Gaming

20015 readers

957 users here now

Sub for any gaming related content!

Rules:

1: No spam or advertising. This basically means no linking to your own content on blogs, YouTube, Twitch, etc.
2: No bigotry or gatekeeping. This should be obvious, but neither of those things will be tolerated. This goes for linked content too; if the site has some heavy "anti-woke" energy, you probably shouldn't be posting it here.
3: No untagged game spoilers. If the game was recently released or not released at all yet, use the Spoiler tag (the little ⚠️ button) in the body text, and avoid typing spoilers in the title. It should also be avoided to openly talk about major story spoilers, even in old games.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

410

Nintendo forces Garry's Mod to delete 20 years of content — Garry confirms Nintendo is behind Steam Workshop purge | Tom's Hardware (www.tomshardware.com)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

78 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Nintendo is literally a depressing company right now....

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

Nintendo game out hot at the start when people were referring to other consoles as “Nintendos” even though they weren’t NES’ or SNES’. Theres plenty of precedence already then why they had to stop that immediately.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (4 children)

They weren't people or organisations they could sue.

If Sony said the new Nintendo system playstation, Nintendo would lose trademark rights over this. Because a large business like valve is involved they can sue and are compelled to sue to retain their trademark.

The emulator that recently got taken down was because an organisation was developing and distributing it. Individuals that copy and share the source code themselves won't get any threats from Nintendo because they don't need to find and sue them. Nintendo had to sue these other businesses, to retain their trademark.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

The problem stems from the subtle ways in which language develops. It's instinctive for us to pluralise product names in everyday conversation (Oreos, Jet Skis) or turn them into verbs (to photoshop, to tarmac). But by doing so we begin to erode the trademark. Companies can, from the outset, encourage us to use an alternative generic name; sometimes this works (Nintendo pushing the term "games console"), sometimes it almost works (Xerox's fondness for the term "photocopying"), and sometimes it fails miserably (who has ever referred to the once-trademarked trampoline as a "rebound tumbler"?)

Nintendo had to start calling their stuff “game consoles” so their name wouldn’t be genericized to refer to all consoles. Its not always about sueing others. Theres lots of avenues they need to protect and they knew they needed to defend it from the start.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Its not always about suing others.

You're right, sometimes it's also about straight-up begging the public through a catchy musical number to not use your brand name generically

load more comments (2 replies)