Slashdot Mirror


A Broke Fan Owes $5,400 For Pokemon-Themed Party Posters

Jason Koebler writes: A fan has been ordered by a Washington judge to pay the Pokémon Company International $5,400 for copyright infringement after attempting to throw a Pokemon-themed party earlier this summer. Even though he canceled the free event, the Pokemon Company successfully sued Ramar Larkin Jones, for using an image of Pikachu to promote the Unofficial PAX Pokemon Kickoff Party.

134 of 212 comments (clear)

  1. Is it a good game? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've been thinking of buying a 3DS for when I travel...

    1. Re:Is it a good game? by ruir · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What is it wrong with you? Boycott the bastards.

    2. Re: Is it a good game? by Jiro · · Score: 2

      You don't actually need the Gateway. Modern custom firmware runs (on the same firmware that a Gateway will run on) without needing anything except possibly a cheap DS flash card or a place to host web files.

    3. Re:Is it a good game? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I've had my most enjoyable Pokemon play on a GameBoy Advance SP with Pokeman Emerald. They've really never put out a Pokemon game as good as Emerald ever since. The extra stuff that came after Emerald (aside from the additional Pokemon) is mostly just croft. (No, I am not interested in different clothing for my human player in Pokemon.) Watch out for counterfeit Emerald carts; they don't have the entire game, they just ripped part of it.

    4. Re: Is it a good game? by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      Why? The law is pretty cut and dry on this, and the copyright holders are merely protecting their rights. $5400 is hardly anything at all compared to the bullshit from the MPAA and RIAA.

      The way copyright works, the holders are just about forced into suing over every little transgression.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    5. Re: Is it a good game? by matunos · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of trademark law. You don't lose a copyright automatically for failing to sue over it.

    6. Re: Is it a good game? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

      The $5400 consists of a $400 filing fee and $5000 lawyer bills. The copyright holders are getting NOTHING. It's a virtual certainty that the lawyers persuaded the copyright holders to sue, just so that the lawyers could have a nice payday.

      If the GP truly wants justice out of this, find the lawyer's car and fill it with manure.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    7. Re: Is it a good game? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      You don't lose the copyright, but lax enforcement may affect damages awarded in later cases.

    8. Re: Is it a good game? by St.Creed · · Score: 3, Informative

      True. If we didn't fine people who put up pokemon posters, we'd rapidly slide into anarchy!

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    9. Re: Is it a good game? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Trademark law you need to defend it or you could lose it. The Pokemon trademark is very valuable.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  2. If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by ldobehardcore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans, I shudder to think of how they treat their enemies and competitors. What a fucking shitty thing to do. These people love Pokemon enough to have a big fun party kicking of PAX, and all Nintendo cares about is extracting it's fucking pound of flesh and in the process looking like a big, wobbly, flaccid dildo. In other words: Go fuck yourselves Nintendo, if you can't treat your fans well, then you deserve no fans. You bunch of litigious morons.

    --
    Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
    1. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ketchum's response should not be to wimp out by trying to GoFundMe the ransom. Blare the whole thing on social media, concentrating on Pokémon fan sites, with the aim of turning fans off as much as possible. So long as he doesn't make anything up, there is no possibility of additional suits for such activity (this isn't Britain!). Make them wish they had never tried to pull such a tactic.

    2. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nintendo has a long history of treating its fans with contempt. Take for example how it issues DMCA notices to anybody who posts a video showing themselves playing their games. Honestly I stopped giving a shit about Nintendo after the SNES because as of the N64 and onward they basically gave the middle finger to both the developers and fans of third party titles of their systems. If they ever go belly up, I'd just say good riddance.

    3. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Informative

      If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans

      Ramar Larkin Jones isn't a "fan" - he's a event organizer who was running a Pokemon themed event for which he was selling tickets. The selling tickets parts got left out of the linked article somehow - I wonder why. (Actually, I don't need to wonder - the article is slanted all to hell and back.)

    4. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hate to be a dick, but you DID charge admission using another company's IP.

      Whoever posted that is a dick. According to the Gofundme page, he only charged $2, which was intended to cover the cost of prizes for the cosplay contest. No huge profit involved.

      To the parent poster: you also are a dick, for posting this drivel, which misrepresents the situation.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    5. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Gryle · · Score: 4, Informative

      The fan launched the GoFundMe page because the litigants are insisting on a lump-sum payment. From ArsTechnica "Jones even offered to pay the full $4,000 over the course of a year, but Pokémon's lawyers from the firm of Davis Wright Tremaine wouldn't budge on the deadline."

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    6. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Gryle · · Score: 5, Informative

      According to ArsTechnica, tickets were $2.00 each and covered the expenses. This wasn't a for-profit endeavor. Now, as Jones is an event organizer, he may have been using this party as something to add to his resume.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    7. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by The+Rizz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Defending your trademark" does not mean "suing anyone who doesn't pay you to use it". As long as there's no brand confusion being caused it doesn't need to be defended. As per the Wikipedia article: "It is not necessary for a trademark owner to take enforcement action against all infringement if it can be shown that the owner perceived the infringement to be minor and inconsequential."

      Arguably, you can even let infringement go in many larger instances as long as they're not believed to cause brand confusion. Look at Star Wars - George Lucas has allowed fan-made works to do a helluvalot that would get them sued by just about any other IP-based company out there. He's even commented on fan works, showing that he is quite aware of them. None of this permissiveness with his trademarks has ever led to him coming even close to losing the brand.

    8. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by mrbester · · Score: 1

      So they want to bankrupt him which then buggers up his credit rating for years so he won't be able to get a loan, mortgage, even a mobile phone contract. Fuck you, Davis Wright Tremaine.

      Are their offices "gun free zones"?

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    9. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by sexconker · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's means it is.

      Not always. It's been fun proving you wrong.

    10. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      You need to look into trademark law.

      You need to ask DeVry for a refund on that JD course.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 2

      Defending a trademark can be as simple as asking nicely to stop using it. A formal cease-and-desist letter will work as well. You don't need to sue for damages to defend it if the abuser responds to the requests to stop.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    12. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      So long as he doesn't make anything up, there is no possibility of additional suits for such activity (this isn't Britain!).

      I don't have the benefit of your immense legal education, so please explain why that makes a difference.

      Some citations would be nice.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    13. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      There's no such thing as intellectual property. There's nothing to defend.

    14. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It really doesn't matter. Once you start collecting money, the whole nature of the thing changes. If he wanted to pass the hat and beg for donations he could probably have got away with that, but actually charging admission is another thing. Having a pot for the costume contest prize would probably have been acceptable as well.

      The truth is that Nintendo has always aggressively defended their trademarks, often to the detriment of their fans, to the extent that it doesn't make sense to be one because why should you worship something which abuses you? Which reminds me of another subject... I guess you could say these people belong to the church of Mario. Suckers.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by packrat0x · · Score: 1

      Somehow, I think the respondent did not take threats of litigation seriously. It's far better to mollify the petitioner.
      Perhaps he should have done an Ask Slashdot before a lawsuit was filed?

      --
      227-3517
    16. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1

      So long as he doesn't make anything up, there is no possibility of additional suits for such activity (this isn't Britain!).

      I don't have the benefit of your immense legal education, so please explain why that makes a difference.

      Some citations would be nice.

      Come on! This is /.! Where any half-wit suddenly becomes an expert in law, philosophy, finance, science, history, and any other subject under the sun. It's kind of like an on-line Rush Limbaugh program.

    17. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by lpevey · · Score: 4, Informative

      Truth of a statement is a valid legal defense against libel accusations in the U.S. And many other Western countries, but not in the UK. That is what the poster was referencing.

    18. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Besides, if crap behaviour could put a games hurt a company then EA would have been out of business a long time ago.

    19. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Sqr(twg) · · Score: 2

      Yes, but a cease-and-desist would have been sufficient for defending the trademark.

    20. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by fisted · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Always. Good try, though.

      So you think what GP say was "It is been fun proving your wrong."?

    21. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by KGIII · · Score: 5, Funny

      My wife and I divorced and my kids came to live with me after they figured out that I had the coolest toys. My son was into these things. He was still fairly young at the time. For a while I had him convinced that they got the name for the show from that period when you sit on the toilet and aren't actually able to go. He was convinced it was a "peek-a-pooh."

      Yes, yes he does sometimes abhor my very existence but I don't regret it one bit. I am still waiting for the right time. for my daughter to be around a few of her friends, so that I can ask her to explain what "twerking" is.

      This is my parental obligation. They're both adults now but I still have my job to do. I can't wait until they have children. I'm going to buy them each a drum kit and spoil them beyond belief. That part is not my obligation. That part is purely revenge. If you have kids, you might understand.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    22. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      For profit or not, once you start accepting money and running it through a business... you've crossed a line. It's no longer just a "fan party". (IMO of course.)

    23. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter money is exchanged for a promotional event using other people's IP

      Doesn't matter how you feel, that's pretty cut n dry in the eyes of the law and if you don't actively protect your IP when something real happens you loose basis of compliant

    24. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Except Nintendo is practically the only game developer that does this. Search for "let's play" videos on youtube; there are TONS of them, from current generation games no less. If you upload a let's play for a nintendo game, they'll DMCA you and either demand you insert ads and they keep all of its revenue, or you have to remove it completely.

      http://www.gamesindustry.biz/a...

      If you want Nintendo to share the ad revenue, you have to delete all of your videos of non-Nintendo games from youtube:

      http://recode.net/2015/02/04/n...

      (Disclaimer: I don't watch pewdiepie.)

    25. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

      Please $5400 of that $400 is the filing fee. This guy is incredibly lucky. $5400 in a copyright case is basically $0 for the actual IP holder, since the majority of that left over $5000 will be going to the lawyers. If anything, this is what a slap on the wrist looks like. Copyright cases can quickly escalate into six digits given enough lawyer. Anyone who believes that a paltry $5k is worthy of some massive corp rage is totally missing the whole point that tons of other folks who have cried for fair copyright have been trying to make. $5k is more than a fair amount for clear infringement.

    26. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Asserting isn't a defense. Proving beyond doubt is. This can sometimes be very difficult to do - if you write that Dr Quack has been promoting a cancer treatment does doesn't actually work and he sues you for libel, you then need to provide absolute proof that his treatment really does not work - and if it hasn't been subjected to proper scientific study, how are you supposed to do that?

    27. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Holy shit you dummmmmmm

    28. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      They could have phoned him, explained he needed to ask permission and told him he'd get it if he just applied nicely (and maybe drop the ticket fee). That would have served the same purpose of defending their IP.

      But nooo... they had to litigate. They're dicks. And so is anyone who defends this as something that's right and proper.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    29. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      In Brittain, "telling the truth" is not an absolute defense in a defamation lawsuit. In the USA, it is.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    30. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Since my kid has started playing a lot of games because of "Let's play" youtube videos (mostly from Pewdiepie but also a lot of others nowadays), this is like Nintendo taking a revolver, filling 5 out of 6 chambers with live ammo, and saying "let's see what happens!".

      If I had shares, I'd sell them fast. There isn't going to be much value left in them a few years from now.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    31. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by lgw · · Score: 2

      Doesn't matter how you feel, that's pretty cut n dry in the eyes of the law

      Fucking stupid laws that hurt society should be changed. Punishing stupid fan-hating companies that take advantage of such nonsense is a good start. Just because somethings technically legal, doesn't mean you're not a total dick for doing it.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    32. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I sat here for about five minutes trying to process that. I currently have a guest and we're debating your motive. All we can figure out is that you are probably on the left wing, probably extreme left wing, and trying (somehow?) to make the right look bad with a bunch of assumptions.

      She says I shouldn't bother to reply and so I have no spent like another half hour of my time explaining why it's sometimes fun to feed the trolls. After all, trolling is a art. For the sake of brevity, I'll spare you the details of the conversation.

      However, we've decided that the reasonable, and measured, response is to reply to let you know that your point is well taken and I'll certainly give everything you said due consideration as, I'm sure, will my children. I'm sure you absolutely understand the intricacies of our relationships, how the future will develop, and are more than qualified to opine on such and so, frankly, I'm a bit curious as to how I can repay you for your words of wisdom.

      Anyhow, we have Chinese on the way. She's a local and tells me the food is good. Then we're going to shuffle off and watch a movie. However, I will - and this is a promise, check back to see if you've replied with any more pearls of wisdom, insight, and recommendations. Really, do I send you a check or something? If, for no other reason, thanks for the chuckles and giving us an inspiring and good topic for conversation.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    33. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Hate to be a dick, but you DID charge admission using another company's IP.

      But did he charge admission for the right to experience another company's IP? People didn't pay $2 apiece to see the posters. They paid $2 apiece to go to the party. So he didn't charge money for their IP in any meaningful sense. There's very little difference between this and suing some kid for printing out a picture of their IP and hanging it on his/her bedroom door.... It is, pedantically, a copyright violation, but it isn't the sort of way legitimate businesses behave. It's the way you'd expect a company trying to milk every last buck out of a dying franchise would behave.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    34. Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Under US law, you can't be sued for libel if you stick to the truth. This is why deep-pocket libel plaintiffs in cases of international exposure will take the trouble to file in London, where it is effectively illegal to rake muck about a famous person if he/she decides to make a case of it.

    35. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      do you know how much of a butthurt fanboi you sound like right now

      this company has one simple goal, extract cash from as many peoples hands as possible while giving them absolutely worthless paper cards and trinket toys in exchance

    36. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by znrt · · Score: 1

      Lawyers and lawmakers disagree with you and since they have money and power and you obviously do not, I'd say you're wrong and your opinion irrelevant.

      i'd say he is right and his opinion is irrelevant (vs the global brainwash promoted by the intellectual property mafia)

    37. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      They definitely win in the end but I am obligated to score as many points as I can while the getting is good. Tradition and all that.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    38. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Either that or they could litigate to prove their point, then ask for a judgment of $1 or something. That would encourage others to ask permission before using their trademarks, but show that "really it's just about asking permission, not money."

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    39. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Truth of a statement is a valid legal defense against libel accusations in the U.S. And many other Western countries, but not in the UK.

      (1)It is a defence to an action for defamation for the defendant to show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true.

      You opened the door, you had a good look, and you still walked into it. Perhaps in future you could do some research (I asked for citations, did I not?) instead of repeating shit you heard the bigger kids saying.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  3. Hahahahahahaha by Jailbrekr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Gotta catch them all!

    --
    Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
    1. Re:Hahahahahahaha by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      I don't even follow Pokemon and I found that joke hilarious!

  4. Business by darkain · · Score: 5, Informative

    The big piece of information that always gets neglected in these articles is that they didn't sue because he was throwing a party, but because he runs a business which hosts party events and then used Pokémon to promote such an event. Here is the company's trashy Facebook page. "Fans" and "Businesses" are NOT the same thing. https://www.facebook.com/Rucku...

    1. Re:Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You don't have to charge money for something to be considered commercial. Facebook is free, but if they started putting Pokemon all over the page they would get sued.

    2. Re:Business by ldobehardcore · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know the law, and what you say is true. What I'm saying is that it's not particularly egregious and super fucking petty of Pokemon Int'l to sue for something so piddly, and it makes them look like pathetic money-grubbers who can't just sit back and enjoy their already massive popularity. It'd be better for them to just not fucking sue people and be liked, rather than sue people and make themselves look like acquisitive morons.

      --
      Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
    3. Re:Business by sims+2 · · Score: 2

      /. left the broken scribd link In from firehose for some reason.
      Pokemon is owned by Nintendo which explains a lot.
      The guy has setup a go fund me page to try to pay off Nin- I mean Pokemon. The comments so far aren't very nice;

      Here's one for example:
      "David Rustles 2 hours ago Not only were you illegally hosting an event, but you were charging for tickets and serving alcohol. TPC is completely in the right and you deserve everything that happened."

      And here's a link to the gofundme in question https://www.gofundme.com/ng5f2...

      Should be interesting to see where this goes.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    4. Re:Business by ldobehardcore · · Score: 2

      That never happens. And also, you're confusing copyright with trademark. You don't lose copyright if you don't defend it. Otherwise CreativeCommons wouldn't exist. Trademark on the other hand does require active defense. I haven't read the exact details, but if they're suing for copyright it's completely unnecessary and at their discretion. It's something they chose to do. If they're suing for trademark, then they kind of have to.

      --
      Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
    5. Re:Business by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      What I'm saying is that it's not particularly egregious and super fucking petty of Pokemon Int'l to sue for something so piddly

      That word does not mean what you think it does.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Business by Gryle · · Score: 2

      The event wasn't free. Tickets were $2 each to cover expenses. I feel for the guy, but let's make sure we're spreading accurate information.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    7. Re:Business by The+Rizz · · Score: 1

      if you know the law then you should also know that if a company doesn't proactively protect its copyrights, they risk it being classified as abandoned and losing it to the public domain.

      Incorrect. First off, you cannot lose copyright for not defending it - that's trademarks. Secondly, you are not required to "proactively protect" your trademark against all infringement in order to risk losing it; only against major infringements. In most cases, major infringements are meant to mean something that would cause confusion as to which company actually owns the trademarks. Unless you're arguing that people would have thought Ramar Larkin Jones was the actual owner of Pokemon because he was throwing a party, then the mark would never be in jeopardy from this use.

    8. Re:Business by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I read that as, "What I'm saying is that [Jones' actions were] not particularly egregious and [it was] super fucking petty of Pokemon Int'l to sue for something so piddly".

      But of course it'd be better if people would take the time and effort to ensure that their words accurately reflect what they're trying to say.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    9. Re:Business by mrbester · · Score: 1

      Oh noes! He was going to have *alcohol* at this party? What a monster.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    10. Re:Business by konohitowa · · Score: 1

      You missed the point completely. Alcohol was mentioned because, in addition to the $2 cover charge, they were making money selling drinks.

    11. Re:Business by sjames · · Score: 3, Informative

      If they're suing for trademark, then they kind of have to.

      Actually, they don't, that's a myth created by assholes that don't want to look like assholes. Other valid defenses of the mark include sending a letter granting a one time only limited license and cautioning the person not to do it again, offering a license for $1, granting a revocable continuing license, etc.

    12. Re:Business by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      On the other hand Pokemon Company didn't and couldn't lose any money or suffer any other kind of harm due to that event so this lawsuit is abuse of law. For sure this party couldn't erode brand image or lead to consumer confusion, which the company admitted by not filing a trademark suit and abusing copyright instead.

    13. Re:Business by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Americans are ridiculously prissy about alcohol, but I see the point here.

      If you were in charge of a brand aimed at children would you want that association?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    14. Re:Business by mrbester · · Score: 1

      And you missed the point. If the whining turd had said "serving drinks" then they wouldn't have come across as a whining turd, just a dick. They specifically mentioned alcohol in the puritanical way tosspots do when speaking about parties organised for adults that have a "childish" element such as a game as a theme.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    15. Re:Business by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      However this party was unrelated to PAX.

      That must be why it's the sixth word on the poster and the second in large type. Just after "poke'mon" [sic].

      http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    16. Re:Business by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      Pokemon Int'l shouldn't. They should enjoy the free publicity

      The entire point of setting up Pokemon Company International was to monetize use of Pokemon imagery. The business model is a lot like Angry Birds: sure, there's a video game involved, but the big profits come from toys and apparel. Someone setting up a party with Pokemon imagery is exactly where PCI aims to generate profit. You don't want "free publicity" from a guy like that, you want payment of licensing fees.

    17. Re:Business by ldobehardcore · · Score: 1

      You interpreted it correctly. Hey man, I just clocked out of work on a Friday. So, could you cut me just a little slack. I'm usually a grammar nazi, but honestly, I'm having trouble getting my eyeballs to focus.

      --
      Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
    18. Re:Business by ldobehardcore · · Score: 1

      The fourth word on that poster is "UNOFFICIAL". That's how you know it isn't actually related to PAX in any official capacity. Funny how the prefix "un" negates your presumption.

      --
      Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
    19. Re:Business by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Didn't detect any grammatical errors as such, just a bit of confusion in the pronoun/antecedent department.

      But, hey, it's the weekend, and I'm not perfect, either.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    20. Re:Business by ldobehardcore · · Score: 1

      That's why I said "kind of". They only have to sue if the guy doing the infringement won't play ball at all, and if the guy doing the infringement causes confusion about who owns and endorses the brand. In this circumstance the wording on the promotional material all includes the language "unofficial" preceding the statements that it's a PAX kickoff party and that it's pokemon themed. Pokemon International could have chosen to:

      Overlook it
      Contact the promoter asking for a different wording on promotional material with an emphasis on the fact that it wasn't endorsed by Nintendo.
      Contact the promoter asking them to pay a nominal one-time fee, in addition to the clarification.
      Contact the promoter asking them to join in a program for minor users of the trademark and become some kind of partner to the licensing scheme, in addition to the aforementioned steps.
      Contact the promoter asking them to cease and desist (possibly even with a legal threat)

      All acceptable actions, with graduated response built in. All more even handed than what Pokemon International did. And it would have likely resulted in making them look diplomatic at best, and unnoticed at worst.

      Pokemon International and Nintendo are managed by morons.

      --
      Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
    21. Re:Business by lgw · · Score: 1

      Pokémon was a brand aimed at children, what, 20 years ago? Those kids done growed up. It's an adult thing as much as anything these days, just like most of gaming, superheroes, and so on.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    22. Re:Business by konohitowa · · Score: 1

      Your eloquent discourse and calm demeanor have swayed me to your side.

      Nah. Just kidding. You got your panties all in a wad because you chose to be offended by a factual statement. Now you're just trying to justify it.

    23. Re:Business by mrbester · · Score: 1

      You expect me to RTFA? You must be new here...

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  5. Marketing 101 by Ironlenny · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Don't sue your fans!

    --
    There is a system for subverting the system and you should use that system!
    1. Re:Marketing 101 by TWX · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hahahahaha!

      Oh, wait... you're serious?

      As long as there are MBAs looking how to squeeze the last dime out of every potential customer and there are lawyers concerned about the loss of trademark through failure to defend that trademark there will be these kinds of lawsuits.

      Quite honestly, I'm amazed that armies of lawyers haven't descended upon ComiCons and other fandom gatherings to sue the shit out of all of the artists and merchants selling unlicensed comic book derivative works. You wander around the dealers' rooms at the big cons and there are booths upon booths of artists with their own takes on Phoenix or The Hulk or Supergirl or any other hot comic book character of the moment. Based on current law I'm amazed that the continued creation of these unlicensed derivative works hasn't given the trademark holders panic that they could lose control over their characters. Indeed, it appears that they already have lost control over them, it simply hasn't been declared through trial yet.

      Given what lawyers cost, I'm really surprised that the judgement against him is as small as it is. From the lawyers' perspective this is chump-change even if it would bankrupt half the households in the country to suddenly owe $5400.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Marketing 101 by freeze128 · · Score: 2

      Well, It's going to be a really interesting Halloween....

    3. Re:Marketing 101 by TWX · · Score: 1

      You're right, an MBA is someone that gets into corporate management and starts seeing employees as liabilities because of the salaries they command and starts seeing the fandom base as lost-revenue because the company isn't squeezing every list bit of money out of them, even though arguably those customers have already bought far more through their fandom interests than they ever would have bought otherwise. The MBAs then provide instructions to the corporate lawyers.

      Smart franchises that aren't run by only greedy assholes actually consider how much profit the fans have provided and figure out how to allow those fans some license to keep them as fans. The various owners of Star Trek throughout the years have generally been fairly good about it so long as clubs don't start manufacturing product for general sale. Many of the car companies have means for clubs to submit for formal permission to use official logos, brand names, and marques. It's not impossible for a company to maintain some control over trademark but still allow fandom to use and celebrate what they're fanatical about.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re:Marketing 101 by TWX · · Score: 1

      Third-party costumes generally lack the actual logos and are not sold by-name as the characters they're ripping off. People making costumes for themselves are generally not pursued because it's for personal use, but Disney has a longstanding policy of not letting adults into the parks that are wearing detailed Disney character costumes, probably in part to prevent confusion for actual staff and any liability that could be associated with a visitor misbehaving while dressed as that staff. I am a little surprised that there haven't been more cases where paid cosplayers haven't had to seek permission and probably pay for license to professionally appear in costume, similar to the artists that make money off of derivative works.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    5. Re:Marketing 101 by Dracolytch · · Score: 1

      So, you've kind of hit on the answer to your own quandary:

      The reasons they don't sue all of these artists is because a) Lawyers are expensive, and b) these artists have little/no money. You can sue, but it's lose/lose proposition because you can't collect.

      ~D

      --
      This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
  6. Re:"First, I'd like to thank...." by jargonburn · · Score: 1

    No, no, you should be safe...you spelled "Pokémon" wrong :-D

  7. A new franchise is born: by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Brokemon

    1. Re:A new franchise is born: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Gotta sue 'em all..."

  8. Enjoy the $5400 It will cost you morein Xmas sales by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Starting with me not buying Pokemon for nephews and nieces.

  9. Re:A more important question is... by elvesrus · · Score: 3

    If you think that is bad take a look at bronies.

  10. Re:A more important question is... by Gryle · · Score: 1

    Because they enjoy the game and part of the joy of being an adult is deciding how you want to spend your time?

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  11. Re:People say RMS is nuts by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Well? When it comes to copyable media we do get to use it for free for near enough all eternity. The only exception is a relatively short time near the beginning.

    Yes pedants - 95 years is a relatively short time compared to the billions of years we expect the universe to exist.

  12. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Because they enjoy the game

    More specifically, some things you grow out of because you grow into other, more mature, interests.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  13. Re:People say RMS is nuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Get real, the next time Mickey Mouse is about to expire, copyright will be extended again. Are you that naive you believe congress won't pass infinity-1 sooner or later? Nothing will come into the public domain ever again. Never. Get it?

  14. Re:Utterly wrong summary by Iamthecheese · · Score: 1

    >Honestly, its probably him you should be hating on and Pokemon International who merely hired his firm.

    Lie down with dogs...

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  15. Amount of claim is for legal fees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The article doesn't make it clear, but Pokemon Company International have not claimed any money for the breach of the copyright. In the lawyer's letter, the money claimed is purely for court fees and attorney costs.

    It's unusual for this type of claim to go to court, as they are almost invariably settled out of court. I'd guess that he got the C&D letter from the lawyers, and was offered an out of court settlement to pay for the lawyers fees accrued at that time. He then decided to take it to court, where he had no meaningful defence, and served only to rack up more lawyers fees and the court fees.

    1. Re:Amount of claim is for legal fees by sudon't · · Score: 1

      I love it. "We decided to hire a lawyer, now you must pay for it." Nevermind that they could've simply picked up the phone and asked the dude to take down the posters.

      Here's what I wonder: Why not simply not pay them? Even if they went to court and won, it's usually impossible to enforce this kind of stuff.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

  16. Re:People say RMS is nuts by MacTO · · Score: 1

    Oddly enough, RMS depends upon the very same copyright laws in order to validate the GPL. Without those laws, so that everything would be in the public domain, people would be able to get anything and everything free for all eternity. On the other hand, they would lose some of the rights that the GPL grants. That includes access to the source code. That would be a world in which someone could publish a program with source code, then a third party could modify the source code and only ship binaries. In other words, the modified sources would more-or-less be treated as a trade secret.

    Copyright can be used for good or for ill. Thankfully there are some people like RMS who do the former.

  17. What about the alcohol ... by MacTO · · Score: 1

    The organizer seems to be focussing on ticket sales as his source of revenue, but there is also mention of serving themed shots and drinks. Alcohol is expensive and surely he was not giving that away for free. It can also be a good revenue generator. I wonder how that fits into how much revenue he would have, and whether it would end up being profitable?

    (Note: I'm not saying that this would be a hugely profitable event because of those drinks. I am suggesting that there are important details being left out, details which mean that this is more than a simple fandom party.)

  18. Professional event organizer abuses Pokemon IP by Kjella · · Score: 1

    That would be a more appropriate headline. The $2 admission their company charges is basically the cover charge to get into a party with sale of alcoholic beverages. Does this sound like your typical fan gathering?:

    Defendants boast that the "5th Annual Unofficial Pokemon PAX Kickoff Party" will feature among other things, "Pokemon themed shots and drinks - Smash Bros. Tournament with cash prize - Dancing - Giveaways - Cosplay Contest and more," and an "AMAZIN POKEMON MASHUP."

    This sounds like a typical commercial "theme night" that bars and clubs might have, only instead of using a generic unprotected theme like Halloween they made a Pokemon party. Not surprised their lawyers got angry, They managed to put a very good media spin on it though, clearly they as event organizers know how to get media attention and manipulate it. I hope they get to pay every dollar.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  19. Re:A more important question is... by Gryle · · Score: 1

    And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?
    For the record, I don't play Pokemon and was never really that into it. I get irritated at folks who look down their noses at other folks' hobbies because it's "not something adults do". Who made you arbiter of what's appropriate?

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  20. Lawyers need to be outlawed. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Because old lawyers become judges... and it perpetuates the "good ol boy" club.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  21. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Fuck you, bootlicker. At this rate, corporations will own all culture within the next 30 years and you won't be able to blow your nose unless it's on government sanctioned, di$ney branded tissue that you had to pay $2 a piece for.

  22. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?

    Anything who's second-most identifiable character isn't a pre-teen (Ash Ketchum).

    Who made you arbiter of what's appropriate?

    My opinion is my own, and I have the right to write it. Your opinion is your own, and you have the right to ignore it.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  23. Bankrupcy by borcharc · · Score: 1

    Chapter 7 bankruptcy can be done for a few hundred bucks and has the added benefit of burning your credit cards in the process.

  24. Re:A more important question is... by alexgieg · · Score: 2

    And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?

    Sports, evidently. Sporting is what adults do. Pokemon video-gaming, bad. Football video-gaming, good. What? Children also play football video-games? Oh, but that's just them wanting to grow up, so it's fine!

    Also, cosplaying. True adults don't cosplay. I mean, they don't cosplay Pokemon team's uniforms. Hockey team uniforms, now, those are fine to cosplay.

    Also, let's not forget that only children write Pokemon games. Adults never do that. And those rare that do, they hate every single minute of their day. They could all be adulting, and instead they're childring. That's just plain evil! They could be cosplaying their sporting team, and by means of that showing all their grown up adulting, but no, they're forced to be childring. Oh, how they suffer! I'm sad for them. So, so many sporting stuff they could be doing. Sad. :(

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  25. Re:A more important question is... by alexgieg · · Score: 1

    More specifically, some things you grow out of because you grow into other, more mature, interests.

    "Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -- C.S. Lewis

    Grow up.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  26. What are "reasonable" legal fees? by Hutz · · Score: 1

    I'm finding it hard to arrive at $5,000 in costs unless it's just a round number pulled out of a hat.

    Can anyone detail how there could be $5,000 in legal fees. I can't see more than about 5-6 hours of time spent on this.

    1. Re:What are "reasonable" legal fees? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      It's easy. That's 5 hours for an IP lawyer.

      Even for a garden variety lawyer, it's only 10 hours at a partner level. The fresh-outs are billing at $250-350/hr. There's two hours just to check conflict of interest and set up your file ($500). Send one of those briefs to go look up case law and type up a briefing for a half a day ($1000-1400), let the partner review it and consult for 2 hours with the client ($1000), then write and opinion (2 hours, $1000) and then send a brief to type/proof/file it with the court (4 hours, another $1000-1400) and you've easily popped a $4000-5000 bill.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  27. Re:A more important question is... by Overzeetop · · Score: 2

    No, don't look at bronies. That's something you can't unsee.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  28. Re:People say RMS is nuts by MacTO · · Score: 1

    The example that I gave assumed that copyright law does not exist. That is to say that everything is in the public domain. The GPL could not exist in that world since the GPL requires copyright law. If you don't have the GPL, you can't force people to distribute the modified source code.

  29. Suggested means of protest. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

    Time to spread some Rule 34 Pokemon art around! Dare them to sue, and invoke the Streisand Effect.

  30. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Amazingly, C.S. Lewis isn't the arbiter of opinion either.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  31. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Sporting is what adults do.

    Sports change with age.

    Hockey team uniforms, now, those are fine to cosplay.

    Send me multiple links of many people wearing complete hockey uniforms (including stick) at a hockey-con, since that would be hockey cosplay.

    Otherwise, it's just wearing a jersey.

    only children write Pokemon games. Adults never do that.

    Adults write children's books. That doesn't mean they obsess over them.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  32. Re:A more important question is... by lgw · · Score: 1

    And just such an adult wrote

    Critics who treat "adult" as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.

    Grow up kid, and put aside your fears.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  33. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    You're the second person to quote that to me. My reply to you is the same as to him: Amazingly, C.S. Lewis isn't the arbiter of opinion either.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  34. Wonder by Archfeld · · Score: 1

    I wonder if Disney will be as lenient as Lucas was. Disney certainly isn't as picky or discriminating in what they will license for Star Wars, i.e. read anything or anyone who will pay a buck...

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  35. Conspiracy! by lucm · · Score: 1

    What is Julian Assange doing at that Pokemon party?

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  36. Re:A more important question is... by alexgieg · · Score: 1

    Sports change with age.

    Yes. And once you've grown enough, after decades of effort at adulting, you finally reach the ultimate level: a pretty good dominoes player. Not to mention a regular at the local bingo parlor.

    Send me multiple links of many people wearing complete...

    Yay! Let's play No true Scotsman as the adults we are!

    Adults write children's books. That doesn't mean they obsess over them.

    And as an adult, I allow myself to obsess over books written by other adults.

    You're the second person to quote that to me.

    I was the first. As for him not being an arbiter of opinion, actually he is. That isn't an "opinion". That's his expert advice as one of the foremost scholars in the field of English literature.

    Now, evidently you may disagree. But then, who am I to prevent someone from being of an opinion mutatis mutandi similar to that of a flat Earth apologist? Have fun within your prejudice-delimited field of "permissible content". In the meantime, we'll continue having fun with literally anything and everything we want.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  37. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Let's play No true Scotsman

    I don't see how asking for evidence for your claim that "people cosplay hockey" is the NTS fallacy.

    That's his expert advice as one of the foremost scholars in the field of English literature.

    Since English Literature has no actual bearing on Pokemon, I'll throw the Argument from authority fallacy at you.

    But then, who am I to prevent someone from being of an opinion

    Since my statement was not adults should stop playing games where the hero is prepubescent, but rather it was the question why are adults still playing with Pokemon?, what you could have done is try and convince me.

    But you didn't. Instead, you got all defensive.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  38. Re:SOMETHING FISHY? by johncandale · · Score: 1

    Oh who cares even if he made a little profit. It's still mostly about the 250 fans that lost out on fun because he printed some posters? The fans buy the playing cards and enjoy their fandom.

  39. Re:A more important question is... by alexgieg · · Score: 1

    I don't see how asking for evidence for your claim that "people cosplay hockey" is the NTS fallacy.

    Cosplay goes from partial to theatrical production with full makeup. You restricted your side to complete outfits, playing on the fact I randomly mentioned hockey. Other sports, let's say, soccer, use simpler outfits whose fans completely emulate.

    But the point you're trying to avoid is this: the delimitation between what is proper adult behavior and what is child behavior is cultural. Sport fans act in every single way exactly like anime, video-game, sci-fi etc. fans, but no one thinks it strange because they're used to seeing it all around. This familiarity is the sole thing that gives any of it the "air" of legitimacy, and that's all there is to it. Objectively, there's no difference except this one, and it's one that's being slowly closed.

    Since English Literature has no actual bearing on Pokemon

    Actually it does, by means of something that goes beyond it. Pokemon, as almost any work of fiction, including the fairy tales Lewis studied and worked upon (including writing them) and including adult stories, even hard core military fiction, are variations of the same set of narrative elements, that of the monomyth. The teenage boy catching big-eyed cute pseudo-monsters in an all-primary-colors world, or the hardened veteran of a thousand battles watching his companions gruesomely dismembered one by one while struggling to survive in a scenario of nightmares where death is the easy way out and nothing but supreme sacrifices will work, are both the same story. The difference in setting, tone and style are fluff, a matter of taste and preference, and little more.

    But you didn't. Instead, you got all defensive.

    You asked in an aggressive manner and you got aggressive replies. As for your rephrased and deescalated question, the answer is simple: adults still play Pokemon because for them it's fun to play Pokemon. The same reason anyone does any past time.

    Now, would you want a reason for you to play Pokemon? I doubt I'd have any to offer, not even the simple one that you should try it. The reason is that what you wrote make it clear you'd feel so uncomfortable trying a "children's game", so challenged by what others might think if they saw you doing such a thing, that any enjoyment you could discover in the game itself would be overshadowed by that extra layer of negative social expectations, resulting in an almost certain verdict of "it sucks". So, there's no point.

    Now, adults who an enjoy "children" things are precisely those who, like Lewis, are able to give the middle finger to that social layer and look at things objectively. For them, the experience of playing for the first time something like a Pokemon game, is one of experiencing that thing, not one of experiencing that thing through the lens and these concepts, those norms, those expectations, these opinions etc. They can allow themselves to enjoy whatever they want enjoy.

    Want to have this experience? First thing, learn to not ask yourself anymore whether this or that is something that {list of things you are} "can" enjoy. Managed that? Then I say, go try those games. Then, and only then, you'll be able to say with full knowledge whether it's something worth playing. Note: not "something an adult should be playing", something worth playing.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  40. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Sport fans act in every single way exactly like anime, video-game, sci-fi etc. fans

    But those sports fans wear the jerseys of other adults, not of teenagers (or worse, pre-pubescents).

    It's the same reason why a man cosplaying Worf isn't weird, but a man cosplaying as his son Alexander Rozhenko is creepy.

    The teenage boy

    Or the 10 year old.

    The teenage boy catching big-eyed cute pseudo-monsters in an all-primary-colors world

    When I was young, I hated broccoli and squash. As I matured, I started liking them. Why? My tastes literally changed.

    The difference in setting, tone and style are fluff, a matter of taste and preference, and little more.

    Adults playing a game with a 10 year old protagonist is a creepy as old men staring at little girls.

    This is completely different from both adults and children reading the Chronicles Of Narnia and both enjoying it (though for completely different reasons: the adult seeing nuances and subtexts lost on a child).

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  41. Re:A more important question is... by Gryle · · Score: 1

    My opinion is my own, and I have the right to write it. Your opinion is your own, and you have the right to ignore it.

    You seem to be implying that if I disagree with you, then I should just ignore you and move on. You're leaving out the part where we have the right to call each other's opinions into question. You posted something I found stupid. I responded. Now we have a short (and probably pointless) debate on the subject. That's what adults do.

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  42. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    You seem to be implying that if I disagree with you, then I just ignore you and move on

    You said that I set myself up as the arbiter of what's appropriate. (Which I didn't.)

    I wrote that you have the right to ignore my opinion, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate.

    Now we have a short (and probably pointless) debate on the subject.

    We can. Or you can ignore me, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate. It's all the same to me, since my self-image is not wrapped up in ensuring that adults don't play Pokemon.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  43. Re:A more important question is... by Gryle · · Score: 1

    When I was young, I hated broccoli and squash. As I matured, I started liking them. Why? My tastes literally changed.

    Since we're throwing around anecdotes, I liked lasagna when I was 6. I still like lasagna as an adult. No one's calling into question changing tastes. We're calling you out for declaring someone else's taste is wrong. You didn't say it outright, but your original post pretty heavily implied it.

    Adults playing a game with a 10 year old protagonist is a creepy as old men staring at little girls.

    I can't tell if you're deeply insecure or just an exquisite troll. Are you seriously going to equate adults playing video games with child protagonists to paedophilia? If you'd said "adults playing games with a 10 year old protagonist is as creepy as adults who watch My Little Pony", I might have been willing to let it slide as rhetoric. Instead you went and implied that anyone over the age of 18 (or whatever age you consider an adult) who plays a video game with a child protagonist is harbouring paedophilia tendencies.

    Just to be clear, are you saying everyone who played and enjoyed Child of Light (with a female child protagonist), The Last of Us (that features a barely-pubescent Elle as a co-protagonist), or the The Legend of Zelda (Link is described as "a young lad") is a paedophile? If you want to make that argument, by all means, go for it. I'll hear you out and we can debate it like adults. But at least have the courage of your convictions and say it as a declarative.

    Or, you know, you could not shit on someone else's hobbies in order to give yourself a sense of superiority.

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  44. Re:A more important question is... by Gryle · · Score: 1

    You said that I set myself up as the arbiter of what's appropriate. (Which I didn't.)

    I wrote that you have the right to ignore my opinion, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate.

    Congratulations, you can reguritate past events. Now, for your next challenge, can you form a coherent counterargument?

    We can. Or you can ignore me, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate. It's all the same to me, since my self-image is not wrapped up in ensuring that adults don't play Pokemon.

    Yes, I certainly could ignore you, but I'm not going to do that. Instead I'm going to continue to press the issue since you suddenly very defensive and incapable of backing up your opinion with anything more substantial than more opinions and flimsy rhetoric. Or you could keep your opinions on Pokemon to yourself since no one asked for them and they're completely tangential to the original article.

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  45. Re:A more important question is... by Gryle · · Score: 1

    Since my statement was not adults should stop playing games where the hero is prepubescent, but rather it was the question why are adults still playing with Pokemon?, what you could have done is try and convince me.

    I'm almost certain you're trolling now. No one owes you an explanation of why they enjoy the hobbies they do, so why should they have to convince you of anything?

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  46. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Just to be clear, are you saying everyone who played and enjoyed Child of Light (with a female child protagonist), The Last of Us (that features a barely-pubescent Elle as a co-protagonist) ... is a paedophile?

    I said creepy, not "jail worthy". There actually is a substantial difference.

    (Young lad going to rescue a princess is sufficiently ambiguous to be what I consider normal.)

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  47. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    since you suddenly very defensive and incapable of backing up your opinion with anything more substantial than more opinions and flimsy rhetoric.

    No defensiveness; you're reading in too much. It's my opinion, because it does feel creepy.

    since no one asked for them and they're completely tangential to the original article.

    You do realize this is /., right?

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  48. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    No one owes you an explanation of why they enjoy the hobbies they do, so why should they have to convince you of anything?

    I've already written that you (and everyone else) can ignore me, and yet while writing this (No one owes you an explanation), in another thread you write, I'm not going to ignore you.

    Make up your mind.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  49. Re:A more important question is... by lgw · · Score: 1

    Did I cite him as an authority? No. He's simply: correct. You seem obsessed with being very grown up. What stake do you have in how adults enjoy their free time anyhow? Certainly adults who obsess over entertainment as the expense of having a productive career are hurting themselves and society, but once the job is done for the day? To each his own.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  50. Re:A more important question is... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    You seem obsessed with being very grown up.

    Obsessed??????

    Channeling Wikipedia: citation please.

    What stake do you have in how adults enjoy their free time anyhow?

    The thread started out with a question. I have my opinion on the matter, but have given no indication whatsoever that I'm on some sort of Moral Crusade to stop adults from playing Pokemon.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  51. Re: we'd rapidly slide into anarchy! by peacefool · · Score: 1
  52. Re:People say RMS is nuts by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    RMS has stated he'd be fine with no copyrights, since then the binaries could be passed around freely and people could reconstruct the source. The GPLs are ways of using copyright law to his advantage, since he's pragmatic in many areas.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  53. Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans.. by maharvey · · Score: 1

    Corporations only own our culture because we buy our culture from corporations. If people don't want to be owned, they should stop being a fanboy of someone else's ideas and make their ideas. Of course this will never happen in society at large, it is an individual choice, and once you go it alone you cease to have a meaningful impact on culture. The vocal minority (backed by advertising $$$) will always hog the spotlight and create that gravitational center we think of as culture. Like it or not, our culture has been hijacked and we can't do jack shit about it.