Oh, Nintendo. You have such a friendly public face, but deep down you're pure sod. You're like a kind clown with a short temper, who will occasionally kick a dog up the bottom so hard that its colon pops out of its mouth, making it look like it's blowing a kiss.
Admittedly, most big corporations end up in a courtroom sooner or later, but Nintendo has a particularly knee-jerk history when it comes to inflating its legal balloon... as well as often being on the opposite end of the statutory balloon-bounce from others.
Here are 7 times Nintendo felt the need - the need for speed (to unleash its lawyers).
Admittedly, most big corporations end up in a courtroom sooner or later, but Nintendo has a particularly knee-jerk history when it comes to inflating its legal balloon... as well as often being on the opposite end of the statutory balloon-bounce from others.
Here are 7 times Nintendo felt the need - the need for speed (to unleash its lawyers).
NINTENDO vs GAME GENIE
You might remember when cheat cartridges were a bit of a thing; you'd plug them into your console's cart slot, and by inputting a code you could alter the game to give extra health, or infinite ammo, or make your trousers fall off.
Nintendo sued Galoob, the makers of Game Genie, for copyright infringement, stating that modifying its existing games constituted creating a derivative work.
After a year of debate - during which time the Game Genie wasn't allowed to be sold - the judge ruled in Galoob's favour, likening the Game Genie to "skipping the pages of a book", or something. Nintendo was ultimately forced to pay $15 million to Galoob to account for its 12 months of lost revenue.
Silly Nintendo.
Nintendo sued Galoob, the makers of Game Genie, for copyright infringement, stating that modifying its existing games constituted creating a derivative work.
After a year of debate - during which time the Game Genie wasn't allowed to be sold - the judge ruled in Galoob's favour, likening the Game Genie to "skipping the pages of a book", or something. Nintendo was ultimately forced to pay $15 million to Galoob to account for its 12 months of lost revenue.
Silly Nintendo.
NINTENDO vs BLOCKBUSTER
I miss Blockbuster. It's not the same, looking for things to watch on Netflix. I'd always find a film to rent, no matter how terrible it was, and - having spent money for it - I'd make damn sure I'd watch the thing through to the end. Admittedly, I only ever rented games a handful of times, but given the prohibitive cost for paupers of buying games outright, game rental offered an important alternative.
Like Nintendo was ever going to care about the paupers.
In 1989, having already succeeded in getting video game rentals banned in Japan, Nintendo turned its beak to the rest of the world - and tried to get Blockbuster Video to stop renting out its games.
Nintendo lost the case, but won a small concession; Blockbuster wouldn't be allowed to bundle original manuals with its rentals, thus customers had to make do with dreadful photocopied reproductions, and a hand-drawn image of some chard.
Like Nintendo was ever going to care about the paupers.
In 1989, having already succeeded in getting video game rentals banned in Japan, Nintendo turned its beak to the rest of the world - and tried to get Blockbuster Video to stop renting out its games.
Nintendo lost the case, but won a small concession; Blockbuster wouldn't be allowed to bundle original manuals with its rentals, thus customers had to make do with dreadful photocopied reproductions, and a hand-drawn image of some chard.
NINTENDO vs UNIVERSAL STUDIOS
Nintendo and Universal Studios are best friends these days; they're working together on bringing a Nintendo land to Universal theme parks, at which you'll be able to try on a pair of massive elastic underpants with the word "Mario" written on them - in caulk!
It wasn't always the case. In 1982, Universal sued Nintendo, alleging that its Donkey Kong character infringed upon the King Kong movie franchise. The judge ruled in Nintendo's favour, stating that the rights to King Kong - created by RKO in the 1930s - did not reside with Universal in the first place, and actually belonged in the public domain.
"Donkey Kong's particular expression of a gorilla villain and a carpenter hero (with or without a fire hat) who must dodge various obstacles (whether bombs or fireballs) while climbing up ladders (whether complete or broken) and picking up prizes (umbrellas or purses) to rescue a fair-haired (whether knotted or pigtailed) hostage from the gorilla is protractible against Universal and its licensees," he screamed, like a terror-stricken swine (with or without a fire hat).
It wasn't always the case. In 1982, Universal sued Nintendo, alleging that its Donkey Kong character infringed upon the King Kong movie franchise. The judge ruled in Nintendo's favour, stating that the rights to King Kong - created by RKO in the 1930s - did not reside with Universal in the first place, and actually belonged in the public domain.
"Donkey Kong's particular expression of a gorilla villain and a carpenter hero (with or without a fire hat) who must dodge various obstacles (whether bombs or fireballs) while climbing up ladders (whether complete or broken) and picking up prizes (umbrellas or purses) to rescue a fair-haired (whether knotted or pigtailed) hostage from the gorilla is protractible against Universal and its licensees," he screamed, like a terror-stricken swine (with or without a fire hat).
NINTENDO vs ATARI
This 1989 case saw Atari - and its subsidiary Tengen - suing Nintendo, accusing them of unfair business practises which had led to a monopoly.
According to Atari, game makers were forced to "yield to coercion from Nintendo, so that Atari and other manufacturers of video game consoles are unable to obtain many popular games for use on their own systems".
The complex case revolved around who had the rights to release Tetris on the NES - Nintendo or Tengen.
Atari objected to Nintendo's policy of only allowing official licensees to make games for its machines. Nintendo launched a countersuit, which prevented Tengen from releasing games on its systems without an official Nintendo license. The judge ruled in Nintendo's favour, forcing Tengen to destroy almost 270,000 copies of their version of Tetris, and allowing Nintendo to release a less-good version of the popular Russian block-dropper.
According to Atari, game makers were forced to "yield to coercion from Nintendo, so that Atari and other manufacturers of video game consoles are unable to obtain many popular games for use on their own systems".
The complex case revolved around who had the rights to release Tetris on the NES - Nintendo or Tengen.
Atari objected to Nintendo's policy of only allowing official licensees to make games for its machines. Nintendo launched a countersuit, which prevented Tengen from releasing games on its systems without an official Nintendo license. The judge ruled in Nintendo's favour, forcing Tengen to destroy almost 270,000 copies of their version of Tetris, and allowing Nintendo to release a less-good version of the popular Russian block-dropper.
NINTENDO vs URI GELLER
In 1999, believing that the spoon-wielding Pokemon Kadabra (known in Japan as Un-Geller) was a cruel parody of himself, "psychic" bender Uri Geller hit Nintendo with a £60 million lawsuit.
He claimed: "Nintendo turned me into an evil, occult Pokémon character. Nintendo stole my identity by using my name and my signature image."
Geller additionally claimed that markings on Kadabra's body were antisemitic in nature.
Astonishingly, the case has yet to be resolved, almost 20 years on. Consequently, Kadabra has been quietly retired from Pokemon titles and media, while Geller has gone on to threaten others with stealing his likeness - including IKEA, which released a table with bent legs that it dubbed "Uri".
He claimed: "Nintendo turned me into an evil, occult Pokémon character. Nintendo stole my identity by using my name and my signature image."
Geller additionally claimed that markings on Kadabra's body were antisemitic in nature.
Astonishingly, the case has yet to be resolved, almost 20 years on. Consequently, Kadabra has been quietly retired from Pokemon titles and media, while Geller has gone on to threaten others with stealing his likeness - including IKEA, which released a table with bent legs that it dubbed "Uri".
NINTENDO vs THE ELDERLY
In 2013, Nintendo was successfully sued by iLife Technologies, a company responsible for creating a device which detected when elderly people had fallen over. A jury awarded iLife $10 million, stating that Nintendo had appropriated its technology for use in it Wii controllers.
Ironically, upon receiving the news of the company's defeat, many Nintendo executives immediately fell over.
Ironically, upon receiving the news of the company's defeat, many Nintendo executives immediately fell over.
NINTENDO vs THE FANS
Whether it's hobbyist developers making unlicensed version of Nintendo titles, or YouTubers with their so-called "Let's Play" videos, Nintendo has a reputation for getting heavy with fans of its games.
Following legal threats by Nintendo, creators may no longer live stream Nintendo games through YouTube - even if they have registered with its controversial Nintendo Content Creators program (which allows YouTubers to a share of advertising revenue - split with Nintendo - providing they adhere to Nintendo's terms).
Frankly, this may be the most heinous peak of Nintendo's legal fatuity.
Following legal threats by Nintendo, creators may no longer live stream Nintendo games through YouTube - even if they have registered with its controversial Nintendo Content Creators program (which allows YouTubers to a share of advertising revenue - split with Nintendo - providing they adhere to Nintendo's terms).
Frankly, this may be the most heinous peak of Nintendo's legal fatuity.
PLEASE... SEND AN EMAIL TO THE DIGITISER FRIDAY LETTERS PAGE
digitiser2000@gmail.com
digitiser2000@gmail.com
RSS Feed
