Nintendo Hates You And The Company Most Certainly Does Not Want You To Co-Stream 'Nintendo Direct'
from the direct-as-in-direct dept
If you're a fan of gaming giant Nintendo, you really should know by now that Nintendo hates you. More specifically, when Nintendo is presented with a choice to either allow its rabid fans to express their fandom in new and interesting ways or attempt to exert iron-fisted control over every last thing, the company will always, always, always choose control. From taking down fan-games, DMCAing let's plays and much-loved video game music from its properties, or shutting down fan-projects for fiction or movies, the company behaves as though it just can't help itself. To be clear, Nintendo is typically within its rights in taking these actions, but it doesn't have to. This is a choice, not a necessity.
And now, on the cusp of this year's Nintendo Direct, the company's E3 presentation that serves essentially as one giant commercial for what's coming out from Nintendo in the near future, the company has put out a statement in Japan insisting that nobody co-stream the event.
Leading up to the event, the Kyoto-based game company has issued a request on its Japanese Twitter account: Do not co-stream our presentation.
“Please refrain from mirroring Nintendo Direct footage and sound during the Nintendo Direct livestream,” the tweet reads. Nintendo will allow simultaneous viewing (reactions, basically) without mirroring—and thus, without streaming sound or footage.
Nobody seems to be sure if this applies in other countries, such as America, as well. Even if this is limited to just Japan, or perhaps especially if this is limited to just Japan, this makes little sense. The very idea behind big productions like Nintendo Direct is to generate massive amounts of interest in future Nintendo projects. Why in the actual hell would the company not want that production disseminated as far and wide as possible? Why limit the avenues by which people can watch what is essentially a commercialized hype-video for its own products?
This is something akin to when companies have on occasion DMCA'd their own commercials on sites like YouTube, except those are typically done in error. I guess some should take this as a sign that maybe Nintendo doesn't actually want you to watch Nintendo Direct this year.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
unNintendoed consequences
Don't pay for their games, I think that is the message.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: unNintendoed consequences
I mean, according to Jim Sterling it's morally okay to pirate them because their business practices of artificial scarcity, TD's various coverage of how Nintendo is a rabid control freak,stifling their fan's creativity, etc.
Now I'm not SAYING you should, I'm just saying there's a case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: unNintendoed consequences
And I always disagreed.
My personal policy is: if someone doesn't want your money, just use someone else's products.
If a game/movie/music studio doesn't let me "consume" their entertainment for some reason (geographic or service restrictions, basically), I will not go through hoops and loops to do so. I won't bother pirating, I'll just play/watch/listen to something else. There is a ton of entertainment out there, after all, so I don't need any one production in particular.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"We have a huge marketing event, so what we need to do is limit the amount of ways that people can view the advertising, and stop them from discussing what they're excited about when we announce them."
I'm sure this makes sense to someone. Not me, but someone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If they let you stream it on your own channel, nintendo's user counters are not being increased and then nintendo's customers will think that the product isn't popular enough. The counters are all that matters, so nintendo tries to steer users to use official stream directly from nintendo headquarters.
Why should your blog get the users, if nintendo created the material?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Wow, it's been a while since I've seen your brand of breathtaking insanity.
"nintendo's user counters are not being increased and then nintendo's customers will think that the product isn't popular enough"
You don't make any sense, as usual. Nintendo's customers don't give 2 shits how many people are watching the advertisements overall, they care about the content. They may care how many people they can sit with in their chosen venue to watch the stream and talk with during the event, but they don't care about overall numbers.
"Why should your blog get the users, if nintendo created the material?"
Because they get extra viewers who aren't viewing the main streams, thus giving them free marketing during a marketing event. An event whose entire purpose is to get as many people as possible excited about upcoming products to buy. Thereby increasing the number of people likely to preorder the products they announced.
I know you don't understand the slightest thing about marketing, but this shouldn't be rocket science, even for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Paul, I'm a bit tempted to give you the same treatment as you just gave to td, but I promised the wife I'd be a nice guy today, so....
td is correct, but he lacked using the one word that would've clued you in - beancounter. Yes, the times they are a'changing, and even Japanese companies have come to the realization that a company in fierce competition for entertainment dollars has to watch what it's doing, and has to make every effort to control costs and maximize profit. Beancounters have only one metric for this, and that's to... count visitors (read: eyeballs).
Since these guys can't quantify anything outside of their immediate control, they get all upset when things like 'free publicity' come into play. After all, and it does make a kind of sense, you can't depend on free publicity, so how much should you allocate for your advertising budget. That's case study right there, in almost any business school.
But the fact that said 'counters appear to 'running the show', that's a bit more concerning, at least to me. It tends to show that things in Japan are getting tense, and planning for the long-term is giving way to Harvard MBA-style thinking. And that's bad for everyone, not just the Japanese economy, trust me on that one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
There's a really easy solution to that: You don't count on free publicity you treat it as an extra. You budget for your standard publicity and if anyone else decides to boost it you chalk it up as a bonus, and if that makes it more difficult to accurately count how much the attention you get is due to your efforts as opposed to the efforts of fans the tradeoff of increased attention should more than make up for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
(it's tp btw)
He claimed that:
That is what you're going to defend as "correct"?
* which I doubt are even made public, which completely invalidates this whole claim
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
We all know that everybody only likes something that everyone else already likes. What's the confusion?
[p.s. /s, and also ignore the paradox]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, caught that error right afterwards, sorry 'bout that.
Yes in fact, that was the whole point of my treatise, that things are changing for Nintendo's economical outlook when they feel the need to pull a stunt like this. Prior to just now, I would've agreed with you that a decent budget would not attempt to take "free publicity" into account, but when things are tight you start looking into every corner for relief.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
How does things being tight make it a good idea to shoot yourself in the foot?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Prior to just now, I would've agreed with you that a decent budget would not attempt to take "free publicity" into account, but when things are tight you start looking into every corner for relief.
If that was the motivation then they should be cheering on the fans spreading news of their upcoming products and making it easier for them to do so as that's free publicity that they don't have to pay for, not cracking down on it in typical Nintendo fashion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"td is correct"
Maybe he is, but since tp is the guy in the thread, and he specifically said that customers won't think the product is popular enough if streams aren't locked down, he's obviously wrong. Maybe in his barrage of insane rambling he used the wrong word, but I can only respond to what he actually said. If he meant Nintendo staff won't think that, he should use a word that doesn't mean the opposite of what he meant.
"It tends to show that things in Japan are getting tense, and planning for the long-term is giving way to Harvard MBA-style thinking"
No, it shows that Nintendo's management are still struggling with 21st century promotion and gaming styles. None of this is new, it's just hilariously obvious that they have problems when they try torpedoing their own marketing like this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
If people didn't keep taking the backhands Nintendo hands out and asking for more it would be downright hilarious how insane the company is when it comes to anything they own, as they show a level of obsession with keeping an iron grip on anything Nintendo that it seems to veer into 'you should see a psychologist for that, that's not healthy'-levels on a regular basis.
As it is it's more in the sad/disturbing range to see a company show such open contempt for their biggest fans and still have fans despite that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
It might come as suprise to some people here, but not everyone in the world is against strict copyrights. In fact, techdirt is the only island in the world where such contempt against copyrights is being spread. Techdirt stands alone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
If Techdirt stands alone I must be imagining things when I visit torrent freak, or hear share this at the end of Podcasts licensed under creative commons. Oh, and the BSD/MIT licenses do not exists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
Yes. Techdirt was chosen as a focus area because it was clear that they'll have biggest problems with copyrights, given their constant contempt against rule of law. Thus real information needs to be provided, instead of the propaganda against copyrights. RIAA's and MPAA's position needs to be made explicit, and then everyone can decide themselves whether to follow the rules or ignore them.
This ability to provide stricter and more consistent copyright story is important for the young people who explore the internet and end up reading techdirt articles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
Like being sued for copyright infringement after singing Happy Birthday, that's a good story to bring up. Or how fans paying homage to the favorite characters is getting sued or how even a convention gets shutdown. Or how their youtube-videos are getting copyright-claims from 8 different entities monetizing their video that happens to be 100% original. Or how music labels DMCA's their own content.
Yeah, lets educate young people how strict copyrights impacts them and our culture.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
Yes, relying on someone elses work is always bad sign. If some unknown author invented happy birthday song and made it popular and tried to collect the reward for the hard work, then your pirates failed to purchase the cd-rom and instead tried to perform the song without permission from the copyright holders.
Yes, if your convention is based on star trek or mickey mouse characters, obviously part of the money needs to go to the copyright owners and thus a permission is required. Otherwise unauthorised vendors are using the goodwill of the copyright owner's market to compete against disney world and licensed trekkie conventions.
The random static that they used in the background was copyrighted by the entertainment industry.
Of course music labels can try to teach proper copyright practices by showing examples of what kind of horror they encounter in their jobs of filtering out pirated material from their published music content. Teaching DMCA notices and how they work is just basic music industry training camp material.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?
"Yes, relying on someone elses work is always bad sign"
How dare those people celebrate their own family's birthdays without paying a ransom to someone who died before their grandparents were born!
Thankfully, not everyone is a deranged idiot, and it's now back in the public domain, where it was promised to be delivered decades before your type got involved in changing the deal after the person agreeing to the deal died.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have anot
So, you think the current practice is somehow better where ransom is being paid to the criminals who dare to hack into oil pipeline's computer systems and lock the files with encryption/deletion?
Basically the current practice is rewarding people who cause damage.
Copyright on the other hand, rewards people who actually create something useful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have
“Someone will steal your money, and by god that someone should be the copyright industry” - TP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I h
The money actually circulates in the market, if all vendors who actually contribute to the product gets their share of the profits.
Obviously if you don't want to give authors their share, obviously you'll have problems with sharing the money with copyright industry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may
“Obviously if you don't want to give authors their share, obviously you'll have problems”
Obviously a big ass citation is obviously needed obviously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have
Well, we know that's not true. It's almost like you think that slapping a copyright on something means you are entitled to a lot of money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No, it’s exactly like that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?
This tells me you are a fucking troll, which means anything you say has zero value. You are one of humanity's shit-stains and you will never accomplish anything of worth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have anot
To be fair we live in a universe where birdsong and white noise of all things were hit with copyright notices. If some executive thought he could make bank suing YouTube content creators for usage of random static, there'd be nothing stopping him from doing it.
The difference between you and me from the likes of tp is that Tero Pulkinnen would consider the above scenario as a plus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?
Congratulations. You just described Disney's Business model. Hell, you described Nintendo's ascent into being the Video Game Disney, considering that Mario's first appearance was in the game Donkey Kong, and Nintendo famously won a court case against Universal Studios by proving that King Kong was in the public Domain.
It doesn't end there. There was a Nintendo game called Balloon Fight which was just a ripoff of Atari's Joust.
So yeah, even the big companies aren't 100% original.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have anot
"So yeah, even the big companies aren't 100% original."
The major things announced in Nintendo's stream this year:
Sure, there's a bit more to it, and Nintendo first party content is normally top notch, but you have to laugh at the idea that they're hives of concentrated originality to the point where they have to hide even their own marketing materials from people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To be fair to Nintendo,
Nintendo does make original games, like Good Job!, Snipperclips, ARMS, and Part-Time UFO (if we're counting the Wii U Generation, Splattoon). It's just that the sequels make more money, so…
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And still no new F-Zero or Kid Icarus… 😭
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
A new Cruis'n game, though!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?
Tell that to Walt. The House of Mouse was built off of someone else's old work. Because if you believe that we'd get the entertainment giant off of just Steamboat Willie, I've got a bridge or two to sell you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not even "Steamboat Willie" is original.
Not only that, but Walt Disney's Steamboat Willie was derived from Buster Keaton's Steamboat Bill, Jr. (See here), which in turn came from the 1910 song "Steamboat Bill".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I think we are done here.
“If some unknown author invented happy birthday song made it popular and tried to collect the reward for the hard work...”
The one Warner Brothers falsely claimed they had a copyright on for decades?
That’s your example?
Really?
Goddamn you’re stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nothing worse than a butthurt fanboi
“given their constant contempt against rule of law.”
How many hundreds of people did the RIAA mistakenly sue?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
Oh? It seems you are under some severe misapprehensions. Just to give you an inkling how far up in your ass your head is, your own little project would be neigh impossible if you got your wish on strict copyrights.
I can guarantee that you are using things that have permissive licensing, like GPL and the like. Those licenses came about in part to combat strict copyrights while giving users freedom to copy, improve or just to learn from others without the fear of being sued for infringement.
In other words, your argument comes from the viewpoint of someone who doesn't have a clue. If you really are for strict copyrights, may I suggest you stop using OSS or anything dependent on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
no, GPL relies on the strict copyright stuff, when they say in the license that noone has a permission to copy the software without accepting the license. I.e. GPL is actually using the strict copyright policies to force their worldview to all users. It does not "combat" struct copyrights but instead embraces it fully.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
What about the BSD/MIT licenses? There only requirement is that source code attribution is let in place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
copyright-wise they're no better than copyright infringement. The reason is that those licenses do not have the section about "only accepting this license gives permission to copy/distribute the work" which is there in GPL/LGPL. Basically lack of this "strict copyright area" in those licenses makes users of those licenses forget that they're not allowed to use material that isn't covered by BSD/MIT licenses as freely as they use BSD/MIT licensed material. This means over time, users of those licenses will actually become pirates when they consider all products on the planet as free as BSD/MIT licensed material. This is the danger with permissive licenses -- half of their users are actually pirates. ¨
Basically everyone needs to learn to reject those works which are not covered by permissive licenses, and failure to do that operation will make those users pirates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?
Oh Jesus, you're really dumber than what I enter into the toilet. You're comparing free licenses to Copyright Infringement? Maybe Larry Lessig should set you straight as to what the differences between free licenses and piracy are.
[Spoiler alert: it's the difference between allowing people to freely come and play on your garden and people trespassing on your garden]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have anot
It's more like inviting users to your garden, but then building eletcric fence to it which electrocutes the users who fail to follow the borders of your garden.
Copyright infringement would be like intentionally electrocuting your tong in the electric fence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
…fucking what
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The words "mentally ill" comes to mind. Or "a shit-stain of a troll".
Just flag him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
Strange to see you of all people defending the GPL...
Anyway, you're barely conversant with the truth, as usual. GPL, CC and other licences exist because without them the only choice is overbearing copyright from people who believe that ownership is more important than progress and creativity, or public domain where those people can freely take.
So, other licences are available which depend on the existence of copyright for them to be effective, but immediately replace the standard licence with something usable for people who understand the human concepts of sharing and collaboration.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
Progress and creativity does not happen without proper ownership practices... The problem with your pattern is that developers get bored maintaining the copyrighted work when the work becomes old, outdated or simply too much work to maintain. The ownership rights are needed to keep maintainance activity ongoing while the market success is against the copyrighted work.
Open-Source-Software is already seeing developers fleeing the maintainance work and going to long holidays instead of supporting users who chose to explore that work. Half of the github bots are designed to close bug reports that haven't been fixed in a year with comments like "please reopen if it's still an issue"... Given that the authors didn't bother to fix the issue, it's obviously still an issue.
Ownership rights are fixing this by giving incentives for developers to maintain their own work. I.e. money is flowing from end users to the people who do maintainance work. Open-Source-Software completely failed in this money flow aspect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People were pretty fucking creative for the thousands of years before copyright. People would still be creative if copyright were abolished (or at least heavily reformed) tomorrow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
While I don't want © to be abolished, I do agree that there will still be creations with or without copyright. Just look at what the Blender Studio has produced with free licenses!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Just look at all the written works, plays and music produced before the statute of Anne, which is when copyright became an authors right. Prior to that, copyright was a censor licensing publication, and a means of regulating printers. It had nothing to do with creativity, other than the Hollywood accounting variety, which existed long before Hollywood became a thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Just so we're clear, Are you talking about the Conger?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, as Imprimatur, and the stationers originally being censors for the state are the roots of copyright. It advantage to the printing industry was control over who could print a title, which was significant when months, if not years of typesetting and printing preceded the first sale, and the printer printed as many copies as they thought they could sell. The only lever that an author had was ownership of a manuscript, and possibly a copy as either took time or money to create a copy. Once they sold said manuscript to a publisher, they lost all control over the work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If anything these days people are creative in spite of copyright rather than because of it, of the content I run across(from videos, stories to artwork) a huge chuck of it is derivitive and built upon the works of others and likely wouldn't exist were strict 'ownership practices' adhered to and everything required permission.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Yes. This kind of works where authors do not invest their time to the creation process, shouldn't really exist at all. Building the world to be better place takes significant maintainance effort and there's no point in creating works where authors spent 20 minutes to copy-paste someone elses work and mix&matched it with some content ripped from some games. End users require better quality than this, and mere 20 minutes effort is simply not enough to raise the work to the level where it could possibly be useful to any of the end users. End users are complaining about the quality of the work, even after spending 10 years fine-tuning it to the parameters that users are requesting, so mere 20 minute effort is nowhere near acceptable quality. And after spending 20 minutes for creating it, are those same people going to maintain the work forever, or will the maintainance work be passed to someone else? Shouldn't original authors maintain it until their death?
Basically people who do not follow strict copyright are underestimating the effort it takes to maintain the copyrighted works. If the market is filled with BS works where the author has no intention to maintain it, then real authors do not get enough shelf space.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
This is rich coming from someone who used a Friday Nights at Freddy's model for his tech demo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, the current content creation practices are nearing ridiculous, when the only way to get community acceptance is via copyright infringements. Supposedly we should be cloning other works and not creating anything of our own.
Happily licenses are available for part of the content..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And who gets to determine whom is a “real” author? If it’s idiots like you, it’s no wonder no one respects copyright or it’s slobbering toadies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Real authors would be those who would anyway get a publishing contract in the old world of gatekeepers...
Obviously gatekeepers get to decide who is worthy of the praise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This is the new world bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The evidence that you are at least somewhat intellectually disabled continues to pile up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?
"Progress and creativity does not happen without proper ownership practices"
Millenia of human progress disagrees with you.
"The problem with your pattern is that developers get bored maintaining the copyrighted work when the work becomes old, outdated or simply too much work to maintain."
Yes, and in fact this is a direct reason why so much of today's tech innovation happens - people get tired of working as corporate drones supporting outdated legacy tech that their employers don't want to replace, so they do something that interests and excites them in their spare time. FOSS is a massive success because the people who work on it want to work on it, not just put in the bare minimum to fix a bug left by someone before they started with the company.
"Open-Source-Software is already seeing developers fleeing the maintainance work and going to long holidays"
Only the people with the misfortune of encountering you. In the rest of the world, people having a decent summer holiday is not a bad thing, and competent project owners on a global project can get by if the northern hemisphere goes away for the summer.
"bug reports that haven't been fixed in a year with comments like "please reopen if it's still an issue"
What's funny is that your dumb ass thinks this is only a problem in open source projects. I've seen 15 year old bug reports in major corporate environments, the only difference is they're only visible by the poor lost souls employed to view them.
"money is flowing from end users to the people who do maintainance work"
One day you'll learn that there's more to creativity than getting an hourly wage - which is why you're stuck lying and complaining about the successful people who actually did quality work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have anot
Exactly. As proof, see Jackey Rey Neyman Jones' story about Manos: The Hands of Fate and how that movie being in the public domain was actually the best thing that could've happened to her and her father's estranged relationship.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
"not everyone in the world is against strict copyrights"
True, but you'd have to be some kind of special moron to believe that copyrights need to be protected to the point of blocking your own advertising material from being broadcast to potential customers.
Wait, sorry, just remembered who I'm talking to...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
The practice of keeping accurate authorship information is one of the core elements in copyright protection. The copyright notices attached to each work are required to contain this authorship information, and modifying that information is strictly forbidden by the copyright laws.
Reposting nintendo's material to your own blog and mixing and matching small sections of the material to the blog's content basically strips away original authorship information and replaces it with blog author's authorship information. This alone is important reason to reject permission requests requesting reposting of the material in random blogs.
But not only that, but copyright law is very much completely based on the principle that it's copyright owner that gets to decide how far the material can be reproduced and posted on the internet. So if nintendo as the copyright owner decides that some uses of the material are outside the allowed limits, copyright law is protecting those decisions with 300k damage awards for infringement of those decisions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Only you could see a Nintendo Direct put on by Nintendo that focuses on Nintendo games and contains tons of Nintendo branding, yet still think “wow, I wonder what company did that”.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This piece of authorship information seems to be only available in the original nintendo's site. The reposted blog posts have removed those markings and they only reproduce the part which is most interesting to their readership. I.e. all authorship information has been removed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The presentation is literally called a “Nintendo Direct”. I don’t know how you think people are talking about that video without actually mentioning Nintendo, but trust me, no one thinks Capcom or EA or fucking Microsoft put out a Nintendo Direct.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sure, but this is only the first level... First capcom takes nintendo marketing material and posts it without authorship info. Then blogs like slashdot get interested, and strip away even more authorship info and adds some bullshit description of how nintendo is doing their evil operations. Then finally techdirt decides to post the same story, again stripping away further layers of authorship information. Then the content is available everywhere, but nintendo's authorship info is nowhere to be found. Instead all the blogs just replicate some bullshit about how nintendo is evil and supports copyright.
At some point, the company just need to stop it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"First capcom takes nintendo marketing material and posts it without authorship info."
I don't think anyone except for you is going to see that and think that the new Zelda is a Capcom game... Even if they did, Capcom aren't getting any money from the store on the Switch when people buy the final product.
"Then blogs like slashdot get interested, and strip away even more authorship info"
Because a blog writing after a livestream about what happened is going to remove that info from the stream? Do you have any understanding of the subject at hand? Probably not, which is why your attempts at insight are always funny.
"Then the content is available everywhere, but nintendo's authorship info is nowhere to be found"
...but, it's still an advertisement for things sold by Nintendo, so even if what you imagine did happen, who the fuck cares? People still need to buy the game being advertised from Nintendo no matter if they're stupid enough to think that Slashdot made Mario.
"At some point, the company just need to stop it."
Yes, they do need to stop being so monumentally stupid that they think they need to block their own marketing materials over fear of things that cannot happen.
We know that you're a spectacular failure at marketing, but you'd have thought someone at Nintendo would be more familiar with their own markets..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
At that point, the message isn't any longer that users should be buying new game, but instead its being filled with bullshit like nintendo supports copyrights and copyrights are evil. They even forgot to include the url to the site where the game can be purchased or preordered. Without that url, selling a game to customers gets slightly difficult. If everyone who sees adverticement video needs to track the game from huge supplier network instead of just clicking the url... Basically the layers that supposedly make the game more popular, are actually building larger and larger blockers for customers to access the authorised dealers who can sell a copy of the game. When there are large blockers available, users will just choose pirated copy of the game instead of finding the author's representative. This way the layers and layers of blogs that repost the marketing material are supporting the piracy ecosystem instead of doing anything that would help nintendo market their games.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You have to have a Nintendo Switch, and it's really easy to shop at the eShop.
As usual, you know nothing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"At that point, the message isn't any longer that users should be buying new game, but instead its being filled with bullshit like nintendo supports copyrights and copyrights are evil"
Nobody restreaming the marketing announcement is going to be saying anything like that, and even if they were it should fall clearly under fair use.
"They even forgot to include the url to the site where the game can be purchased or preordered."
So did the official stream AFAIK. You might be so stupid that you don't know of the thousands of places where a Nintendo product can be pre-ordered, but their targeted audience don't tend to be.
"If everyone who sees adverticement video needs to track the game from huge supplier network instead of just clicking the url"
There was nothing to click in the video, and most people are capable of going to Amazon or similar if not nintendo.com.
"blogs that repost the marketing material are supporting the piracy ecosystem"
They are not, but at least people are choosing quality Nintendo games and not supporting people like you with their purchases.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
are you fucking mental
oh my god you are
holy fucking shit you might actually be intellectually disabled
okay there’s no “might” about it any more, jfc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Now i want to know who the actual authors are, as "Nintendo" is not bloody well an "author".
Oh wait nooooo, credit can't go to actual people working there or something. Never mind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Under US Law, Corporations can be authors if they pay people to do the work for them (i.e. "work for hire"). See here:
The theory is that the one who pays the piper writes the tune, so to speak.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Ahhhh, the stupid, it burns!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
“At some point, the company just need to stop it.”
If only you’d heed your own advise...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I don't think tp would heed their own advice, considering the number of times they've tried to do this same thing and gotten shut down by Techdirt commentators.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
"The practice of keeping accurate authorship information is one of the core elements in copyright protection"
A damn shame that the current copyright system makes it impossible to keep such a list, then.
"Reposting nintendo's material to your own blog and mixing and matching small sections of the material to the blog's content basically strips away original authorship information"
We're talking about live feeds here, you drooling idiot. All that's changed is the extra detail put on top by the people hosting the stream. Everyone still knows it's a Nintendo marketing event.
"copyright owner that gets to decide how far the material can be reproduced and posted on the internet"
Yes, and they're as stupid as you are if they think they can increase sales by blocking their own marketing material.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?'
Tero Pulkinnen's the guy who thinks the public domain purely exists as a database of content to nuke from orbit in case it gives people a reason not to use his third-rate Blender ripoff.
I don't know why people keep giving him the benefit of the doubt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have another?
This problem can always be solved by changing the licensing. Placing the magic words "All rights reserved" to the location where available licenses are supposed to go to, will surely increase the adoption.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have anot
Ah, yet another reason why you're such a desperate failure. You don't believe in the actual concepts at hand, you think it's all about finding magic words. Everyone else is out there creating things that allow others to create, offering people what's useful with a robust support structure, and you're here trying to find the right incantation to force people to choose you instead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I have
Today's newsfeed (at https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/22/third_party_libraries_veracode/) there was info that "functionality", "licensing" and "security" are the most important elements when selecting a library. This means magic words are needed in those areas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may I h
No, those are concepts that should be considered when choosing a product, not magic words to chant to get what you want. You've trying to do the latter, and it fails as hilariously as your marketing attempts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo, may
I implemented "functionality" part properly, so "licensing" and "security" can be a little bit sloppy...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Nintendo,
"I implemented "functionality" part properly"
You just forgot things like a coherent interface or actual reason for anyone to use it...
"so "licensing" and "security" can be a little bit sloppy..."
Licensing is sloppy because the people you constantly cheerlead for have made it a complicated mess.
Security is fine because there's nothing valuable for anyone to try stealing on your site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you Ninte
I implemented all the must-features, like loading times and edit-compile-debug-edit loop performance and enough caching to make it feel snappy...
Unity and unreal engine provides that for me. Their user interfaces are so horribly slow on end-user computers that anyone who has seen how those work will be looking for replacement that doesn't have key events take 20 seconds...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank you N
"I implemented all the must-features,"
Doesn't matter how many features you have when your interface is so incompetently designed that you had to instruct people here on which keys to press before they understood it was meant to be interactive and not a horrifically dated video player.
"Their user interfaces are so horribly slow on end-user computers"
They seem to work fine for everyone else. You are the only person I'm aware of making such a claim, and last time you brought it up it was because you broke your own installation by messing up the installation of a plugin.
Many thousands of professionals use these tools daily to product billions of dollars of content. I'm sorry that one incompetent fool in Finland wasn't able to get the same use out of them, but introducing a vastly inferior alternative that not even you are able to explain to people isn't going to fix your problems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Thank y
I think you missed important bit of the story. The plugin installation was required by the competition. I didn't choose to use it myself, it was enforced by external entities.
If unity user interface fails to work if 1 plugin is installed to the system, maybe the unity user interface might have trouble working with 600 plugins when they can't get 1 plugin to work quickly enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Tha
"The plugin installation was required by the competition"
Which makes zero sense, but we don't expect coherence from you.
Again, given the choice between believing the people who use those tools professionally to create high quality work on a daily basis and the guy who's failed to compete with them producing output that looks like someone tried some test demos on an Amiga 500 for the first time, I'll trust the guys who have competently produced results without encountering any of the problems you have..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
How can you say that they didn't encounter these problems? Even unity newbies can see the problems from miles away. Maybe they just hide those problems and reject the tools that cause the problems.
You cannot plausibly claim that the problems do not exist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Also, to prove my claim, I can just point to this thread in the internet:
https://forum.unity.com/threads/why-ui-is-so-sluggish.616432/
Are you still claiming that unity doesn't have perf problems?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Are you still claiming that unity doesn't have perf problems?"
I never claimed that, I claimed that professionals use the product to create with every day and that if it were as unusable as you claim then that wouldn't happen. Since the vast majority users are created top quality work, then the reason why are unable to do so must be on your shoulders.
But, well done on finding a random bug being talked about that only affected one version of the platform was apparently fixed in less than a month after it was reported, I guess. I'm not sure why you think that a discussion from 2019 means that there's some widespread issue that makes it unusable for everyone, but then I have no idea why you think anything you come up with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This isn't true. When the folks encounter the perf problems for the first time, they have already been brainwashed to consider the tool to be "the best that is available and switching to another tool wouldn't be suitable"... So they just needs to eat the horror.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Or, the people who came cross the bug that was fixed in less than a day (internally anyway, according to the comments) in your example from 2 years ago just didn't find it reason enough to stop using it on the very specific platform where it even existed in the first place.
Whereas, your software is so unusable overall that you've had to spend years explaining its purpose and function in a totally unconnected forum.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I blame part of the problem is that I need to convert you to support copyrights and RIAA/MPAA before convincing you to use my tools. Basically there's some mismatch between your existing practices of humiliating copyright owners and whatever our tool thinks is reasonable practices from end users. So our human-conversion process is pretty slow progress, we might need to convert you to robots first before you accept the riaa/mpaa copyright reasoning.
We understand that failing the "are you a robot" -test is necessary part of being a human being, but you need to try to get rid of bad practices associated with not-being-a-robot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I support the version of copyright that exists in the real world (although I would love for its many flaws to be fixed), not the fever dream misrepresentation you made up to excuse your own failures.
"your existing practices of humiliating copyright owners"
You do surely realise that the people I've referred to who manage to make billions of dollars of valuable content every year using the tools that your incompetent ass hasn't worked out are copyright owners, right? I'm supporting them, while you insist that they lose their livelihoods so that you can have a piece of the action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Letting a tool record bunch of your mouse clicks isn't exactly worth billions of dollars. In fact, it'll take significant effort from your part to figure out stuff that is worth millions, much less billions. Then even if the content is worth that much, extracting that money from the user base is so burdensome task that you simply cannot do it. So all those billions will be just a pipe dream, with no basis in reality. Instead, you'll need to get money from government to pay the internet and your modern lifestyle. Your billions are as far as a winning lottery ticket, and even that gives you mere millions, nowhere near billion bucks...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Letting a tool record bunch of your mouse clicks isn't exactly worth billions of dollars."
Yet, the work that they actually do is being purchased for billions of dollars a year.
How typical - you can't deal with your failure so you have to lie about your competition.
"Then even if the content is worth that much, extracting that money from the user base is so burdensome task that you simply cannot do it."
You know I'm referring to the actual global revenue that comes in, not some hypothetical? Basing arguments on what ever fantasy you have about how you wish the world would work is your preferred tactic, not mine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This web site https://www.owler.com/company/blender claims that annual revenue for blender is 3.5M, so it's nowhere near the billion you claimed it would be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I never claimed that. I said that the people who use Blender, Unity and all the pother people you're attacking create billions per year. You know, the people who avoid your incompetent shit because it won't allow them to create, by design.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This isn't really true. I offer a tool for creating 3d models and scenes. Then there's export option that prints a piece of code representing animation. That exported animation can be copy-pasted to html page to make the animation visible in web browsers.
Clearly that pattern allows create, and that's by design.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can go to YouTube right now and watch giantbomb streams of Nintendo direct,
Nintendo direct is a giant commercial
Why would you not want everyone to see your ads and content
It makes no sense
Nintendo is stuck in the 90s it doesn't really understand the Web streaming free promotion
It costs almost nothing to put a video on YouTube
Meanwhile you pay millions to advertise on tv
Under Japanese law you can't use someone's video without permission
But then I can watch any game being streamed plsythroughs on YouTube apart from Nintendo games
Nintendo is the equivalent of the old man who only watchs live TV
They just don't understand youtube or streaming equals free advertising
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why does anyone even think about buying or supporting Nintendo? it's as bad as Sony! it's almost like retaliation for losing the WWII. we hate everyone so we're gonna fuck you up whenever we can! push them into touch! i did and i am certainly no worse off for doing so!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Because, like many other content-houses, they still have some rather amazing people working for them, the ones who produce the actual content, and people like that content. (Even if, at this point, most of it is just re-hashed to hell and back.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
A lot of people forget that Nintendo is a business after all...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Because nobody in the mainstream knows or cares about this sort of stuff ,and you'll give yourself an aneurism trying to pretend they have the same standards as those of us who do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why is your golden standards always based on bashing the authors and committing copyright infringement?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
So you think anything Japanese should be boycotted because of World War II?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Why are your standards always based on either lying about or misrepresenting reality?
For the sane and honest, I was simply saying that the average Nintendo fan is not basing their purchasing decisions on stories about their misbehaviour in threads like this. But, they would be basing them on things like the stream you're so desperate to pretend needs to be hidden from people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
This is required for marketing. Those marketing goons need to learn to subtly execute lying patterns without customers realizing what is happening. Since I'm not expert on marketing, my customers will notice. There's also conspiracy theories around where all authors are lying bastards, so even when my marketing material honestly proclaims that there's 0 actual users, the techdirt spins it as lying. Everyone of us have different reality, so you cannot consider your reality better than mine, and "reject your reality and substitute my own" only works in mythbusters...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"all authors"? Are you fucking kidding me?!?!? No, not "all authors"; just you. I offer statistics about my music career and nobody at Techdirt dismisses me or thinks I'm a liar. You are so far delusional, my good friend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On this count, nobody believes you're lying. Nobody with a drop of sanity thinks you have any actual users.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You’re literally the only person who believes in this.
Did your mother drop you on your head as a child? Because I’m beginning to believe she didn’t stop at one drop.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"This is required for marketing"
Well.. not really. If you make shitty products nobody can understand or wants to use like some loser in Finland, sure. But, in this case "marketing" for Nintendo means simply "we're making a new Zelda, here's some footage". That requires no lying, unless you're implying that they faked the footage.
It makes no sense to restrict the number of people who can see and react to that footage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Of course it requires lying. Their trailers for the games are conviniently missing all the load times, so that end users cannot see the 5 minute delay they need to be watching the progressbar when they watch the trailer. None of the companies put the load times to their trailer videos, so basically they're all lying bastards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So, your argument is that all advertising is lying. A poster simply saying "Coke is available at Wal Mart" is lying because they don't show you a 20 minute video of people driving to the store and wait at the checkout to pay. An advert for an apartment is lying because they don't show you the whole process of applying for a mortgage. You saying "look at meshpage" is lying because it doesn't show you the horrible layout and load times you have to endure to laugh at your incompetent page.
Meanwhile, someone watching the restreamed live feed that you're desperately trying to pretend is stealing have already paid money to Nintendo for exactly the product they expect to experience when they get it delivered.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, it would be lying if I simply removed the load times from the marketing material. But I actually spent enough time to actually optimize the load times that significant lying is no longer needed. Once its giving the best result than what technology available can do, its good time to stop complaining about it. But any vendors who didn't spend the time to optimize, will need to remove the load times from the trailers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Load times don't matter jack because you went out of your way to remove the publish button. If users can't publish animations, users won't care how quickly their files load. They won't be able to use your supposedly revolutionary tech. I'd also like to add that none of this information is actually visible on the "tech demo reel" you posted on that one bus in London, so this information is pointless to users to start with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
publish button isn't the only way to get results with my tech. The faq has more information about what you'd do if you wanted an animation in your own web page (as opposed to publishing it on meshpage)...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Yes, it would be lying if I simply removed the load times from the marketing material"
The fun thing with this is that you did remove them - along with any coherent explanation of what the site was, what it did or anything coherent to a signle person you subjected bus riders to with your hilarious failure of a marketing campaign.
"But I actually spent enough time to actually optimize the load times that significant lying is no longer needed. "
Yet, failed to provide any reason why someone should bother trying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just another example of the 3M principle at at work;
Mine, MINE, MINE!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Okay, they hate fans. So?
I'm frustrated that this piece doesn't actually examine Nintendo's decision.
There's some assumptions here more or less along the lines of:
And there's a lot packed into the second that I don't think can be snarked away if we want to talk about the ethos of copyright rather than just "good business decisions."
What if there was a conscious decision by Nintendo to leave money on the table because of some animus towards "fans" or desire for control beyond what money could provide?
Is there an argument that they shouldn't be able to lose/waste money exercising their rights if they want to, or is it just economic?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then Nintendo higher-ups made a foolish decision that makes the company look even less fan-friendly than it already does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Okay, they hate fans. So?
The argument is not that they are not or shouldn't be allowed to do it, just that it's dumb.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Okay, they hate fans. So?
"Dumb" really depends on assuming that Nintendo's business and culture are what you think they are, and no one has established that.
But I don't really want to argue Nintendo's business model, because I think the "need" for fan engagement relative to Nintendo's branding as a more "casual" or "toy-like" console is complicated enough that everyone will walk away insisting that their portion of the elephant is the most important one.
So, instead, before talking about "the facts," I want to talk about principles. What if an IP holder doesn't want your business, and is willing to lose money because of it? Why is that dumb?
Just having money isn't a good in itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Okay, they hate fans. So?
Losing money because you have principles that extend beyond your wallet is fine. I'm just not sure what the principles that state that you need to stop customers from sharing your marketing material with other potential customers consist of
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Okay, they hate fans. So?
If the principles are beneficial to the company, fine. And I don't just mean in terms of money; maybe a company would give up some money in order to do something in a more ethical manner, or some such. I am skeptical that the principle of controlling everything no matter the cost is beneficial to Nintendo, their customers, society, or anyone else. If you can make the case that hamstringing free marketing in order to maintain control for the sake of control (or if you can come up with some other reason they would want to do this) by all means have at it. I also acknowledge the possibility they have motivations or influences that none of us will ever know that would make this a perfectly reasonable decision. But that doesn't seem like the most likely explanation to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
You may like their games,
But Nintendo hates you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]