| Jumpin said: A lot of misconceptions in your post. Let me break them down. • Buying an item with copyrighted material on it does not make you the copyright holder. The copyright material remains the property of the creator/owner. You are certainly not entitled to copy and distribute someone else’s property. • Copyright laws exist because copying and distributing stuff violates the rights of the creator/owner of the property, and undermines their ability to use/distribute it the way they want to. Nintendo is the creator of their stuff, not you; Nintendo has the right to sell their stuff and use it however they want, you don’t have the right to decide that for them. • Nintendo didn’t invent copyright or trademark laws, these are the results of the legal systems of the country you live in. • Assigning a random data point like “20 years old” doesn’t justify your position. The laws of your country determine how many years until a copyright expires, not your opinion. • They also didn’t “crush” him for being a “little guy” they sued him for damages because he was profiting by pirating Nintendo’s property. • If Nintendo sets a precedent for allowing pirates to distribute/sell Nintendo’s property, and even profit off of them like this guy you’re defending, then the precedent would allow Apple and Microsoft to do so. • Being a company that serves families does not mean Nintendo can’t also have legal rights. You do realize both these things can and should exist? • Nintendo’s ownership over their own property is not removed because you want stuff for free. And even if your made-up claim that “most Nintendo fans agree” was true, that is not a valid argument against Nintendo’s legal rights. • Calling yourself a “Nintendo fan” does not give you the justification to decide how Nintendo’s copyrights are used. Besides, it’s not up to fans to decide how someone else’s creation should be used or distributed, it’s up to the creator. • Defending copyrights and trademarks is neither antiquated, greedy, authoritative, nor fascist. These are all unsubstantiated attacks your making, not valid arguments. Your post falls apart with a basic application of reason and reality. I’m not seeing someone making some kind of rational argument against the tyranny of copyright law, but you’re not doing that, you’re attacking Nintendo for protecting their property from rampant piracy. Nintendo’s not greedy for doing that, as a creator they have rights to defend the properties they created. You’re the greedy one. Your motivation doesn’t come from anything relating to justice, but from selfishness and entitlement to properties that don’t belong to you. |
I couldn't disagree with you more.
• Buying an item with copyrighted material on it does not make you the copyright holder. The copyright material remains the property of the creator/owner. You are certainly not entitled to copy and distribute someone else’s property.
You are entitled to make personal backups or to format shift the copyrighted content you own (of course, this is under the condition that you do not share it). This goes way back in copyright law for decades across many countries. I never said anything about owning the copyright of the material that you purchase.
• Copyright laws exist because copying and distributing stuff violates the rights of the creator/owner of the property, and undermines their ability to use/distribute it the way they want to. Nintendo is the creator of their stuff, not you; Nintendo has the right to sell their stuff and use it however they want, you don’t have the right to decide that for them.
I never said that I wanted such a right. I only want the right to backup my own physical media in the event that they fail, which is also my right enshrined in copyright law. The DRM clause that was recently added in the last 10 years to both US and Canadian copyright law is interfering with this right. Before 2012 in Canada there were absolutely no legal barriers against me making backups of games that I own, now the legality is ambiguous.
• Nintendo didn’t invent copyright or trademark laws, these are the results of the legal systems of the country you live in.
Media giants (which Nintendo is one of) lobby governments to pass amendments to the copyright acts that hurt the consumer. It's their right to lobby, but it is also my right to dislike the actions of the industry because of this. The DRM bypass prohibition was brought in specifically as a result of industry pressure in Canada and there were numerous consumer groups that opposed it, unfortunately corporations lobby and control a lot of politicians so we know who they ended up siding with. Companies like Nintendo also pursue court cases in courts that they know are sympathetic to their cause in order to get rulings that are liberally in their favor that expands the intent of said laws even beyond the intent of the politicians who created the law. I am not sure if Nintendo had a hand in creating the DRM bypass prohibition but they have aggressively made use of it and their court-cases have created case law that has put a lot more restrictions on the consumer's ability to protect their purchases.
• Assigning a random data point like “20 years old” doesn’t justify your position. The laws of your country determine how many years until a copyright expires, not your opinion.
I don't think that you understand my position, I am not trying to argue that downloading a 20 year old game is not a violation of current copyright law, I expressed my opinion that the crime should have the seriousness of jay-walking at 2:00 in the morning. Also, laws can and sometimes should change. That's my opinion and if you don't like it, you can have your own.
• Nintendo’s ownership over their own property is not removed because you want stuff for free. And even if your made-up claim that “most Nintendo fans agree” was true, that is not a valid argument against Nintendo’s legal rights.
I personally do not download pirated media. I have spent tons of money buying retro games used and 100% legit over the past decade as well as my own personal collection of games from the 90's. I want to make backups of these games because playing them can destroy the media (both cart and disc based media). If you want to risk killing a $300 Dragon Warrior IV NES cart by playing it in 2021, that's your choice but I shouldn't have to be forced to destroy my media just to have access to it. This is why backup and format-shifting provisions exist in copyright law. It's unjust for these rights to be curtailed just so that Nintendo can have a heavier hand in going after people who actually pirate things.
I also feel that people who download older games, while breaking the law, are about as bad as jaywalkers (who are also breaking the law). This is my opinion and I would love to see a poll of the gaming community to see how many people agree with me. I am not arguing against Nintendo's legal rights, I am saying that they should pay attention to their fans because they are lots of upset fans like myself who can be very easily convinced to boycott them if they keep enforcing their rights in a heavy-handed manner.
• Defending copyrights and trademarks is neither antiquated, greedy, authoritative, nor fascist. These are all unsubstantiated attacks your making, not valid arguments.
The "fascist" comment was specifically in relation to my comments on recent copyright law changes prohibiting personal backups. Nintendo going after ROM websites I feel have bad optics for Nintendo but I acknowledged that it is their right.
Your post falls apart with a basic application of reason and reality. I’m not seeing someone making some kind of rational argument against the tyranny of copyright law, but you’re not doing that, you’re attacking Nintendo for protecting their property from rampant piracy.
Honestly, I am not sure if you even read my post, but yeah part of it is that I am attacking Nintendo for the over enforcement of their copyright laws. I am pretty sure that this is the topic of the thread. A lot of people (including many on this thread) think that Nintendo is being too heavy-handed, even if they are in the right. The other part of my post was that I am upset at Nintendo for contributing to the obstruction of user's rights to make personal backups of their media. I don't see how any of this argument is faulty, although you are free to disagree with it.
Last edited by Illusion - on 15 September 2021
