Nintendo Fires Employee For Speaking About Job On a Podcast

An anonymous reader writes: You may not have heard of Chris Pranger before, but he's one of the localizers that works to bring Nintendo games over to the west. He recently talked about the localization process for a small podcast, providing Nintendo fans some details about how games make it from Japan to the western world. Nintendo's response to the fan interest in the game localizing process? They fired him, of course. It's unclear what statements in specific Nintendo objected to and Nintendo, so far, hasn't explained its decision.

Comments

This doesn't seem unusual.

[Sowelu]

Most places I've been at have a VERY strict policy of not talking to the media or representing the company in any way without permission (usually only PR or execs can do it). If you want people to follow the policy, you have to enforce it, even for the little things.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[gurps_npc]

I am so tired of people saying "you have to enforce it, even for the little things". That is bull crap. Not true at all. Zero tolerance policies cause more problems than they are worth - ALL the time.

One of the worst examples was the kids school that Disney sued. Disney falsely claimed that by giving away or by charging minimal values, it opened them up to law suits from other locations demanding the same treatment. After it happened, Universal gave that school - for free - the use of their characters - Yogi Bear, Scooby Doo, Flintstones, etc. That happened in 1989.

Funny how Universal never ran into any lawsuits demanding the same treatment. Not a single one in all of 26 years.

Zero tolerance parties never make any sense. You do NOT need to enforce a policy for the little things in order to be able to enforce it for the big things. A mere warning is most often more than enough than actual punishment. A letter written to the Day school - offering a $10,000 donation in kind of a license to use the Disney characters would have been more than enough to maintain their copyright. Similarly, a strict warning and perhaps a one day suspension (no pay) would have let this employee off without endangering the "no press" rule's sanctity.

Other examples are very very common. Cops routinely ignore people traveling at 58 mph in a 55 mph zone. Some businesses routinely let people leave early on the day before a three day weekend.

In most cases where someone/some group enforces a rule strictly it's because some shmuck has an agenda to push, not because it enforcing it loosely wouldn't work.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[bws111]

This is a company disciplinary issue. You damn well better apply it consistently or you open yourself up to all sorts of grief.

Your examples are stupid. Disney's policy is that they only license under certain condtions, and that is their right. And they are 100% correct that if they relax those conditions for one group, other groups are going to demand the same thing, something which they do not want to provide. Universal did give the school permission to use their characters for free, but do you have any evidence that any other school approached Universal for the same terms and was refused? If not, then that would explain the lack of lawsuits, wouldn't it?

Yes, cops let people speed a little. However, they let EVERYONE speed a little.

Yes, businesses let people leave early. However, they let EVERYONE leave early.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Dutch Gun]

It's not unusual at all. I've worked in the videogame industry for many years. You simply don't talk to the public or media about projects you're working on - ever. We all sign NDA agreements which prohibit us from talking about *anything*. I can't even *name* the current project I'm working on, let alone discuss details. I've written official company blogs about the games I've worked on, but they were reviewed by editors, legal, community managers, PR, and so on before being published. When you're sinking ten to a hundred million dollars into a AAA title, a company wants to be incredibly careful about the message being sent out. This developer was part of that world, and unfortunately didn't understand that.

There's a great temptation to talk to media, because people are interested in what happens behind the scenes of some of their favorite videogames. It's a bit of an ego boost to think that people want to listen to what you have to say. It's unfortunate that Nintendo felt the need to fire him instead of giving him a reprimand, but I suppose that's their policy.

Just recently we saw how an ill-conceive blog from an Oracle manager made the entire company look really bad. You can understand why people who aren't trained to talk to the public or the media shouldn't be attempting it on their own. Things are bound to slip our that you didn't really want to say.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Derekloffin]

Get it right man, it isn't Zero Tolerance, it is Zero Intelligence. Come on now. Seriously though, that is really what Zero Tolerance is about, removing any form of intelligence from the decision making process and assuming that one solution fits all situations. It truly Zero Intelligence. As you say it just doesn't make sense.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[AK Marc]

I came here to say this. I've seen people fired for less. Any "on the record" statement of any kind is a fireable offense for most places. Some explicitly, some implicitly.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[phorm]

Only in equal situations. If buddy is talking about his job and how interesting it is, it's different from talking about stuff that may be a business secret or slamming your employer.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Marginal Coward]

Zero tolerance policies cause more problems than they are worth - ALL the time.

I'm sensing that you have a policy of zero tolerance for zero tolerance policies. Maybe it's time for a little leeway in this area.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Anonymous Coward]

I talk about old jobs here on Slashdot all the time in the comments under Anonymous Coward.

Reason? Exactly the reason in the OP. If I was still working for said companies (eg if they were still operating, and not being terrible American companies.) I would never do such a thing working for a company that through a process of elimination could determine I'm the one "leaking sensitive information"

A lot of American company policies are asinine to a point where you can't even get an employment reference anymore. So there is a lot of incentive to spill your deadbeat employer's secrets so that they suffer humiliation and hopefully as a byproduct they improve the situation or go bankrupt and someone else takes their place.

However when you work for a company like Nintendo, or Electronic Arts, you end up with this unfortunate situation where ALL talking to the media is reflected negatively, no matter how polite and nice you are. This is because these companies sell products that can be harmed if talked about... regardless of the context. A Nintendo Employee is clearly not an unbiased source of information, so as much as the employee may talk up their companies products, it will be seen as covering for bad choices made by the company.

Hence, why only employers of "services" can ever get away about talking about their company. Your local ISP or services provided by your Municipal government you can talk positively or pooh-pooh all you want, because ultimately your ISP or Municipal government is the only provider of that service. Talking about key staff though? That's a firing.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[bill_mcgonigle]

Zero tolerance parties never make any sense.

To whom?

You're assuming one side of the argument, which is why you don't get it. The policies make total sense.

The people charged with metering out discipline follow the policies without waiver, and then they cannot be fired for exercising poor judgment.

They protect their phoney-baloney jobs and they protect their phoney-baloney pensions. By rigorously not thinking.

Now the consequences of such a system may be disastrous for a given culture, but that does not mean they don't make sense to the people who use them and advocate for them.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a company disciplinary issue. You damn well better apply it consistently or you open yourself up to all sorts of grief.

I get sick and tired of hearing about all the grief someone will face whenever a human actually uses their fucking brain for once and makes a logical judgement call instead of sitting there like a mindless idiot making decisions only because of the unending threat of litigation that has paralyzed entire nations.

Where legal cases should have been laughed out of court we now have precedent. Fuck you very much for that shit, legal system.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[ShanghaiBill]

You are assuming that the summary is correct, and he was fired for explaining the localization process. Far more likely, is that his manager has wanted to get rid of him for a long time, and this was just an excuse. Companies don't just ax an otherwise good employee for one mistake. There is almost certainly far more to it than that.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

You also are under no obligation to fund or assist your detractors. The corporation, or more accurately, the owners of it, reserve to themselves the right to speak for their company and product. They hire advertising and legal departments to groom these statements and speakers in some cases.

You, an employee, do not have a right to go out and speak on behalf of the company if they don't want you to. It isn't your company.

Presumably he was aware of this. If not, it's an exercise left to lawyers. And any SJW movement of nerds to refuse to buy Nintendo stuff unless they hire him back.

Put your speech where your mouth is!!!!!!!!

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems Chris' heart was in the right place, but unfortunately he didn't seek approval before discussing company policy. Perhaps working for an open source company would suit his personality better. Best of luck, Chris, and don't let this get you down too badly. Sometimes what seems bad can actually be the best thing to happen to you.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Anonymous Coward]

And this is why there should be a law that explicitly permits employees to talk about their work, workplace or company, regardless of what bullshit legal documents they had to sign to get the job. For a triviality, this guy's life got smashed to bits. To put things in perspective, most rapists get more lenient sentences.

And then there is the benefit to society. The current climate and way of doing things actively harms our entire society. Companies' decisions often affect us much more profoundly than the government's, but even though we fought tooth and nail to get our governments as transparent as we can, corporations are allowed to be opaque, secretive entities that are exempt from public scrutiny.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Fire_Wraith]

That was Oracle though. They're probably contractually obligated to make the company look bad.

If they didn't, it just wouldn't be Oracle.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Anonymous Coward]

Japanese and Japanese controlled companies are all about the hierarchy, in ways almost no Westerner can imagine. They are little feudal empires, and this peasant dared usurp the rights and privileges of his betters. So he's fired, of course. He should be happy they didn't transfer him to India or Iraq before firing him.

I don't know why this would seem surprising to anyone. Did everyone miss the Konami revelations about how the managers treat their employees?

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[whoever57]

I can't even *name* the current project I'm working on, let alone discuss details

I once interviewed with a company like that. Years later, I figured out that they were working on nuclear warheads.

Re: This doesn't seem unusual.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you know that in the US you're only allowed to complain about the government? You're not supposed to notice that there's anything wrong with the real rulers around here.

Sarcasm over...we really need to end corporate control over our lives. Corporations control more people more often than government does. Living in a nation of servile corporate apologists doesn't help of course, but more and more people are getting more and more fed up with it.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[gl4ss]

disney or universal can give use of the characters or not based on solely on their wishes. there's no need for them to license them to everyone or nobody like you fucking claimed.

disney's own licensing deals around the world are a direct counter example to what you're claiming, showing that you're just full of bullshit. any group can demand the right to use uncle scrooge today as well and they can deny it to any group they want just as they can grant it.

furthermore the business world is full of cases where a business has decided to give some user or another some perk or another while not giving it to everyone. the cops analogy is bullshit since they're public servants.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Dr_Barnowl]

Picard says :

"There can be no justice, so long as laws are absolute."

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[shortscruffydave]

Situation here is that to discuss company details outside the company is gross misconduct, and so would lead to dismissal. Share details with the media, then you'd get killed, buried, dug up, and then your corpse would be fired for gross misconduct. And I don't think this is an unusual situation. In fact, I know some employers who get a bit twitchy if they know that you have journalists uin your social circle away from work.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Big Hairy Ian]

I'm sensing that you have a policy of zero tolerance for zero tolerance policies. Maybe it's time for a little leeway in this area.

The tolerance is strong in this one

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[mysidia]

Most places I've been at have a VERY strict policy of not talking to the media or representing the company in any way without permission

Companies can have a policy against talking to media ON BEHALF of the company. It wasn't clear from the summary if the person involved purported to be speaking on behalf of Nintendo or not. If not, then it is possible that Nintendo could be in legal trouble for their actions in that case.

A policy of not communicating at all with the media or in public such as on Facebook, Youtube, blog posts, etc (especially about matters such as conditions of work, salary, etc) would be an unlawful policy, since it would interfere with labor rights regarding protected concerted activities that have protected status under federal law.

Just having published policy itself that intimidates against exercise of protected rights is a violation of the law, and enforcing an unlawful policy is itself unlawful.

The employee's lawyers could potentially have a field day with that, if an unlawful policy such as "Never talk to the media" were being enforced, even if the actual activity involved with the firing wasn't protected activity

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[mysidia]

disney or universal can give use of the characters or not based on solely on their wishes.

Unless the character is public domain or the usage is fair use / free speech.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Phreakiture]

(usually only PR or execs can do it)

Truth. Interestingly enough, this makes it very easy to tell the official story from the unofficial, when there has been an incident of some sort. All you have to do to filter (or filter out) the official story is grep for a pattern like /tak(ing|es) .* seriously/. Try it! It works surprisingly well.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[mysidia]

I'm sensing that you have a policy of zero tolerance for zero tolerance policies. Maybe it's time for a little leeway in this area.

Maybe he's just waiting for someone with a zero tolerance policy for people who have a zero tolerance policy toward people who have a zero tolerance policy toward zero tolerance policies?

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[ripvlan]

This seems policy plain and simple. This employee looks to have loose lips - giving out details for what the company considers IP. My employer has a social media policy - plus I am also prohibited by law from speaking about the products (making false claims about product capabilities etc). Not only am I not allowed to disparage the company in general - I must also obey the law (which the policy also points out in an addendum because not all employees work on products in this area).

A company can have any policy that they want - for whatever reasons they want (or need) - and employees are expected to follow them.

 

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[joeblog]

> I know some employers who get a bit twitchy if they know that you have journalists uin your social circle away from work.

It get worse: not only do corporations trample over freedom of speech, they trample over freedom of association.

Re:This doesn't seem unusual.

[Marginal Coward]

Good point. :-) Maybe it's time for me to give him a little more leeway in that area.

Unexpected?

[plasm4]

Not that I think it's correct, but wouldn't this be considered a normal response? He's not a whistlerblower so he can't say he's acting in the public interest.

Re:Unexpected?

[vistic]

Yeah the summary/submission feels like it was written by someone who maybe hasn't worked for a large company before. I know I'd need to get permission before doing something like this. It could be argued that Nintendo could have been lenient here so that they appear to have some compassion. But I am not surprised at all by this response.

Typical corporate move

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Typical corporate move- fire anyone who says anything about anything without written permission from God himself.

Re:Typical corporate move

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

It's more than just blabbing about the company to media, maybe in ways that aren't corporate public-facing direction or whatever the current buzzwords are.

Big companies don't even want you to talk because you may get pumped for information that may help a competitor, or lawsuit, or someone looking to scoop a big product.

"Is Soandso going to CES next week?" "No, Jim Someone is!" "Oh, really?"

Now they have names for the next round.

He takes responsibility for it being his own fault

[__roo]

I know a lot of us like to blame people for their own problems, but in this case he knows it's his own fault—which, to me, makes the whole situation even more sad and awful. I feel really bad for him, and I hope he can find a way to come back from this.

From TFA:

“I look around my house and see images of my son and feel such intense shame and crippling sadness,” Pranger wrote on Facebook. “I know that if I can’t find a job at least as good as this one, I won’t be able to provide for my family I’ve lost them their health coverage and their security. I also know that I’ve probably lost a good deal of my friends, just because I know how hard it can be to stay in touch with someone when the convenience of proximity is lost. I’m so sorry to everyone. I’ve failed you. You believed in me and supported me and trusted me and I’ve failed you. I’ve failed me.”

Simple rule

[bws111]

Here is a simple rule - unless you have been specifically authorized, don't talk about your companies business in public. Chances are very good you signed an agreement to that effect.

Re:Simple rule

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes the company doesn't care about you. You are only a tool to make money.

Re:Simple rule

[bws111]

I must have missed something. Exactly how did you get from "don't talk about our business" to "we don't care about you"?

Re:Simple rule

[thinkwaitfast]

I'm fine with that. I never cared about any company that I've worked for. I do a job (I care about my work and do the best I can), they pay me, end of relationship.

Re:Simple rule

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know, maybe the complete disparity between the "crime" and the consequences?

Every time I read stories like this, I realize where all the kids who enjoyed themselves in their childhood by pulling the the legs and wings of various kinds of helpless insects unfortunate enough to fall into their hands went; they all went into "management".

Re:Simple rule

[steelfood]

Even without an NDA, you'd be lucky if you didn't screw up somehow. Not only could you be revealing trade secrets, you could also misrepresent your company, or in the worst case, reveal insider financial or strategic information. Best to keep that line drawn, especially on a public forum.

Re:Simple rule

[bws111]

Correct. Additionally, there is the cumulative effect of lots of little, seemingly unimportant, information that adds up to a whole lot of information.

Re:Simple rule

[harryjohnston]

Unless you live in a civilized part of the world that protects you against being fired without proper cause.

And that's why I

[Ukab the Great]

never say or publish anything about my workplace on the Internet, good or bad. On Facebook I work for some undisclosed company at some undisclosed location doing some undisclosed thing (which is more than likely programming, for those who know me).

NDA?

[mongothesecond]

Did he sign a NDA when he was hired? If so, the company reaction wouldn't be that surprising.

Re:NDA?

[bobbied]

Did he sign a NDA when he was hired? If so, the company reaction wouldn't be that surprising.

Chances are... YES... I haven't started a job in nearly 2 decades that didn't require me to sign an NDA or some kind of agreement to that affect.

Re:I don't get Nintendo.

[gcnaddict]

Literally billions of dollars in cash on hand.

Literally.

HR issue

[Anonymous Coward]

It's unclear what statements in specific Nintendo objected to and Nintendo, so far, hasn't explained its decision.

It's an HR issue, they have no business explaining.

Re:I don't get Nintendo.

[ArmoredDragon]

Pretty much all that's holding them afloat is exclusivity for the NES era intellectual property, which they keep re-hashing over and over and over again and their die-hard fans (of which there are a lot) keep buying.

Kind of a wonder how well them and a lot of other Japanese based games developers are holding out. Japan used to be the source of some very good games, especially during the late 80s and 90s, but over the last decade especially they've been crap. That is to say, companies like Square, Konami, Capcom, etc, haven't put out any good games in a LONG time.

Re:He takes responsibility for it being his own fa

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy shit. Sounds like Homie is ready to eat a shotgun. I hope someone is keeping a close eye on him.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Why is this news?

[steppin_razor_LA]

This is a common and reasonable policy.

Re:Why is this news?

[quintessencesluglord]

Is it? I've noted this blind acceptance of this particular meme, while in the same breath demanding every iota of information (Facebook passwords, credit history, etc.) from prospective employees. And especially in this instance, no actual harm was done to Nintendo, so where is the justification?

People talking shop about their jobs is as old as the hills. The fact that this encompasses new technologies is maybe slightly different, but it is that gray area that the web inhabits between journalism and hobby.

And again, no harm was done by his disclosure.

But now Nintendo gets to look like paranoid control freak even more.

Well played.

Re:Why is this news?

[harryjohnston]

Common, perhaps. Reasonable? Bullshit.

In civilized parts of the world, Nintendo couldn't get away with this sort of crap.

Re:Well.

[Anonymous Coward]

Its called a NDA, Non-Disclosure Agreement. Open-Shut

Re:I don't get Nintendo.

[Anonymous Coward]

N64 was decently successful although not top of the field.

Wii was basically the winner of the last console wars.

Re:Well.

[AuMatar]

No such thing in the US- most employment is at will and they can fire you for anything except a small number of reasons.

Re:I don't get Nintendo.

[gcnaddict]

Seriously, literally over a trillion yen in net assets, also stated as literally billions of dollars.

Re:Well.

[bobbied]

Chances are it WAS in the agreements he signed the first day of work.

With few exceptions, every place I've ever worked had boiler plate non-disclosure agreements that everybody was required to sign their first day. Most places even followed that up with training that explained what could and could not be said.

IMHO, it's NEVER a good idea to discuss work on ANY social media forum in any way. Stuff like this tends to come back to haunt you when you least expect it. It is an especially bad idea to complain about your work, past or present. It is just way to risky and could cause you trouble like this guy is in.

Re:Well.

[JackieBrown]

I have never worked for a company (even when I was an usher sweeping up trash at the movie theater) that did not have a very strict "do not talk to any media about the company" policy.

It's always been a very public and documented rule.

And that was working at a place with no IP or trade secrets.

The First Rule

[DumbSwede]

The first rule of Nintendo Club is:
You do not talk about Nintendo Club.

The second rule of Nintendo Club is:
You do not talk about Nintendo Club.

Re:The First Rule

[__aaclcg7560]

The third rule of Nintendo Club is:
Everything is proprietary to Nintendo.

Re:The First Rule

[viperidaenz]

The fourth rule of Nintendo Club is:
There is a Nintendo club and will be for quite some time, they have 10 billion dollars.

This isn't "Tomato" is it?

[timrod]

I'm at work so I can't check, but there was a person going by the handle "Tomato" who was the driving force behind the fan localization of Mother 3. I know he mentioned at one point that he worked as a localizer for Nintendo of America - but I don't know if anyone found out what his actual name is. Tomato did an amazing job translating Mother 3, and if this is the same person NoA are idiots for firing him, especially when he singlehandedly proved that Mother 3 had an audience in the United States and would have made Nintendo money hand over fist if it had been ported to the DS and localized.

Can anyone confirm if this is the same guy?

Re:This isn't "Tomato" is it?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tomato was Clyde Mandelin. I don't know that he was ever directly under Nintendo's employee, but he was a well known localization expert, working on things like Kingdom Hearts II and Dragon Ball. Too lazy to find proper references, so wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:I don't get Nintendo.

[RogueyWon]

They eked out profits in the N64 and Gamecube generations despite generally poor sales by keeping unit costs down and managing good first party sales.

They basically won the lottery with the Wii - between the quick-fix appeal of Wii-Sports, a very friendly media narrative (portraying them as the plucky underdog) and some well timed first party exclusives in the first 2-3 years of its lifespan, they made an unfeasible amount of money, most of which they banked.

Since then, their luck has run out and their output has generally disappointed. From the last 2-3 years of the Wii's life-span, through the Wii-U's launch and into the present, their gaming activities have generally been loss-making (sometimes startlingly so). However, they've been doing a lot of currency trading on the side, which has meant that some years/quarters they have shown an overall profit based on that. Just as pre-bailout General Motors was sometimes described as a pension fund that made some cars on the side, Nintendo has somewhat become a currency-trading house that makes a few games on the side. For the time being, they aren't going anywhere (and the Amiibo range has given their gaming revenues a boost, though this looks set to be temporary).

The longer term future for the company is more clouded. They've been able to sit on the takings from the early part of the Wii generation for a long time, at least in part because they've been paying out very small dividends to shareholders. The longer term risk is that shareholders will start to wonder what exactly is going on with the management of a company that is sat on a huge pile of cash, but not particularly good at earning more of it.

Shareholder revolts are generally rare in Japan (which hasn't really had a true Eisner-moment yet), but there are already signs of discontent coming out of reports of their shareholder conference calls. Their hesitant move into the mobile gaming market is almost certainly a reluctant sop to shareholder pressure.

So what?

[mrun4982]

This kind of thing happens all the time in business. There's no reason to single out Nintendo here. It's very simple. Only talk to the public/media about what you're allowed to talk about. Violating that gets you fired.

Re:That sucks but...

[thinkwaitfast]

Most companies that I've been with, going back as far as the 1980's have had a "don't about the company on anything policy". That includes even saying that you work for xxx because it could imply an endorsement by xxx. It's not a new thing and an easy one to follow.

Re:Well.

[thinkwaitfast]

No they can't. It's very difficult to fire people even in right to work states.

Re:I don't get Nintendo.

[Jiro]

I don't believe for one moment that the 3DS is only popular because of NES-era intellectual property (although it certainly helps), and the 3DS is clearly most of what's keeping them afloat.

Re: It was a stupid judgement call on his part

[Anonymous Coward]

Hence why he said only A FEW were patented, and THE REST were held as trade secrets. Reading!

Re:Well.

[mark-t]

Actually, they can fire you for absolutely anything they want.... they just aren't allowed to actually *say* that it's for one of those small number of reasons. Even if it is, the employer will just make up some bullshit that can't really be disproved, and that will be the end of it.

Nintendo is a weird company...

[__aaclcg7560]

When I became a lead tester at Atari (formerly Infogrames) in 2001, I specialized in Nintendo Gameboy Advanced and GameCube titles for the job security, as none of the other lead testers would touch Nintendo. No wonder. Microsoft and Sony have published standards, but you pretty much have to guess the Nintendo standards as that info was proprietary. It was a constant game of cat-and-mouse in figuring out what Nintendo wanted. I was very good at it. Nine out of the ten titles I tested over three years were Nintendo.

Re:Well.

[mark-t]

It's always extremely easy to fire people who have been relatively recently hired.

Re:The reason Google Hangouts is vacant.

[Technician]

This is the very reason I don't have a Google Hangouts account or post anything on a company internal or external site. Any objections to the content can be a career limiting move. I've seen this way too often. I don't give my employer my nicks or post from work.

Don't want any real life people thinking they can lay a world of hurt in a real way for something posted in the virtual world. Too many micro-managers with power trips out there that have nothing better to do but scrub the company image.

It's not slander if it is true, but that does not stop repercussions if the post is tied to a real life person.

Sigh.

[Anonymous Coward]

freedom of speech (a constitutional right just about everywhere except North Korea)

Show me on the doll what government censored his speech.

Re:Sigh.

[joeblog]

Whatever government's courts don't tell Nintendo to f-off for firing him.

Re:Sigh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you saying that we need better protections for employees?

Considering how things get voted around here, I didn't think I'd ever see that day.

That being said, Pranger is one of the few people in the industry that I can put a face, name, and voice to. He'd be great in public relations for some corporation that needs to show it has some heart. I may not like the action Nintendo took, but I can understand it from several angles.

Hope things work out well for him.

Re:I don't get Nintendo.

[the_nightwulf]

Pretty much all that's holding them afloat is exclusivity for the NES era intellectual property, which they keep re-hashing over and over and over again and their die-hard fans (of which there are a lot) keep buying.

F-Zero, Star Fox, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, Pikmin, and Splatoon are examples of Nintendo IP introduced from the SNES through Wii U era that are not related to NES-era IP.

Pretty much all that's holding Sony / MIcrosoft afloat is SUPER 3D SHOOTER CHAMPIONSHIP EDITION 20XX THAT'S NOTHING LIKE LAST YEAR'S VERSION. I don't have any interest in Sony products (I trust I don't need to rehash Sony's shitty anti-consumer policies and products for the audience) but I did buy an Xbox 360 and didn't find much to play that wasn't a sports game or FPS. It collects dust and I'm not finding any attraction to an Xbone, while the Wii U gets frequent use for Smash Bros, Mario Kart, and Splatoon. Hard to understand the hate for Nintendo's "re-hashing" when it's prevalent from every manufacturer, and Nintendo's are actually good.

Re: It was a stupid judgement call on his part

[Anonymous Coward]

I filed a bunch of patents

Maybe you meant you wrote a bunch of patents but didn't file all of them?

The other side of the story.

[westlake]

One of the worst examples was the kids school that Disney sued. Disney falsely claimed that by giving away or by charging minimal values, it opened them up to law suits from other locations demanding the same treatment. After it happened, Universal gave that school - for free - the use of their characters - Yogi Bear, Scooby Doo, Flintstones, etc. That happened in 1989.

Disney demanded that the unauthorized 5-foot-high painted figures of Disney characters on the walls of Very Important Babies Daycare, Good Godmother Daycare, and Temple Messianique (all in Hallandale, Florida) be removed for valid business reasons: infringements must be fought in order to keep trademarks intact; other Disney character licensees would have grounds to object if Disney provided inexpensive (or free) licenses to the centers (which are, after all, profit-making enterprises); and the use of Disney characters falsely suggested Disney's affiliation with the day care facilities.

Universal, still smarting from the early opening of Disney's studio-themed park... saw in the day care controversy a way to seize some publicity for themselves and give Disney a bad name in Florida as part of the bargain. Accordingly, Universal Studios Florida and Hanna-Barbera Productions offered the centers the use of characters from their own cartoons, such as Scooby-Doo, the Flintstones, the Jetsons, and Yogi Bear.

Daycare Center Murals

This was a clever publicity stunt for Universal, but I don't think it has ever shown that Universal really allowed their characters to be used without a license.

The day care centers in question all appear to be defunct. Hallandale, FL Child Care Centers

This is what happens when you aren't paying attention to the licensing of your product: Flintstones Bedrock City in Arizona on Sale for $2 Million, Brontosaurus Included

Because I love quirky roadside attractions, I hope someone does make this place nice again. If not, $5 is a fair price for some rabbit hunting.

I dunno, a lot of us natives love the creepy charm. I've only been once, but would love to go again were there less risk of tetanus.

Re:The other side of the story.

[AK Marc]

: infringements must be fought in order to keep trademarks intact;

Nope. That's a misconception furthered by the markholders who are idiots, as being an idiot is easier than not.

Re:The other side of the story.

[Raenex]

https://encrypted.google.com/s...

Re:The other side of the story.

[AK Marc]

So your assertion is that the only way to defend a trademark is to "fight" it with takedowns for anything and everything? That would make you one of the idiots I was talking about.

Re:The other side of the story.

[Raenex]

I didn't say "takedowns for anything and everything". However, given the case law, I can see why that is the default position. Losing your trademark is a real possibility.

Re:Well.

[AK Marc]

NDA is usually between groups sharing trade secrets. NDA would be a NDC, not an NDA for an employee. You wouldn't have a stand-alone Non-Disclosure Agreement, but a Non-Disclosure Clause in the Employment Agreement.

Re:Well.

[AuMatar]

Only because company policy makes it so. If they want to fire you no reason given right now- they can. Many companies have policies they follow to CYA in case of lawsuits, as juries tend to be sympathetic to employees. But just firing you requires nothing more than marching you out of the office and sending you any accumulated pay.

Re:Well.

[farble1670]

No they can't. It's very difficult to fire people even in right to work states.

well, whatever. firing is so 1980. people don't have to be "fired" to get put out of a job. the company just claims a "restructuring" or a "reduction in force" and it's done. big tech companies do this regularly to clear out the bottom feeders.

Nerd support boycott

[Jharish]

I'd suggest boycotting Nintendo but they stopped making anything that interested me in 1995 so I haven't really bought anything from them in 20 years.

I love that people offer insight into things that many gamer benefit from and I often wondered about when I was playing games like Chrono Trigger and wondering how many people were involved in the way Magus talked in English.

I hate that companies that essentially exist because of the fans punish the fans.

Here's how it looks to a company ...

[farble1670]

They put time, resources, and $ into setting up a process. Now you are just giving that away to the world. Even if we all recognize it as nothing special, that's not how the company sees it. IMHO, this thinking is especially prevalent in Asian cultures. They aren't into the whole OSS way of thinking. Not making any value judgement on that, just saying.

In any big company, there's very little room for "Oh Joe's a good guy, give him a break". Some VP heard about it and that's it. Goes back to Asian cultures as well. You don't question the boss.

Firing someone what gives?

[no-body]

Seems some kind of power trip of people "in charge" often done due to the need of looking good.
 
What does it to the person getting fired? Anything learned from it, getting a chance to do better?
  No such thing. Is it not a failure of the system in which this happen and the emergency solution is to terminate a person in a most humiliating way: Here is a cardboard box, pack your things and leave, you have no value!
 
  All looking good and satisfying to the outside s/he got fired - right so, s/he deserves it.
 
  Another way may be to use a system of issuing a warning and making the person understand and agree what happened was not OK, should be changed and if things are not changed, then some other measures may need to be taken.
 
  I can't help but seeing some kind of lynch mentality in those publizised people firing habits.

Re:I don't get Nintendo.

[Vyse of Arcadia]

Pretty much all that's holding them afloat is exclusivity for the NES era intellectual property

I dunno about that. It's still an older property at this point, but Nintendo is making plenty on Super Smash Bros. And while it's probably not churning out oodles of profit (yet,) Splatoon has a lot of promise as a brand spanking new IP.

The first rule

[yorgasor]

The first rule of localization procedures is that you don't talk about localization procedures!

Re: He takes responsibility for it being his own f

[Chewbacon]

A depressing comment to read. These are things I worry about, losing the income that makes much of the lifestyle I provide my family, when I disagree with my superiors. I have clinical licensure, ethics and people's lives to worry about compared to Benjamins my bosses count, so I have valid disagreements but they mean diddly when you're replaceable.

Naming on resume

[tepples]

That includes even saying that you work for xxx because it could imply an endorsement by xxx. It's not a new thing and an easy one to follow.

If taken strictly, this would preclude even naming your past employers on your resume. Why is it desirable that future employers lack knowledge of a candidate's experience?

Re:Naming on resume

[sound vision]

It may make it harder to jump ship.

In a way, Nintendo was lenient

[tepples]

In a way, Nintendo was lenient by not both firing and suing. Yet.

The fourth console

[tepples]

Hard to understand the hate for Nintendo's "re-hashing" when it's prevalent from every manufacturer

Is lack of new settings also prevalent on PC?

Re:He takes responsibility for it being his own fa

[hcs_$reboot]

I'm so sorry to everyone. I've failed you. You believed in me and supported me and trusted me and I've failed you. I've failed me.

Looks like after working a long time with the Japanese, the guy handles guilt the way the Japanese do.

Re:The reason Google Hangouts is vacant.

[shortscruffydave]

I wonder how long you could repeat that cycle? I reckon that once your CV has accumulated a few entries in the "Previous Experience" section stating that you left that employment because you were sacked for gross misconduct (which would be the fate to befall me if I discussed company details outside of work) then the offers of work might dry up as you would be seen as a bit of a liability

Re:It was a stupid judgement call on his part

[gnupun]

Trade secrets == IP == the reason the company is making the money and not some competitor. Giving away secrets == donating a large chunk of earnings every year.

Re:That sucks but...

[tepples]

Most companies that I've been with, going back as far as the 1980's have had a "don't about the company on anything policy". That includes even saying that you work for xxx because it could imply an endorsement by xxx.

I wonder if this policy could be turned into a question for The Workplace Stack Exchange. Do you have a citation for this policy, or do reliable citations for this not exist because they would also violate confidentiality?

Re:Well.

[bobbied]

Many corporations also have illegal "all you do outside of work is ours" clauses too.

So? What exactly are you trying to say? Surely corporations are allowed to protect their intellectual property from disclosure by putting their employees under contract to protect it?

It's funny since

[jwymanm]

you can already tell how disciplined and closed down the entire process really is by the fact popular games people really want over in America do not ever make their way despite massive fan bases. Then this happens and it just reinforces that entire image. Corporate world for the win?