Christ imagine being so capitalism brained that you're relying on Nintendo to prevent fascism
post
Companies are amoral but they do seem evil most of the time
Fighting against fascism is risky with very little to personally gain from it. Defending your copyright is mandatory if you want to keep it. Isn't it fun that we made these legal entities into cowards ready for fascism by design?
Lawyer here! Rule number one: don’t sue on something you know for a fact will lose.
DHS’ use of pokemon parodies is completely legal fair use. Nintendo knows this and would end up wasting (hundreds of) thousands of dollars in US court on a losing argument if they sued DHS. Also, courts are far more likely to side with the US Govt than a foreign corporation.
This has nothing to do with “defending” copyright because nothing DHS did threatened Nintendo’s copyrights. DHS knows this, Nintendo knows this, but some of yalls seem confused.
DHS’ use of pokemon parodies is completely legal fair use.
How so?
Parody is one of the standard examples of fair use. Just ask Weird Al.
Very little of Weird Al's work counts as parody. Some of it does (or at least could), such as Smells Like Nirvana, because it is providing commentary or criticism of the original.
More of it counts as the broader category of satire, which has significantly lower legal protections.
However, the vast majority of his parodies would be defined as derivative works. If it's about food or TV, this is probably the category.
That being said, Al has never had any of this tested in court. He has a policy to get permission in advance, and that prevents any legal concerns. No one knows for sure how any courts would rule on the subject.
ETA: This site has a more thorough analysis. Al's work has a lot in common with the Dr Seuss case.
https://copyrightalliance.org/is-my-parody-fair-use/
Then why did he have to ask permission from everyone? iirc he couldn't do The Kink's "Lola" for a long time because Ray Davies wouldn't allow it.
He does get permission, because he doesn’t want to be a dick and also doesn’t want to have to go to court, but he technically doesn’t need it.
This says
Often times, a court will apply the “likelihood of confusion” test to a parody case. Courts have noted that a successful parody will rarely be considered infringement because the ultimate object of a parody is to entertain and not confuse the listener or buyer. There is no perceived “threat of confusion” and it is unlikely that the original artist’s profits will be negatively impacted by Weird Al’s versions. Because of this, original recording artists are unlikely to have a cause of action against Mr. Yankovic.>
Despite the unlikelihood of litigation, Weird Al always obtains permission from the original artist. He has stated, ”I have a long-standing history of respecting artists' wishes. So if (the artist) himself were objecting, I wouldn't even offer my parody for free on my Web site.”
By obtaining official copyright permission from the artists, Weird Al’s attorneys negotiate royalties which vary from a flat fee buyout to royalty participation. Weird Al's financial success is likely responsible for the willingness of most copyright owners to grant him permission to parody their musical compositions. It as made it possible for Yankovic to bargain for a lucrative share in the copyright of the parody version of the song.
Curious how he doesn't get 100% royalties if the song is fair use.
Doesnt matter if dhs is in the legal clear. Nintendo have sued and dcma many perfectly legal projects, but because nintendo is a multiple billion company with a team of rabid lawyers. They can just strong arm anyone that stands in their way. But your right... the federal government cant be strong armed by a small fry like nintendo.
Defending your copyright is mandatory if you want to keep it.
You are thinking of trademark. Copyright can not be removed unless you explictly waive your rights away. Use to, you had to register copyright to obtain it. But today, it is immediately granted the moment the copyrighted peice is created. Registering is merely for record keeping making it easier to prove ownership.
Can't we do anything about Nintendo ? Like anything at all ? I don't think I'm the only one who thinks like this here.
I've been exiting the Nintendo ecosystem for a while now. I have no plans to buy a switch 2
That's good and all—me too—but can't we like, protest outside of their offices or something? They have several locations around the world.
Realistically, what did anyone expect them to do?
You want them to sue the US government? For a song that, while technically copyrighted, is so prolifically used that they'd be laughed out of court?
Nintendo had literally nothing to gain from fighting this. Even if they won, they'd still lose.
Realistically, what did anyone expect them to do?
You want them to sue the US government? For a song that, while technically copyrighted, is so prolifically used that they’d be laughed out of court?
a zillion musicians already have.
You act like most lawsuits in the country aren't against the US government. It's in no way unique or unusual thing.
Nintendo had literally nothing to gain from fighting this.
Oh well, give them something to gain for it than. Such as pegging them to a fascist hate-filled regime and harming their family friendly PR.
all 37 comments