Nintendo Sues Sites Over Game Copying

[Phillyman]

Nintendo said Thursday that the company had filed suit against a network of sites that the gaming company said were used to sell game-copying technology.

Nintendo sure has been doing a shitload of lawsuits as of lately......I cant remember when I have heard about Microsoft or Sony doing anything?

Nintendo filed suit against NXPGAME of Queens, New York, charging that the site was selling so-called video game copiers that could be used to illegally copy Nintendo DS and DSi software.

"After multiple letters and telephone calls from Nintendo's legal counsel, the owner agreed to cease selling game copiers and closed his website," Nintendo said. "Shortly thereafter, the owner launched an identical business at a different website address, and redirected people who visited his old site to the new one to purchase illegal game copiers.

Nintendo said that the suit will reference Nintendo v. Chan, a 2009 case that ruled that game copiers violate the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

"Using game copiers to play unauthorized downloaded games is illegal and it's wrong," said Jodi Daugherty, Nintendo of America's senior director of anti-piracy, in a statement. "Piracy is especially harmful to smaller developers. When their creative works are stolen and copied illegally, some companies find it difficult to survive economically."

The suit was filed May 11 in the Western District of Washington.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/20100514/tc_zd/250908

[Mister Zero]

It seems like ever since the DSi they've started cracking down, not exactly sure why. Maybe they're afraid of losing technology to others.

[tinman]

grEEd

[KiwiArcader]

I think Nintendo thought the DSi with its revised anti-piracy mechanisms would be more resistant to the flashcards than it actually turned out to be which meant they had no other choice but to go down the path of litigation. My guess is with the impending release of the 3DS they have decided to try and knock flash carts off the planet before the new unit comes to market and suffers the same fate. Not that this will stop the cracking teams at all from having a go anyway.

[Thor]

grEEd

Yeah Greed!

Because when someone steels something from me, it's me who is greedy.

I'm sorry I say good for Nintendo. People always think of the companies that try and keep their properties safe as greedy and that is really backwards thinking.

[tinman]

Yeah Greed!

Because when someone steels something from me, it's me who is greedy.

I'm sorry I say good for Nintendo. People always think of the companies that try and keep their properties safe as greedy and that is really backwards thinking.

Well...excuse me for my backward thinking! It's not like I give a shYt anyways, I was just expressing my backwards thinking opinion

[Thor]

Well...excuse me for my backward thinking! It's not like I give a shYt anyways, I was just expressing my backwards thinking opinion

I know that you are partially sarcastic and partially upset over my comment but I think it sad to see when people honestly think that stealing is okay. Don't get me wrong because I should take that plank out of my eye myself but it still does not make it right.

[tinman]

I know that you are partially sarcastic and partially upset over my comment but I think it sad to see when people honestly think that stealing is okay. Don't get me wrong because I should take that plank out of my eye myself but it still does not make it right.

Don't get me wrong I do not condone stealing, It is just that I was thinking how much $$$ Nintendo has made over the years...especially mine

I just thought they were being greedy is all. I see both sides of this issue as well

[KiwiArcader]

The old adage that if no piracy occurred then the prices should come down is one lost on the Gaming manufacturers unfortunately. Look at the PS3 ... it has yet to be cracked [ to the point where mere mortals can use it anyway] yet the prices for PS3 software remain incredibly high. And back in the day when the NES/SNES/N64 were around Nintendo had absolute control over the manufacture of carts for games and with that control they had no necessity to lower the costs to publishers.

When you have these types of situation and the public feel they are being ripped off, especially over a long period of a consoles life, you open the door to the cracker/hacker community and they end up with a clientele of people prepared to obtain software at a more economic level.

This isn't to say I support this issue one way or the other ...each to their own ... but the manufacturers have to accept some culpability in the matter. I can guarantee that if you could get Mario Galaxy or Mario Kart Wii for $15 some 6 months after initial release you'd find 'most' people happy to wait and shell out for original software. But titles over a year old are still having an asking price of $100+ which is just ridiculous and fuels the ongoing war between manufacturers and the pirates. In the case of Sony and the PS3 there simply isn't an excuse for their pricing structure given the lack of piracy on the system. It essentially comes down to greed on their part.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Software cost is a function of supply and demand. You aren't entitled to pay whatever price you want for games, and if you are in the business of piracy, it's not greedy for the company whose business you're stealing to respond with litigation. If the guy down the street wants your television, is he entitled to steal it because you won't sell it to him for far less that it is worth?

[tinman]

Software cost is a function of supply and demand. You aren't entitled to pay whatever price you want for games, and if you are in the business of piracy, it's not greedy for the company whose business you're stealing to respond with litigation. If the guy down the street wants your television, is he entitled to steal it because you won't sell it to him for far less that it is worth?

[Data]

I think laws will soon be passed in the Americas and other continents that will make it the responsibility of the web host who provide the files and the people who do the act of breaking the digital locks, creating a backup and illegally provide this link to others. There will be a crackdown like we never seen before.

If you think you are safe by uploading the archive to places like Rapidshare and Megaupload you're wrong. It will be those hosters responsibility to remove the content before it ever becomes public and they will obviously go after the biggest culprits first but I grow increasingly afraid to download anything myself or worse yet, upload anything that is bleeding edge.

Good for Nintendo to enforce it's copyrights if that means I will face heavy fines for downloading any of their dsi games then I will die by the sword. I will of course be forced to find more intelligent ways of obtaining ROMS that I simply will not share with the wild blue yonder.

[KiwiArcader]

Software cost is a function of supply and demand. You aren't entitled to pay whatever price you want for games, and if you are in the business of piracy, it's not greedy for the company whose business you're stealing to respond with litigation. If the guy down the street wants your television, is he entitled to steal it because you won't sell it to him for far less that it is worth?

Well ... hmmm ... how many times have we seen the Gaming publishers stating that the reason the prices of software is high is due directly to piracy? And that if piracy weren't an issue that prices would be lower? Lots of times. Yet here we have a console that hasn't been cracked and the game pricing for that is identical to another console that has been cracked and is therefore a far higher risk to their bottom line. They are not living by that mantra for sure therefore the only reasonable assumption that can be made out of this is simply that they want to charge as much as they believe they can get away with.

Again, I don't care about it personally .... I refuse to buy an X-Box or PS3 as there simply isn't a single thing I can think of that would persuade me to fork out the insane software prices for one of those things at the current time. Maybe when GT5 hits the stores I might think about the PS3 ... then again I might not.

Your comment re Televisions is an apt one. When Samsung introduced the LED TV they ran $6500 for a 42". That same TV is now $1900 due to comeptition as more manufacturers have released product into the market. Unfortunately, the gaming industry doesn't hold to similar principles because essentially the publishers are creating the same content for all three consoles, therefore they think they can charge the same prices across the board. What really needs to happen is for people to vote with their wallets and simply not buy games until they reach a reasonable level. The problem is the chicken eggs scenario that comes with that where if insufficeint sales are made they stop producing. And the fact that Mum cops it in the ear from the kids because they always want something now ... not later.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Well ... hmmm ... how many times have we seen the Gaming publishers stating that the reason the prices of software is high is due directly to piracy? And that if piracy weren't an issue that prices would be lower? Lots of times. Yet here we have a console that hasn't been cracked and the game pricing for that is identical to another console that has been cracked and is therefore a far higher risk to their bottom line. They are not living by that mantra for sure therefore the only reasonable assumption that can be made out of this is simply that they want to charge as much as they believe they can get away with.

They can say what they want, but it is a simple matter of economics. They charge the number that will result in the greatest profit. If that's $50, then they charge $50. If it's $10, then they charge $10. They get hurt by piracy, but it doesn't affect what they charge. Your PS3 example illustrates this.

Again, I don't care about it personally .... I refuse to buy an X-Box or PS3 as there simply isn't a single thing I can think of that would persuade me to fork out the insane software prices for one of those things at the current time. Maybe when GT5 hits the stores I might think about the PS3 ... then again I might not.

And this is your right. No one is requiring you to pay those prices. What you cannot do, however, is demand a product at the price you want to pay, and then steal it when you don't get it.

Your comment re Televisions is an apt one. When Samsung introduced the LED TV they ran $6500 for a 42". That same TV is now $1900 due to comeptition as more manufacturers have released product into the market.

Right. Because they were the first company to bring a desirable product to the market, the supply was very low relative to demand, and they were able to charge $6500. As the supply of 42" LED TVs has increased, the price has gone down.

Unfortunately, the gaming industry doesn't hold to similar principles because essentially the publishers are creating the same content for all three consoles, therefore they think they can charge the same prices across the board.

They surely do have the same principles. The gaming companies charge a price that they think maximizes their profits. If a game doesn't sell, the price drops. If it does sell, the price stays the same. I remember when the Wii was announced at $250, and everyone bitched about the high price, but then they couldn't keep stock in stores for months while completely dominating the market in total sales. Obviously, the price was too low, and not too high.

What really needs to happen is for people to vote with their wallets and simply not buy games until they reach a reasonable level. The problem is the chicken eggs scenario that comes with that where if insufficeint sales are made they stop producing. And the fact that Mum cops it in the ear from the kids because they always want something now ... not later.

You're absolutely correct. If people stopped spending the prices being asked and instead chose not to play those games or systems, the prices would come down. In the past, you've seen products fail because the price was based on production cost rather than the supply/demand curve (the 3DO, for instance), and people weren't willing to spend that kind of money. Piracy doesn't change the prices, but it does increase the cost of production relative to revenue. So rather than increasing costs for everyone, what pirates are doing is likely preventing some games from being produced, which is far worse.

[KiwiArcader]

I think the main point I was trying to make is that if the companies are publically stating that their product pricing has a piracy level component built into it and yet they are selling the product on an uncracked console at the same price as every other consoles pricing point then their argument about reducing prices if software was piracy proofed is rendered invalid and they simply shouldn't be making claims to that effect. Simple as that. It becomes pure economics as you say. I don't disagree with you at all.

I think the remarkable thing in all this is that the marketing side of this has simply not been taken advantage of. A publisher could release a new game at a cheaper price on the PS3 and advertise that the better pricing is due to no piracy and in all probability it will sell more copies due to better pricing and it may also possibly turn prospective purchasers towards the system. More users = more games sold because of the better pricing ... round and round we go.

There will always be people that don't have the money to buy new games who will look at a crackable system with a modchip and the economics of not buying games will sway them to that path. Live by the sword ...die by the sword if the authorities come calling.

Then there will be others like me who prefer to buy older consoles as they are cheap and the games even cheaper. And way better in a lot of cases anyway.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

If I had to guess, claims about piracy increasing the cost of software are used just to try to convince people not to pirate software. However, as I said, the likely result of piracy is less software, rather than more expensive software.

[opwuaioc]

How exactly is copying something stealing? If someone has a bike, and I make an identical copy of that bike, how is it stealing since they still have that bike? Copying isn't "theft", since nothing was taken, but copied.

The premise of the argument is flawed. If you want to say that copyright infringement is wrong, that's your prerogative, but don't confuse it with theft.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

How exactly is copying something stealing? If someone has a bike, and I make an identical copy of that bike, how is it stealing since they still have that bike? Copying isn't "theft", since nothing was taken, but copied.

The premise of the argument is flawed. If you want to say that copyright infringement is wrong, that's your prerogative, but don't confuse it with theft.

You're still taking something that you have no rights to. It hurts their revenue, so there really is no difference. Piracy is taking something that you don't want to pay for, and perhaps some number of those people wouldn't have bought the product if piracy wasn't an option, but it's naive to think that none of them would.

Here's the thing: fewer DS games are being released right now because it's harder to make profits when people know how to pirate those games. So you're not just stealing from Nintendo. You're stealing from me, too.

[opwuaioc]

You're still taking something that you have no rights to. It hurts their revenue, so there really is no difference. Piracy is taking something that you don't want to pay for, and perhaps some number of those people wouldn't have bought the product if piracy wasn't an option, but it's naive to think that none of them would.

Here's the thing: fewer DS games are being released right now because it's harder to make profits when people know how to pirate those games. So you're not just stealing from Nintendo. You're stealing from me, too.

I disagree that Nintendo has a right to copyright intellectual property. And hurting revenue is entirely immaterial to the case. Sony hurt Nintendo's revenue by making the Playstation, are you going to accuse Sony of stealing from Nintendo? The success of the Playstation and the 64 forced Sega to quit making consoles. Did Sony and Nintendo steal from you then? Your logic is very flawed here.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

I disagree that Nintendo has a right to copyright intellectual property. And hurting revenue is entirely immaterial to the case. Sony hurt Nintendo's revenue by making the Playstation, are you going to accuse Sony of stealing from Nintendo? The success of the Playstation and the 64 forced Sega to quit making consoles. Did Sony and Nintendo steal from you then? Your logic is very flawed here.

First of all, how do they not have a right to their intellectual property? If Nintendo creates something, they have a right to that thing. What are you talking about?

Obviously there is a difference between free market competition and piracy. You already knew that, so please try to be a little less dishonest in your points. Stealing games you don't own is illegal. No matter how hard you want to try to justify your theft, it's still theft. It clearly hurts the bottom line of the creative forces behind these games, so you clearly have no legal right to do it. Instead, I hear the same bullshit I've heard from game thieves since I was a kid and people were making copies of PC games. If you want to play abandoned software, that's one thing. But to try to justify people making illegal copies of games being sold for retail is pretty ludicrous.

[opwuaioc]

"If Nintendo creates something, they have a right to that thing."

That's your opinion, but not everyone shares it with you.

"Stealing games you don't own is illegal. No matter how hard you want to try to justify your theft, it's still theft."

False. "Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft, holding, for instance, in the United States Supreme Court case Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not (for the purpose of the case) constitute stolen property..." Look up the Wikipedia article on copyright infringement.

Theft is the removal of something belonging to another. What was removed in copyright infringement? You say sales, but sales do not *belong* to Nintendo, they have no right to make money as they see fit.

You really ought to look up actual laws and legal cases on this issue, because you're doing a poor job at representing the real issue with copyright infringement (hint: it's not theft, and it's not about sales).

[Redstar]

You really ought to look up actual laws and legal cases on this issue, because you're doing a poor job at representing the real issue with copyright infringement (hint: it's not theft, and it's not about sales).

If it's not about theft, and not about sales, what is it about? Does Nintendo just hate us? They want to spite us?

[opwuaioc]

To make my point even further, some nations themselves don't consider copyright a universal right:

"Sharing copied music is legal in some countries, such as Canada and The Netherlands (downloading only),[54][55] provided that the songs are not sold."

Again from the Wikipedia article. Please do read more and educate yourself.

If it's not about theft, and not about sales, what is it about? Does Nintendo just hate us? They want to spite us?

It's not about Nintendo at all. Copyright is not exclusive to Nintendo.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

To make my point even further, some nations themselves don't consider copyright a universal right:

"Sharing copied music is legal in some countries, such as Canada and The Netherlands (downloading only),[54][55] provided that the songs are not sold."

Again from the Wikipedia article. Please do read more and educate yourself.

It's not about Nintendo at all. Copyright is not exclusive to Nintendo.

OK, then it's piracy, not theft. Whatever. You obviously know what we mean. They get to make money when their products are sold. You don't get to pirate their games so you can play them for free.

[opwuaioc]

Do you even look up anything before you start typing words? Since it seems you're just trolling rather than wanting to have an actual conversation, I'm going to ignore you from now on. Have a nice life.