Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo Shuts Down Fan-Made Zelda Movie
Andorin writes "An independently filmed adaptation of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, called The Hero Of Time, has been taken offline by Nintendo as of the end of December. The film's producers write: 'We came to an agreement with Nintendo earlier this month to stop distributing the film... We understand Nintendo's right to protect its characters and trademarks and understand how in order to keep their property unspoiled by fan's interpretation of the franchise, Nintendo needs to protect itself — even from fan-works with good intentions.' Filming for the feature-length, non-profit film began in August 2004 and the movie was completed in 2008. It premiered in various theaters worldwide, including in New York and Los Angeles, and then became available online in the middle of December, before it was targeted by Nintendo's legal team. As both an avid Zelda fan and an appreciator of independent works, I was extremely disappointed in Nintendo's strong-arming of a noncommercial adaptation to the Game of the Year for 1999."
We all know you wouldn't get anywhere with Micky Mouse, why should a game character be any different?
Without these evil fans they have no sales. Pricks. And I'm not even a gamer.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Got a link?
... on your favourite bittorrent search engine.
No, it was not the best they could have done. That would have been saying "cool" and granting a free licence.
Bullshit. You can enforce your trademarks and still allow fan works. For instance, CBS allows use of Star Trek properties for non-profit use. Nintendo should be encouraging their most enthusiastic fans, not threatening them with legal action.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
No, the owner of the copyright has the *exclusive* right to distribute, and the *exclusive* right to licence others to distribute.
The owner of the trademark has the *exclusive* right to make derivative works, and the *exclusive* right to licence other derivative works.
That they chose to deny approval to a derivative work is their choice even if it shows them up as asshats
Now I'm curious and I'm going to have to hunt down a copy of that movie, that I would never have heard of had Nintendo just let it be.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Proof, please. Imagining the worst possible motives and threats when you don't know what really went on is absolutely disgusting.
This probably isn't the best time to bring attention to another of your liked series. Just a thought.
The fan spends four years in production. The film is screened in New York and L.A.
It never occurs to him at any point along the way to ask Nintendo for their permission and support. It comes as a surprise when the rights holder pulls the plug.
There is a way to get it right:
The Hunt for Gollum
I'm not sure why Nintendo would want to do this - it's only a negative for them, spreading all this ill will. Look at Star Trek and Star Wars. Lucasfilm and Paramount generally don't "crack down" on fan films or most other fan works, as long as they're nonprofit ventures. And fan films are more comparable to Lucasfilm and Paramount products. Nintendo primarily sells interactive products, so a noninteractive fan film would not be in direct competition with well, anything they sell. That is, unless they decide to develop a full length Zelda film. Remember how well Super Mario Bros. turned out?
Freedom is drinking a beer in the park when you're supposed to be at work.
Yes, thank you Captain Obvious. Is anyone claiming otherwise?
The issue isn't what the law is, it's what the law should be, as well as how companies should use the law. When there's a story about the use of the DMCA, do you go posting the text of the DMCA, saying "But that's the law!"? In yesterday's story, are you going to explain what the current copyright law is, and therefore those items won't be entering the public domain today?
You have no right to rip off other people's work without permission. What is an homage to one person is a horrible butchering of something they've spent years of their lives working to another.
CBS are liberal with permissions to use Star Trek stuff. Good for them. Other creators do not wish the same things of their properties. Do not confuse one group's good will with something that should be expected from everyone.
I gave to a charity the other day. You should give to them too. It's outrageous that you have yet to donate to them! If I can donate, I see no reason why you shouldn't too!
Without these pricks, the fans would have no Zelda.
I didn't see anything about regret. All I saw was "Yeah, they have a legal or financial need to protect their brand, so they had to take us down". Why would you even think that their statement was coerced? Sure, they were forced to take it down to avoid big lawsuits, but that's not what you said. You said "Forcing them to put out a "mea culpa" statement like this (no doubt with hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars of lawsuits promised if they did not) is absolutely disgusting." Again, what exactly makes you think it's coerced?
As with most slashdot articles, they say [big company] does something outrageous and evil to [little guy who's not even trying to profit or nothing!].
Then you find out that they're showing it in theaters (which tend to be for-profit ventures).
Donkey Kong, Metroid, F-Zero, Fire Emblem, Golden Sun, Kirby, Starfy, Star Fox, Punch-Out!!, Pokemon, Kid Icarus
It's a serious threat. Think of what happened to the Sonic the Hedgehog series.
Apart from the first statement being simply untrue (there are a number of uses permitted without the copyright holder's permisssion), it is also completely irrelevant - this case is not about copyright, it's about trademarks. I know the fudmongers want us all to be seduced into the "information is property" paradigm, but copyrights and trademarks (and for that matter, patents and trade secrets) are not the same thing at all, and blurring the distinctions between them does nobody any good. Before you go berating us all in your role as AC law expert you might want to get a better understanding of the law yourself.
My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
Do not confuse one group's good will with something that should be expected from everyone.
I think you're being a little bit harsh but raise a good point all the same. It would be really easy to tweak the story line and character names to come up with an original story. At least then you'd have a small but non-zero chance of being able to sell your final product.
I've seen the same thing in Star Wars fan films. Some of them are really quite good and required a huge amount of effort. Had they put that effort into an original story in a vaguely similar universe, they'd own it.
A Zelda fan might enjoy a Zelda-like story line nearly as much. You just have to invest in the back story, which you can skip in a fan film. But if you use a similar setting and environment, the history can be pretty short. A narrator can read it in if you really want to go cheap. The fans will get it. If it's too similar you could still get sued, but then it's a big corporation beating up on a bunch of poor kids. Not a bunch of poor kids encroaching on a big company's copyright.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
It seems that Desilu didn't register the copyrights properly for the first season,
At least in the US, copyright is the automatic default. Anything you do is automatically copyrighted. Registering it is useful, especially if you want to prove it's yours, but not necessary.
Now, trademarks are different, as are patents. But these are completely different bodies of law.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
If the geeks at Nintendo were even half way awake they'd have noticed this thing brewing a long time ago.
Wait until the fans sink all their investments into the movie, then blow it out of the water with a lawsuit after they're too low on the budget to fight back.
Whereas Nintendo was protecting their franchise with the release of the CD-i rapes of Zelda. I'm sure whatever the amateur fans made couldn't have been as bad.
http://screwattack.com/videos/AVGN-CD-i-Part-2
http://screwattack.com/videos/AVGN-CD-i-Part-3
Nintendo has always been stalwart when it comes to protecting their copyrights. Nintendo has a long history of comments about fair use, personal backups, and so forth that might even make Ken Kutaragi, Mr. "PS3 gamers should get a second job", laugh out loud. Their actions are usually quite in line with their statements.
But, something I have never heard about, despite trawling some of the darkest parts of the internet, is Nintendo going after creators of porn based on Nintendo IP. This has always confused me--I'm not really for nor against them going after the artists, but considering the potential harm they might do to Nintendo's brand, you'd think it would be of a higher priority. Even more astounding, at least to me, is that as far as I can tell THOT was being given away for free, while there are plenty of toon porn sites out there that charge for their content (though piracy often slips around this). I would think it almost a no-brainer for Nintendo to go after the commercial sites and more popular/notorious artists to scare off the little guys. And, yet, I've never heard of a single case or even a C&D.
In fact, I've never heard of any company acting upon toon porn (and any cosplay porn that may exist.) Why is this? Are they somehow not aware it exists? Rule 34 is a popular enough concept at this point that I would think the idea would have at least entered their head from somewhere. Are they scared of bringing the world of drawn pornography to the limelight? After an Iowa man was thrown in jail for kiddie toon porn ("shota yaoi"), Nintendo (and other similar companies) could get even more help from the FBI and local police forces (looking to make a name for themselves) going after the artists of any underaged characters. Nintendo obviously isn't going just for profit makers (Neither is Disney), so their lack of action in this regard leaves me scratching my head. ..Oh, and, uh, boo copyright, overzealous corporations, fish, fish, etc.
Even the for- or not-for-profit issue aside, Nintendo has actually apparently been pretty cool about it (so I take back my own sarcastic comment in another thread). From the movie's website: "We came to an agreement with Nintendo earlier this month to stop distributing the film. In the spirit of the holiday season they were good enough to let us keep the movie up for you to watch and enjoy through the end of 2009, but not past 2009."
Other examples of Nintendo being cool is the way they never tried to stop the fan translation of Mother 3 after they announced it wasn't going to be ported here.
Property is theft.