Talk:Intellectual property protection by Nintendo

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Nintendo task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Purple Francis (6 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (2 participants)
Dr. Wily (8 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)
Melee (game terminology) (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Move to something like Nintendo stance on IP rights?

I briefly considered adding a sentence to the start of the lede saying that people make a lot of fangames for Mario, Zelda, and Metroid and such, but then I noticed that fangames are not actually described in this article at all. There's nothing here about fangames as a whole, but the article seems focused on Nintendo's legal and moral responses to the existence of fan projects in the abstract. Should the title of the article be changed to describe this subject better? (Or should we refocus the article?) ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The scope should be broadened to IP protections, and merge more stuff over from Nintendo#Intellectual property protection. Perhaps title the article Nintendo and intellectual property or something like that. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 17:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea for an article. I do support some sort of page title move. Tarkus' suggestion is good IMO, but open to others. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I focused it on fan games because sources outright stated that Nintendo was largely focused on the fan game realm. For example, they are a lot less takedown-happy about fan art or fan remixes. The amount of high-profile fan games removed by Nintendo makes it a particular area of contention. While observers might assume it's a "tomato toMAHTO" scenario, I think it's anything but.

Still, I can't really stop people from doing it if they disagree, with WP:OWN being a thing and all that. If it was moved then I would support the new name Nintendo and copyright. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:10, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With the more recent action on Garry's mod, I do think we should consider the merge and move to a larger scope (which would still cover the fan game issues in this way). Probably a better name would be something like "Intellectual property protection by Nintendo" — Masem (t) 16:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem:I agree! This should be merged with the main page of Nintendo. Roberth Martinez (talk) 23:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was planning to merge stuff out of the Nintendo page to here, as to cover the history of Nintendo efforts to control both hardware and software copyrights as well as licensing (eg mentioning Cadence of Hyrule as a rare third party licensing) and focusing on its efforts against what it sees as copyright violations, which still includes fan games. Masem (t) 23:12, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am planning on moving this page and incorporating material from the main Nintendo page on IP stuff this weekend. A few new things have developed in recent news (including Nintendo stating its stance on character IPs) that make a broader article on Nintendo and IP (which includes their take on fan games) more appropriate. --Masem (t) 04:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]