Pokemon Gene Renamed Under Legal Threat

Gamasutra reports that the 'Pokemon' cancer-causing gene has been renamed after legal threats were made by Pokemon USA. From the article: "Scientific journal Nature reported that Pokémon USA, the subsidiary company of Nintendo established to control the Pokémon brand in America, threatened to sue the cancer research center on the understandable grounds that equating Pokémon with cancer was doing harm to the brand's image. Sloan-Kettering acquiesced to the company's demands and changed the gene's name to the more unobtrusive Zbtb7."

Comments

photosensitive epilepsy

[b1t r0t]

However, further recent warnings on these Pokemon-related health problems have been tempered by the fact that Southern Medical Journal researchers discovered only a small fraction of the children treated were actually diagnosed with photosensitive epilepsy.

Well, duuuuuuh. In the original case in Japan, after watching the Porygon episode, schoolkids were basically told "if you felt sick after watching that episode last night, you can go home right now." If you were a schoolkid, in Japan or elsewhere, what would you do? It doesn't take a Bart Simpson to jump at the chance to play hooky and get away with it.

Would this really be a bad thing?

[aj1]

I think the brand is very much defined already. Let's face it, Kids are the main consumer of this type of game and I know of several demented middle schoolers who would love owning a game that has a gene that causes cancer named after it. The parents might be afraid the game could cause cancer, and that the two are linked; BUT having that fear would require the parents actually knowing which games their kids play, AND the name of that specific gene.

Then again, I am probably not giving credit too the age of media sound bytes. I can see the headlines and one liner news stations now. "A new meaning to pocket monsters; Pokemon linked with cancer! Are your kids safe? More after the break."

Re:The obvious reasons

[booch]

if you allow anyone to use a trademark for any reason you risk loosing the trademark because it can become a generic term

Not true. There has to be a likelihood of confusion or deception. But your reason number 2 may be valid. It's a grey area though -- whether just because it's a gene associated with cancer is enough to turn the case in Nintendo's favor is questionable. The added "fame" of the Pokemon trademark might be enough to throw the case into their favor though.