By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

@Cobretti

The question isn't what is typical. Publishing contracts run varying lengths of time from as little as a year to as much as fifty. The only questions are these what is lawful, and what the parties agree to. Beyond that typical isn't very relevant especially when its an object of contention. The question is what did Nintendo retain in the contract negotiations, and for what specified period.

I find it difficult to believe that such an issue would not be agreed to as part of contract negotiations as a rule large corporations are very exacting in their contracts so that they have legal verification of their rights to certain things. Even if at the time the publishing rights to past games was not a major issue it would have still been addressed, and Microsoft would have wanted to secure them. Meanwhile Nintendo might have been less eager. Thus a compromise of perhaps ten years from the original publish date.

Somewhere during all the wheeling and dealing the publishing rights to these games were conferred to Microsoft in one form or another. The only question would be when are they free to use said rights. Basically I think its a tad bit naive to think that Microsoft purchased a company, and did not even bother to secure the right to sell all intellectual properties of said company. Instead you would argue that they would let typically decide the issue, and more specifically you think they would let any company maintain a position from which they can squat on their property. Please we are talking about Microsoft.

You see three options that serve your interests, but they are all very much fantasies. You cannot seriously expect Microsoft to agree to those things. They are more apt to let the games rot in hell then give Nintendo even the scraps from their plate. You know its a competition thing.