Illusion said:
OK so there are two arguments here: 1) Is existing copyright law just. 2) Is it right (aka. moral) for Nintendo exercise its rights fully under the law enforcing copyright law. My above point dealt strictly with #2 and it is a subjective argument, not a legal one. No, I do not think that Nintendo as a large company should be suing small players, issuing cease and desist orders for tiny not-for-profit projects like Metroid 64, etc even though the law allows them to do it. It is bad business because it makes long-time loyal fans like myself who have given Nintendo thousands of my own dollars over the years want to boycott them. It's also the case that Nintendo is basically by far the worse in the industry, where their competitors only just underline how excessively litigious Nintendo is. Also, I am not talking about the pirates out there that make big cash on Nintendo's IP, I am talking about the many small ROM sites that get taken down that basically had enough add revenue to break even but nothing more getting sued for multi-million dollar suits and essentially ruining the lives of these people. It should be sufficient in my view at most to issue a cease and desist order to these ROM sites and sue for whatever profits the site earned, not bring down multi-million dollar damages that will ruin a person's life. That being said, an even better way to handle the problem is for Nintendo to take a page from Sega's book and put their old ROM's up for sale on Steam and effectively kill the market. Nintendo creates its own problems and then relies on heavy-handed legal force to deal with the fallout. Yes it is completely within their rights, but I think that it is abhorrent and it is a bad image for a company that should be focused on fun and great memories. |
Whether it is bad for business is not is really up to Nintendo. Doesn't seem based on this topic or their earnings that there is a ton of sympathy for rom sites. But if it is bad for their business, then that's their problem, and too bad for them. Actions have consequences.
Nintendo doesn't really decide whether or not they can receive damages beyond what the profits are. But, if the website's profits (which would be really hard to determine and I'm not sure I'm trusting the rom site to be honest) are all they could lose, then running a Rom site is a risk free endeavor. If you get caught, just give back the excess, and all you lost was time. If you don't, then you're making some nice bank.
In US law at least, Nintendo has to demonstrate the amount of harm done to them, and that's what they could recover (unless the court imposes punitive damages). If you did 1 million dollars of damage to Nintendo, then that's what you should be forced to pay back. That seems pretty darn reasonable to me. I see nothing immoral about holding someone liable directly in proportion to the harm done.
There is this weird notion you seem to have that if you're just infringing a widdle bit then you're like a mom and pop rom shop and everyone should be nice to you. Like they just accidentally opened a rom site one lazy Saturday afternoon. No, it wasn't a small momentary lapse in judgment, they worked hard on this. If you don't want to face a multi million dollar damage... maybe don't run a rom site? If someone gets caught stealing and has to pay the consequences, they're ruining their own lives.
Like I said, this argument just boils down to "come on, Nintendo, be cool". I don't see why from a business, legal, or moral perspective, Nintendo shouldn't protect their property from theft just because it would be a major bummer for the thief.
Last edited by JWeinCom - on 01 May 2022
