the confusion is to reject the term entirely.
According to Professor Mark Lemley, now of the Stanford Law School, the widespread use of the term “intellectual property” is a fashion that followed the 1967 founding of the World “Intellectual Property” Organization (WIPO), and only became really common in recent years. (WIPO is formally a UN organization, but in fact represents the interests of the holders of copyrights, patents, and trademarks.) Wide use dates from around 1990.
The term carries a bias that is not hard to see: it suggests thinking about copyright, patents and trademarks by analogy with property rights for physical objects. (This analogy is at odds with the legal philosophies of copyright law, of patent law, and of trademark law, but only specialists know that.) These laws are in fact not much like physical property law, but use of this term leads legislators to change them to be more so. Since that is the change desired by the companies that exercise copyright, patent and trademark powers, the bias introduced by the term “intellectual property” suits them.
The bias is reason enough to reject the term, and people have often asked me to propose some other name for the overall category—or have proposed their own alternatives (often humorous). Suggestions include IMPs, for Imposed Monopoly Privileges, and GOLEMs, for Government-Originated Legally Enforced Monopolies. Some speak of “exclusive rights regimes”, but referring to restrictions as “rights” is doublethink too.
Some of these alternative names would be an improvement, but it is a mistake to replace “intellectual property” with any other term. A different name will not address the term's deeper problem: overgeneralization. There is no such unified thing as “intellectual property”—it is a mirage. The only reason people think it makes sense as a coherent category is that widespread use of the term has misled them about the laws in question.
The term “intellectual property” is at best a catch-all to lump together disparate laws. Nonlawyers who hear one term applied to these various laws tend to assume they are based on a common principle and function similarly.
Nothing could be further from the case. These laws originated separately, evolved differently, cover different activities, have different rules, and raise different public policy issues.
For instance, copyright law was designed to promote authorship and art, and covers the details of expression of a work. Patent law was intended to promote the publication of useful ideas, at the price of giving the one who publishes an idea a temporary monopoly over it—a price that may be worth paying in some fields and not in others.

Trademark law, by contrast, was not intended to promote any particular way of acting, but simply to enable buyers to know what they are buying. Legislators under the influence of the term “intellectual property”, however, have turned it into a scheme that provides incentives for advertising. And these are just three out of many laws that the term refers to.
Since these laws developed independently, they are different in every detail, as well as in their basic purposes and methods. Thus, if you learn some fact about copyright law, you'd be wise to assume that patent law is different. You'll rarely go wrong!
In practice, nearly all general statements you encounter that are formulated using “intellectual property” will be false. For instance, you'll see claims that “its” purpose is to “promote innovation”, but that only fits patent law and perhaps plant variety monopolies. Copyright law is not concerned with innovation; a pop song or novel is copyrighted even if there is nothing innovative about it. Trademark law is not concerned with innovation; if I start a tea store and call it “rms tea”, that would be a solid trademark even if I sell the same teas in the same way as everyone else. Trade secret law is not concerned with innovation, except tangentially; my list of tea customers would be a trade secret with nothing to do with innovation.
You will also see assertions that “intellectual property” is concerned with “creativity”, but really that only fits copyright law. More than creativity is needed to make a patentable invention. Trademark law and trade secret law have nothing to do with creativity; the name “rms tea” isn't creative at all, and neither is my secret list of tea customers.

How can you own an idea, user?

That's entirely separate from intellectual property laws, or are you suggesting no one ever benefited from creation before the existence of the patent?

Oh boy I am not going to read this thread, fucking retard.

People often say “intellectual property” when they really mean some larger or smaller set of laws. For instance, rich countries often impose unjust laws on poor countries to squeeze money out of them. Some of these laws are among those called “intellectual property” laws, and others are not; nonetheless, critics of the practice often grab for that label because it has become familiar to them. By using it, they misrepresent the nature of the issue. It would be better to use an accurate term, such as “legislative colonization”, that gets to the heart of the matter.
Laymen are not alone in being confused by this term. Even law professors who teach these laws are lured and distracted by the seductiveness of the term “intellectual property”, and make general statements that conflict with facts they know. For example, one professor wrote in 2006:

Unlike their descendants who now work the floor at WIPO, the framers of the US constitution had a principled, procompetitive attitude to intellectual property. They knew rights might be necessary, but…they tied congress's hands, restricting its power in multiple ways.

That statement refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution, which authorizes copyright law and patent law. That clause, though, has nothing to do with trademark law, trade secret law, or various others. The term “intellectual property” led that professor to make a false generalization.
The term “intellectual property” also leads to simplistic thinking. It leads people to focus on the meager commonality in form that these disparate laws have—that they create artificial privileges for certain parties—and to disregard the details which form their substance: the specific restrictions each law places on the public, and the consequences that result. This simplistic focus on the form encourages an “economistic” approach to all these issues.
Economics operates here, as it often does, as a vehicle for unexamined assumptions. These include assumptions about values, such as that amount of production matters while freedom and way of life do not, and factual assumptions which are mostly false, such as that copyrights on music supports musicians, or that patents on drugs support life-saving research.
Another problem is that, at the broad scale implicit in the term “intellectual property”, the specific issues raised by the various laws become nearly invisible. These issues arise from the specifics of each law—precisely what the term “intellectual property” encourages people to ignore. For instance, one issue relating to copyright law is whether music sharing should be allowed; patent law has nothing to do with this. Patent law raises issues such as whether poor countries should be allowed to produce life-saving drugs and sell them cheaply to save lives; copyright law has nothing to do with such matters.
Neither of these issues is solely economic in nature, and their noneconomic aspects are very different; using the shallow economic overgeneralization as the basis for considering them means ignoring the differences. Putting the two laws in the “intellectual property” pot obstructs clear thinking about each one.
Thus, any opinions about “the issue of intellectual property” and any generalizations about this supposed category are almost surely foolish. If you think all those laws are one issue, you will tend to choose your opinions from a selection of sweeping overgeneralizations, none of which is any good.
Rejection of “intellectual property” is not mere philosophical recreation. The term does real harm. Apple used it to warp debate about Nebraska's “right to repair” bill. The bogus concept gave Apple a way to dress up its preference for secrecy, which conficts with its customers' rights, as a supposed principle that customers and the state must yield to.
If you want to think clearly about the issues raised by patents, or copyrights, or trademarks, or various other different laws, the first step is to forget the idea of lumping them together, and treat them as separate topics. The second step is to reject the narrow perspectives and simplistic picture the term “intellectual property” suggests. Consider each of these issues separately, in its fullness, and you have a chance of considering them well.

(Checked)
Very nice.

This is great, however the formatting could be better suited to image boards.

Yes it does, also Nazi Germany had patent and copyright laws too, faggot.

Information doesn't have scarcity because you can copy it without degradation, and it doesn't depreciate unless you're the sort of stupid faggot who thinks games age.
Yeah, well, Nazi Germany also made allies with mudslimes. No one's perfect.

WE WUZ ZELDA N SHIEEEEET

...

Copyright laws should serve to protect a person's ideas, or any kind of intellectual creation. After about 50 years it should go away because at this point either everyone forgot about it, or it left a strong mark on society.

When your works are at risk of being heavily copied and plagiarized, it helps to protect creators with original ideas so they get rewarded, while lesser creators don't benefit.

That's a god tier copypasta, user, you made Stallman proud. I almost fell for it like 1ba955 and 5cdaaa. Sadly it completely misses the point of my post and the actual subject I was arguing for.

OH MY GOD! FUCKING KILL YOURSELF YOU FUCKING CORPORATE SHILL!

I'm only against the term "intellectual property" because it is intellectually dishonest and deceptive. The subject you're arguing is different, and I understand that.

user, if I could've pulled a law book out my ass and read up the exact terms, we wouldn't be here. I know you know i know what I'm saying, but you used the big fat faggot freetard's walls of text and that's not cool.

If you knew what you were saying you wouldn't need to pull a law book out of your ass.
Absolutely retarded, but I guess reading is for nerds, right? But then you never had a real argument in the first place.

The only time black Zelda was acceptable was in Legend of Neil, and that was as a joke.

I'm actually curious, do all of the fan games that Nintendo DMCAs actually use assets ripped from Nintendo games? Like sound effects, textures, character models and so on? Is there any examples of games that Nintendo C&Dd that use completely new and fan made assets but just had the characters likeness and names?

I'm not sure that's something we should prioritize except in the case of physical security.

Newgrounds?

I really enjoyed it when I watched it way back. Dropped off before they finished the series though, so I still have to go back and see the ending.

Thanks.

By which you mean physical copies of the game? Didn't the devs of the 90s and early 00s have a number of ingenious (and funny) anti-pirating tricks in their repertoire?

bullshit
Sega doesn't do it and people love them for it.

You sure about that?

Besides some slight errors it looks fine to me.

itt Holla Forums has trouble adapting to the information age, still.

We do a better job of it than you do.

...

He seems to be in line with Holla Forums's views in places.