Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
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:
Building Better Software
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.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is a common and reasonable policy.
Evolution: love it or leave it
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.
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.
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.
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.