RomUniverse To Attempt To Crowdfund Legal Defense, Which Isn't Going Well At All

from the lie-with-infringers... dept

We recently discussed Nintendo's lawsuit against RomUniverse, part of a longstanding war on ROM sites that seems less than absolutely necessary given just how much cash the company is raking in from its retro consoles and titles. Several commenters pointed out that RomUniverse, while proclaiming that it's a source for those who long ago purchased Nintendo games to preserve those purchases, also engages in plenty of other less than ethical behaviors. This includes offering up books and movies alongside the ROMs, for which it can't really make the same claims. In other words, while Nintendo itself might not be the best paladin to slay RomUniverse, it's not as though the site is on the side of the angels.

Given all of that, you would expect the operator of RomUniverse, Matthew Storman, to try to limit the damage here. That certainly doesn't seem to be Storman's plan, however, as he has both publicly stated he will fight the suit and is attempting to crowdfund his legal expenses.

The operator has added a donation option to the RomUniverse homepage and also launched a crowdfunding campaign on GoFundMe, setting a goal of $100,000 to assist with the defense.

“RomUniverse.com was founded in 2009 under the notion that users like you should have easy access to the content that you purchased and the ability to relive those childhood moments. It is because of this, that I am asking for your help,” Storman writes.  “Now I know what you’re thinking, this one person is going to take on one of the largest console/gaming manufacturers in the world? And the short answer is YES,” he notes.

To be clear, he's probably wrong. There is a multitude of risk factors here. For starters, ROM sites have always operated on the wrong side of copyright law. Even if we would advise companies like Nintendo that they should leave them alone, they certainly don't have to. RomUniverse can put up as many banners as they like stating that downloads should only occur if the user has purchased an actual physical cartridge previously, but that doesn't suddenly make offering the copyrighted game content not copyright infringement.

Add to that the possibility that the owners of the other types of media RomUniverse makes available might see all of this going on and decide to get their own piece of the lawsuit pie and this huge Nintendo lawsuit could suddenly morph into a multi-plaintiff apocalypse for RomUniverse. That's all the more so possible given Storman's public statements.

And, finally, if RomUniverse is really relying on crowdfunding to power its legal defense, it seems that nobody bothered to show up to its fundraiser.

On the GoFundMe page, Storman notes that he’s not “greedy” or a scammer. He merely wants to defend his rights and those of others in this “unknown” landscape. In the meantime, the site remains online.

While some people may have donated to the site directly, thus far, the crowdfunding campaign on GoFundMe hasn’t gained any traction. After two days, the donation counter is still at $0.

For perhaps other reasons, the page for the GoFundMe for RomUniverse now returns a "Page Not Found" splash page. RomUniverse's site now is soliciting direct donations instead.

There are enough clouds on the horizon here that Storman should probably go into damage control mode.

Filed Under: copyright, crowdfunding, matthew storman, roms, video games
Companies: nintendo, romuniverse

Nintendo's ROM Site War Continues With Huge Lawsuit Against Site Despite Not Sending DMCA Notices

from the nintendon't dept

Roughly a year ago, Nintendo launched a war between itself and ROM sites. Despite the insanely profitable NES Classic retro-console, the company decided that ROM sites, which until recently almost single-handedly preserved a great deal of console gaming history, need to be slayed. Nintendo extracted huge settlements out of some of the sites, which led to most others shutting down voluntarily. While this was probably always Nintendo's strategy, some sites decided to stare down the company's legal threats and continue on.

One of those sites was RomUniverse, which not only refused to shut down, but essentially boasted that it wasn't scared of Nintendo's legal attack dogs and would continue on. That stance is about to be put to the test, however, as Nintendo has filed a copyright lawsuit seeking enormous damages against the site.

In a complaint filed at a federal court in California, the Japanese gaming giant accuses the site’s alleged operator, Matthew Storman, of “brazen” and “mass-scale” copyright and trademark infringement.

“The Website is among the most visited and notorious online hubs for pirated Nintendo video games. Through the Website, Defendants reproduce, distribute, monetize, and offer for download thousands of unauthorized copies of Nintendo’s video games,” the complaint reads.

Nintendo states that the site, which has 375,000 members, offers downloads for nearly every video game system it has ever produced.

Now, to be clear, there is nuance to our stance here. Does this constitute copyright infringement of Nintendo's property? Hell yes. Can Nintendo sue over this on solid legal grounds? Of course! Should it do so? Well, that's a more complicated question. You have to wonder just exactly what Nintendo is going to get out of all of these lawsuits. Yes, it may succeed in shutting down this and other sites. But does that mean those that use ROM sites are suddenly going to buy a Nintendo console, retro or otherwise? It's not obvious that the answer to that is "yes." Instead, those pirates will probably just not play Nintendo games at all. Or, more likely, will find another venue for ROMs, and rinse and repeat that process as Nintendo goes on its whac-a-mole expedition.

And, given that Nintendo only recently really invested in making retro games available on its consoles, these sites actually did preserve gaming history for millions of people who would otherwise have never played these aged titles. Not to mention that ROM sites are also a place for home-brewed games on these older consoles, which themselves are not infringing.

And, finally, if Nintendo really just wanted to combat piracy in all of this, why not at least start with the DMCA process?

RomAdmin from RomUniverse informed us that he hasn’t received anything from Nintendo, no recent takedown notices either. The site does respond to takedown notices.

“We’ve always immediately taken down questionable material, per their take down notices,” RomAdmin told TorrentFreak.

Instead, Nintendo went straight to the nuclear option, with a lawsuit asking for potentially over $100 million in damages. Again, it can do this, but given how much money the company is already raking in off of retro gaming... why?

Filed Under: dmca, lawsuits, rom sites, romuniverse, threats, video games
Companies: nintendo, romuniverse

Nintendo Hates You: Company DMCAs Over 100 Videos Celebrating Nintendo Game Music

from the orchestrated-takedown dept

Our posts on famed gaming giant Nintendo will likely give you the impression that the company has a very strange distaste for its own fans. Your brain will probably try to convince you that this doesn't make any sense, since Nintendo fans are what makes Nintendo money. Your brain is wrong. Nintendo has demonstrated over and over again that if forced to choose between maximum control over its intellectual property and allowing fans to do fan-things, it will choose control every single time.

YouTube in particular tends to find itself in Nintendo's crosshairs, what with the site being the natural place for fans of Nintendo to share Nintendo-y things with other fans. It's worth noting again that, on matters of copyright at least, there's really no reason why Nintendo must issue takedowns for anything that even barely could be seen as infringing on its IP. Such is the case with the recent spate of takedowns the company issued against a YouTube channel which had the singular purpose of celebrating Nintendo game music.

“Game over,” the YouTube channel GilvaSunner, which has over 300,000 subscribers, wrote on Twitter yesterday. They also shared a screenshot of an email inbox displaying dozens of copyright claims against videos of music ranging from The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time’s “Hyrule Field” to “Mega Man 2 Medley” from Super Smash Bros. 3DS.

This morning, GilvaSunner shared another bevy of copyright claims, this time against videos featuring music from Fire Emblem: Awakening. “115 videos in total blocked so far,” GilvaSunner wrote. “They started manually with the most viewed content on the channel, and are now going through the playlists one by one I guess.”

Here's where the lack of sense in these protectionist actions really shines through. Nintendo makes money by having dedicated fans purchase Nintendo consoles and games for its systems. Fans become dedicated through their love of a game and the nostalgia they might have for a particular property. The soundtracks of games can play a huge part in that, of course. In other words, YouTube posts of Nintendo music, while technically infringing, mostly function to supercharge the fandom of Nintendo properties.

Which is why so many gaming companies do nothing to impede this expression of fandom. And Nintendo doesn't have to either. It can, certainly, and it has, but it doesn't have to. It only does so because the company appears to view protectionism as some kind of default setting.

Why? Because, while fans love Nintendo, Nintendo doesn't share that same love for its fans.

Filed Under: copyright, dmca, fans, video games
Companies: nintendo

Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo Say Trump Tariffs Will Make Game Consoles Hugely More Expensive

from the Big-Old-Derp dept

If you hadn't noticed by now, Trump's efforts to use tariffs to somehow magically improve the country's standing in the world aren't based on much in the way of sound logic or economic theory. And companies who've been forced to reconfigure and relocate their entire supply chains (to countries like Taiwan) to avoid massive penalties are likely to just pass those costs on to American consumers, something said consumers haven't really fully grokked yet. Countless CEOs think the entire gambit is immeasurably stupid, but have been hesitant to be too pointed in their criticism for fear of upsetting administration regulators.

As the actual bill comes due however, consumers are likely to wake up from their slumber. Maybe.

Case in point: Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo this week fired off a letter to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, warning the Trump administration's plan to bump Chinese tariffs from 10 to 25 percent will have a profoundly-negative impact on the game industry. With 96 percent of game consoles made in China last year, the act of reconfiguring their entire supply chains will have a massive impact on the sector's bottom line and the numerous connecting companies that tendril out from the big three gaming giants.

The letter itself is abundantly clear that it's not these companies that are going to eat these costs, but the American consumer. In fact, the full letter (pdf) leans heavily on data suggesting that the 25 percent hike on game consoles will result in US consumers paying $840 million more on the game hardware than they might have anyway:

"A price increase of 25% will likely put a new video game console out of reach for many American families who we expect to be in the market for a console this holiday season. For those purchases that do go forward despite tariffs, consumers would pay $840 million more than they otherwise would have, according to a recent study prepared for the Consumer Technology Association by the independent economic group, Trade Partnership. That study also noted that “[e]ven after accounting for new tariff revenue, the result is a net $350 million loss for the U.S. economy for each year the tariffs remain in effect, with the burden carried by U.S. consumers."

Hey, neat.

Presumably, Trump believes that these threats will ingeniously force China's hands in trade negotiations, though it's not really clear that's actually happening. What's happening instead is a slow accumulation of collateral damage, as countless US companies (like Apple) face new penalties that will slowly chip away at the US economy before it forces China's hand. It will be curious to see what happens when American consumers realize they're the ones footing the bill as we wait for the final outcome of a unilateral US trade gambit that was never likely to actually work.

Filed Under: china, donald trump, gaming consoles, playstation, tariffs, trade war, us, ustr, xbox
Companies: microsoft, nintendo, sony

Dear Nintendo: Here Are Some Ways You Could Be A Little More Cool, Man

from the take-a-breath dept

We were just talking through yet another instance showing that Nintendo hates its own fans, in this case regarding a story about a cool fan-made web game that was essentially a 2D Mario Bros. battle royale game. In that post, I mentioned that Nintendo's lawyerly ways have become so infamously legendary as this point to be the punchline to every announcement for a fan-game that in any way involves Nintendo properties. The battle royale game is obviously not alone in this. And, given the many other options at its disposal, it remains something of a mystery why Nintendo continues to insist on playing the jerk at every turn.

And I'm not the only one wondering, it seems, as Kotaku has picked this theme up and written a decent post asking why Nintendo acts this way as well.

Nintendo needs to read the room here and realise there’s a big difference between a pile of pirated 3DS cartridges at a market stall and a loving, non-commercial Pokémon game made by fans, for fans. These games are tribute, not competition. Mario Battle Royale, the 100-player take on Super Mario Bros.that had to change its name last week to DMCA Royale in honour of Nintendo’s legal threats, was never going to cannabalize sales of Super Mario Maker 2. Likewise, Breath of the NES, another recent and promising fan project that was turning Breath of the Wild into a retro top-down Zelda game, was never going to stop a Nintendo fan from preordering Link’s Awakening.

This paragraph does a decent job of pointing out what should be obvious to Nintendo: fan-games are not a threat. Instead, fan-games are the expression of fandom and nothing more. If anything, fan-games only enhance the market for a gaming company.

But, wait, you say, doesn't a company like Nintendo have to enforce its IP rights or lose them? Kinda-sorta, and Kotaku makes this same overly simplistic mistake.

It’s easy to blame these lawyers, as though they’re out for nothing else than to spoil our fun, but the reality is that they have a job to do. In their eyes, enforcing Nintendo’s copyright means enforcing it, because were Nintendo to get slack and start letting every little product and service use their characters without permission, then (or at least the legal theory goes) it gets harder to defend the company’s ownership of them should they need to take a bigger product or service to court.

I can't be certain, but this reads like someone that is confusing copyright and trademark law. In trademark law, there is a requirement that the holder enforce their trademark when the potential for infringement or confusion exists. If they do not, they risk allowing their mark to become generic. In copyright law, the rightsholder has more options. It is true that the failure to protect a copyright does risk interpretation in future litigation of an implied license being offered, but it's far less black and white compared with trademark law. In addition, rightsholders like Nintendo have tons of options to officially sanction and cheaply, or even freely, license a work so as not to risk an implied license.

To its credit, Kotaku makes this point.

Better yet, Nintendo could take a look at what some of their biggest competitors are doing in the same space. For years now, a dedicated group ofHalo fans have been building an all-new game called Installation 01. The project eventually attracted the attention of Microsoft, and do you know what Microsoft did?

They didn’t send in the lawyers. They didn’t get the game shut down. They met with Installation 01's creators and worked out a deal. So long as the fan game is released free of charge and displays this text:

"Installation 01 is a completely separate entity from 343 Industries and Microsoft Studios and neither 343 Industries nor Microsoft Studios is formally funding or partnering with this project."

Nintendo could and should do exactly this sort of thing. It would take a bit of work, of course, but the boon in allowing the fan community to thrive and create works of love alongside Nintendo properties has to far outweigh whatever that extra workload would be. At the very least, it would keep writers like me from pointing out to the gaming public that Nintendo hates them whenever I can. It would build a more enduring relationship with fans, it would make for a great PR story, and it would allow for an explosion in Nintendo branding to flood gaming fandom. All of these would represent good business developments for Nintendo.

If only it would try to stifle every Nintendo-y instinct it has and try to be just a bit more human and awesome to its fans. Oh well.

Filed Under: copyright, fans, licensing, mario, mario royale, threats
Companies: nintendo

Nintendo Does The Nintendo: 'Mario Royale' Fan Game Becomes 'DMCA Royale'... And Is Now Dead

from the mission-accomplished? dept

I've often made the point before that Nintendo hates you, dear Nintendo fan and general gamer. Between taking down fan-made levels, fan-made games, and going to war with all the ROMs everywhere, Nintendo values an overwhelmingly tight grip on its intellectual property rights far more than the natural desire by its own fans to express their fandom. The speed and reliability of Nintendo's lawyerly involvement has become something of a legend on the internet, with folks that make these expressions of fandom often joking upon release that it's only a matter of time before the suits come calling.

This held true with Mario Royale, a delightfully simple little web game created by a fan that allowed players to play through Mario Bros. levels alongside up to 74 other simultaneous players. The classic game had never been used for this sort of thing and it was quite interesting to watch how it all worked. It's also worth noting that the game was playable for free, meaning there was no commercial aspect to it. Despite that, you all know what happened next.

Given Nintendo's litigious reputation when it comes to fan games, it's perhaps no surprise that the "game got DMCA'd," as creator InfernoPlus noted in a comment on the game's YouTube trailer over the weekend. InfernoPlus himself didn't seem all that surprised. In an interview with Vice last week,he said he "anticiapate[d]" a letter from Nintendo. "I’d say it’s [a] 50/50 [chance of attracting Nintendo's legal ire], maybe more, because it got so big all of a sudden. If [Nintendo] does, I can just re-skin it."

Now, that's precisely what's happened. Following a June 21 "DMCA Patch," the game that was Mario Royale is now DMCA Royale. While the gameplay is unchanged, the game's music, sound effects, and in-game sprites have been replaced with much more generic versions—including a new player character named "Infringio."

Beyond how clever this all is on the part of InfernoPlus, the changes made to the game are important for other reasons as well. By changing the assets to no longer be clear rips from the original Nintendo game, it should have put the game in a place where it was no longer infringing. By changing the name of the game, the characters, and the messaging around the game to focus on the fact that the original was DMCA'd by Nintendo, the game also transformed from a cool experiment into something in the realm of parody and social commentary. That last bit is important, because it should have also transformed the game into something that would pretty clearly fall under fair use.

Which is why it's odd, given both of those factors, that you also no longer can play DMCA Royale, as Nintendo's lawyers apparently issued threats over that game as well. At the URL for the game, all that is left is a message from InfernoPlus saying it had to take the new game down as well.

Unfortunately, Uncle Nintindie's lawyers have informed me that, despite my best efforts, the game still infringes their copyright.
They refused to give me specifics (I asked multiple times) but it would seem that either the level design or general mechanics are still too close to the original game.

As a result I can't just blindly change the game and leave it up. Doing so would put me at risk of further legal action. I'll likely talk in detail about the game and it's short lifespan on my youtube channel in the coming weeks.

I'm sorry about this guys. It was fun while it lasted.

It is equally unclear to me what Nintendo's continued problem with the reskinned game could be. The specific expression in the game assets that might have been copyrightable were removed. What was left was a transformative work that may have mirrored the basic game mechanics from the original Mario Bros. game, but those aren't copyrightable. On top of that, as I mentioned above, this new work seems like pretty clear fair use to me, in that it both serves as commentary on Nintendo's aggressive behavior and is also a clear parody of the original game. Were this to go to court, it's hard to see how it wouldn't result in a win for InfernoPlus.

But, given the legal war chest at Nintendo's disposal, that doesn't ultimately matter. A small developer making a game as a fan and as a cool little experiment isn't going to risk its existence to have such a legal fight. It's worth pointing out briefly here, and I'll expand on this in a separate post, that Nintendo had many other options than DMCAing this game to hell at its disposal. Why didn't it engage any of those other options?

Because Nintendo hates you, that's why.

Filed Under: copyright, dmca, dmca royale, fair use, fan games, infringio, mario, mario royale
Companies: nintendo

Nintendo Slays The Threat From Modded Nintendo Games For The Commodore 64

from the nintendon't dept

Any review of the recent posts we've done on gaming giant Nintendo would certainly reveal a disappointing trend. That trend appears to be the company, which has always maintained an aggressively tight grip on its IP, upping its efforts to take down all kinds of ROM sites, fan-made games, and gaming leaks. Gamers here may also already be aware that there is something of an odd fascination in gaming communities with the Commodore 64, an 8-bit gaming computer created way back in 1982 and discontinued in the early 90s. There are thriving modding and porting communities dedicated to figuring out how to get the C64 to do things it was never intended to do.

Which perhaps makes it surprising that it was only in the last week or so that someone figured out how to get a working C64 to be able to play a port of the original Super Mario Bros. The whole enterprise appears to have nothing to do with wanting to play an illicit copy of the 80s game and everything instead to do with a community of enthusiasts simply tinkering and seeing what could be pulled off for fun. Getting Mario on a Commodore apparently took something like seven years and was hailed as an achievement by the Commodore community. Reactions such as the below are indicative of the responses.

What an achievement. It runs great on my C128D, with slowdowns on the later, more busy levels. But overall, really really impressive.

You get the idea. Much better, it appears, than Nintendo does, which of course waited for the release of years of enthusiastic work before DMCAing everything it could find about this release.

Links to the image squirreled away on hosting platforms started to go down, with the suspicion that the Japanese gaming giant was behind the deletions. Seven years of hard work taken down with a few lines of text. Early this morning, the Commodore Computer Club revealed that it too had been hit with a copyright notice, effectively confirming that Nintendo was behind the action against Super Mario Bros. 64.

It doesn’t really come as a surprise that Nintendo has targeted the project. The company has been extremely busy in recent months taking down sites that offer ROMs that infringe on its copyrights. Furthermore, Super Mario Bros. is also available on its Game Boy, Wii U, and Switch platforms, so the ….erm….Commodore 64…is also a market threat.

No, it absolutely is not a threat. This is plainly ridiculous. We can stipulate all we want that Nintendo is within its rights to issue these takedowns... but why? Seriously, what the hell is the point of taking down this labor of love and geek enthusiasm? Does Nintendo truly suspect there are tons of people out there who have been sitting by with their Commodore 64s, or their emulators, just waiting for this release of Super Mario Bros. in order to play it, instead of buying it on one of Nintendo's current generation consoles?

No, of course not. This was tinkering for the sake of tinkering. Or perhaps for some bragging rights. Whatever all of this is, it's not a threat to sales of Super Mario Bros.

But Nintendo's going to Nintendo, I suppose. Because, gamers, as I keep telling you, Nintendo hates you.

Filed Under: commodore 64, dmca, fans, super mario bros
Companies: nintendo

Unknown Nintendo Game Gets Digitized With Museum's Help, Showing The Importance Of Copyright Exceptions

from the lost-history dept

Roughly a year ago, we wrote about how museums were requesting an exception to the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions in order to preserve online games. While the Librarian of Congress has already allowed for exceptions for preserving non-online games, the request led to pushback by the Entertainment Software Association, which indicated preserving online games would be copyright infringement. Nintendo is a member of the ESA and the gaming giant was at the same time going around to ROMs sites all over the internet and either threatening them with legal action or scaring them into shutting down. This happened all while Nintendo also released several retro consoles, essentially cashing in on the nostalgia that the emulation sites had kept alive for the past decade or so.

All of which is to say this: Nintendo is not generally friendly to the idea of preserving Nintendo games via digitization that it does not control itself. Standing in contrast to that is the recent discovery of an otherwise essentially unknown Nintendo game from 30 years ago that, upon discovery, was swiftly digitized for posterity.

When UWC—a NES game that had been hidden from the world for 30 years—was uncovered last week, one of the first orders of business was getting the game off a cartridge and into the digital realm so that it could be properly preserved.  The new owner of the game, Stephan Reese, aka Archon 1981, said as much last week, and that job has now been completed thanks to the efforts of the Video Game History Foundation.

Saying “we were more than happy to lend our expertise and digitize the game for its owner”, the VGHF haven’t just ripped the game, but also went and finished it (as in, played to the end, not finished development), uploading gameplay footage to YouTube so we can all see some more of UWC in action.

Were it not for the exceptions that allowed the VGHF to have helped Reese out, the game could quite easily have been lost to history. Perhaps more importantly, if the general posture of companies like Nintendo led someone like Reese to believe the illegality of this wasn't even worth questioning, the world may never have seen this game at all. And, whatever you think of the importance of gaming to our culture, it cannot be argued that this would have been a cultural loss concerning the history of a popular entertainment medium.

These exceptions to copyright law are very, very important. This is just one of many examples as to why and yet another reminder that the pervasive culture of ownership and restriction carries with it a danger to literally everyone else who is living or will live. That danger is the potential to lose parts of our culture and history.

Filed Under: archives, copyright, copyright exceptions, digitization, lost content, lost games, nes, uwc, video games
Companies: nintendo

Nintendo Attempts To Bottle The Leak Genie With Copyright Strikes

from the smash-the-leaks dept

A cursory review of our posts on Nintendo will reveal a company all too willing to wield intellectual property purely as a way to combat anything it doesn't like. The gaming giant jealously protects its IP, sure, but it also deploys its lawyers for such purposes as scaring the shit out of ROM sites, silencing YouTubers, shutting down fan-games from its biggest fans, and holding its consoles hostage unless customers agree to updated EULAs. Outside of Nintendo, many groups have tried to use copyright laws and the DMCA to combat leaks about content, or the content itself. This is rarely a good idea, what with the opportunity to use such leaks as free promotional material being an option instead.

Well, as you may have heard, Nintendo suffered its own high-profile leak recently, with the forthcoming Super Smash Bros. Ultimate finding its way onto the internet before the game has even been released. As you would expect, Nintendo got its lawyers busy firing off DMCA notices for all kinds of sites that were hosting the actual game that leaked. It also, however, decided to issue copyright strikes on YouTubers who showed any of the games content.

The YouTuber named Crunchii has been uploading new remixes from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate to his channel over the past few days, which has drawn the ire of Nintendo. Crunchii's channel has been hit with copyright strikes from Nintendo of America, which has caused him to be locked out of his account and will result in its termination over the next few weeks.

There is also a YouTuber named Dystifyzer, who also posted songs from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate's soundtrack. He too has been hit with numerous copyright strikes from Nintendo and is expecting his YouTube channel to be gone by next week.

This is stupid on so, so many levels. First, combating leaks with copyright notices rarely works at all, never mind well. Once the bell has been rung on the internet, it's nearly impossible to fully unring it. On top of that, going after YouTubers that are simply showing off the leaked product really only makes a ton of sense if you don't have a ton of confidence in the quality of that product. If you believe the product is awesome, you should want it shown off, even prior to release. Hell, maybe especially just prior to release, as a way to hype the game even further and push more sales.

It's worth noting both that pretty much everyone showing off this leaked content was expecting Nintendo to freak out over it, and that the leaked content itself isn't terribly compelling.

The sad thing is that the leaked content from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate hasn't been all that exciting – it's mostly new music tracks and some new facets of the World of Light mode. There haven't been any secret unannounced characters hiding in the code of the game that Sakurai was hoping to spring on the fans.

The reason why the World of Light mode doesn't have as many cutscenes as the Subspace Emissary mode is due to how disappointed Sakurai was when all of the lovingly crafted FMV sequences were quickly uploaded to the Internet. The Super Smash Bros. Ultimate leak proves that he was right to reveal everything beforehand, as any secrets would have been spoiled just two weeks before the game was released.

Making it all the more head-scratching that Nintendo is going to these lengths to combat the showing of the leaked content. But, hey, Nintendo is gonna Nintendo, I suppose.

Filed Under: copyright, crunchii, dmca, dystifyzer, leaks, promotion, super smash bros ultimate, takedowns
Companies: nintendo, youtube

Nintendo Shuts Down Its 'Creators' YouTuber Program, Replaces It With Simpler But Still Confusing Guidelines For Streaming

from the request-for-commentary dept

Way back in 2014, after years of waging a prolonged war on let's play streamers and game reviewers, Nintendo introduced a bureaucratic mess of a policy that would eventually become its "Creators Program." After being insanely heavy-handed towards streamers for years, the new program, that would allow for game streaming so long as the program rules were followed, initially was thought to be a major step forward for Nintendo. All too quickly, however, the whole thing devolved into a bureaucratic mess that saw applicants not getting responses to applications, and the revelation that Nintendo had some unethical rules for just how positive about Nintendo's games streamers had to be to remain in the program. Many of the bigger names in streaming simply swore off doing anything with Nintendo games, while others attempted to soldier on until Nintendo suddenly revised the program to essentially ban live-streams, the lifeblood of streamers. That last bit occurred roughly a year ago, rendering confusion and anger at Nintendo in the streaming space.

Well, it seems like Nintendo has realized what a mess all of this had become, as the company has now announced that the Creators Program is now no more, replaced with a much simpler set of guidelines of what will keep streamers on the right side of Nintendo's legal dogs.

The Nintendo Creators Program, launched as an attempt to moderate what folks were doing with the company’s content on YouTube, is closing down next year. In its place is will be a set of guidelines that might have a pretty big impact on the way you watch Nintendo games online.

Three years after its contentious debut, the program will cease operations on March 20, 2019. From a Nintendo statement:

We are ending the Nintendo Creators Program (NCP) to make it easier for content creators to make and monetize videos that contain Nintendo game content. We will no longer ask creators to submit their videos to the NCP, and creators can continue showing their passion for Nintendo by following Nintendo’s guidelines.

And, much to the surprise of your faithful writer, the guidelines are indeed much simpler and, largely, better. You can read the guidelines here in their entirety. And it will only take you a few minutes to do so, as they are blessedly terse. The bureaucracy is largely gone, as is the more heavy-handed oversight by Nintendo from the Creators Program. Instead, streamers are asked to follow a handful of rules to stay in Nintendo's good graces.

Those more interested in streaming their games might find things a bit easier. In 2017 Nintendo brought in some strict rules regarding where and how livestreams of their games could be made as part of the Creators Program, but those are now gone, with the single set of guidelines now covering both pre-recorded content and live broadcasts (across all major sites).

However, this is Nintendo we're talking about, which means it couldn't do all of this with nothing being odd about it. That oddness is in one of the guideline requirements. While gamers in general are getting older as a demographic, it's certainly true that Nintendo fans still skew younger. It's also true of that younger demographic that they are more likely to watch game streams in general and more likely to use those streams to find new games to enjoy.

Which is what makes this requirement a bit odd.

We encourage you to create videos that include your creative input and commentary. Videos and images that contain mere copies of Nintendo Game Content without creative input or commentary are not permitted. You may, however, post gameplay videos and screenshots using Nintendo system features, such as the Capture Button on Nintendo Switch, without additional input or commentary.

Honestly, it's not the biggest deal in the world, but the commentary offered by YouTubers in their game streams tends to carry with it adult language and references. It's rare that a teenager can go out and get commentary-laden game streams that many parents would feel are appropriate for their age. Forcing that commentary into game streams that aren't using Nintendo's video capture system seems likely to deprive young gamers of the game footage they want to help them figure out what to buy without curseword-heavy commentary.

Is that the biggest deal? Nah. Overall, these guidelines are an improvement over the nightmare that was the Creators Program. Still, it would have been nice if Nintendo could have shown it was looking out for its core customer base a bit more.

Filed Under: creators program, streaming, video games
Companies: nintendo, youtube