Nintendo Gets 'Dreams' Mario Taken Down Because Of Course It Did
from the nintendon't dept
If you haven’t heard of the Playstation 4 title Dreams, it’s a fairly fascinating little game. The entire concept of the game revolves around creating. Art, music, game mechanics, and even entire new games are all able to be created within Dreams itself. As you might imagine, while players have spent much time creating brand new content within the platform, others have also reproduced existing video game content within it as well. This is a matter of tinkering, mostly, and reproducing known content just to see what the Dreams system can do.
And, because it’s video games, one of the most common reproductions in Dreams are models of Mario from Super Mario Bros. Nintendo, however, recently got Sony to remove one popular Mario character model from the game over copyright concerns.
One of the most popular and downloaded Mario character models in the PS4 game Dreams has been removed after Sony received a complaint from Nintendo.
As reported by Eurogamer, a Dreams creator by the name of PieceofCraft, who made the popular Mario model, recently Tweeted the news that Sony had pulled their Mario from the game. When fans asked why, PieceofCraft explained that in an email they received from Sony, it mentioned that Nintendo had claimed a copyright strike on the model.
Now, Nintendo is within its rights to do this if it chooses. But why? If nothing else, it’s something of a massive victory and worth some bragging rights for Nintendo to be able to say something like: nice game you have there Sony, but how come gamers just want to use it to play Nintendo characters? It seems unlikely that a fan-made character model of the most popular figure in all of video games in Dreams was somehow a major threat to Nintendo.
But the company just can’t seem to help itself. When it comes to being fun versus exerting control, Nintendo chooses control every time. Except with a game like Dreams, where the entire point is for everyone to make use of the collective content, attempts at control come off as inconsistent at best.
PieceofCraft and others aren’t sure what will happen to any current creations that feature the now removed model. It seems like, at least for the time being, popular Dream games like “Super Mario 64 HD” are still active and playable, even though they contain the now removed model.
So why is Nintendo doing this now? Some are speculating that it has to do with forthcoming plans for Dreams creators to be able to sell their work. Nintendo probably wouldn’t want 3rd parties selling Mario character models. Still, that hasn’t become a reality as of yet.
So why is Nintendo doing this? Because it’s Nintendo.
Filed Under: copyright, dreams, mario, models, takedowns, video games
Companies: nintendo, sony
Comments on “Nintendo Gets 'Dreams' Mario Taken Down Because Of Course It Did”
Look, game about dreams can’t impact nintendo’s dream – of controlling everything to do with Mario.
Having less that total control would be a nightmare for them.
FTFY
Headline
It’s either "gets/does" or "got/did". Make up your temporal mind!
Re: Headline
Nintendo Gets ‘Dreams’ Mario Taken Down [Yesterday] Because Of Course It Did
This is extremely hypocritical of Nintendo…
because I see custom Mii fighters in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate that can be shared and Nintendo just made their own product worse because this means Sony can takedown any of their characters there such as Kratos or Nathan Drake, to name a few (if anyone made a Mii fighter that looks like them, I mean).
Re: This is extremely hypocritical of Nintendo…
"Nintendo just made their own product worse because this means Sony can takedown any of their characters there such as Kratos or Nathan Drake, to name a few…"
Sadly, such is the nature of the self-devouring beast called "copyright". At the end of the day everything is just some sort of derivative of something else.
I wonder how much "culture" will be created – officially – once you need a team of lawyers to be an artist?
Re: Re: This is extremely hypocritical of Nintendo…
None. Which is what they (the incumbents with armies of lawyers) want. After all, irresponsible costs to create anything = less competition = more money for them. They want as system much like how patents (of the US "on a computer" variety) prohibit others from entering the market without their permission. Note: That’s the whole point of copyright, the need to seek permission.
As for Nintendo, this is SOP. It’s literally how Nintendo became the video game juggernaut that it is, and to some extent why it’s still relevant 30+ years later. Long after all of it’s original competition has died off. They control everything, from character / plot design to production of the hardware it runs on.
Anyone expecting Nintendo to change something that’s worked for them over 30+ years is a complete and utter idiot. I’m not saying that the suggested changes are morally / ethically unjustifiable. I’m saying from a business sense, there is no justification to implement them. Nintendo’s fanbase are well trained sheep. Some might disobey every now and then and most will fall inline regardless. So the one thing that might change Nintendo’s mind, hitting their pocketbook, is off the table. (Just go look at Pokemon Sword and Shield‘s debacle if you want / need proof of that.) Beyond that, what do you have? Hoping that they’ll see the light? Fat chance with all of those bills covering their eyes. It would take a massive PR failure with years of financial damage for Nintendo to even dare considering changes like these.
Re: Re: Re: This is extremely hypocritical of Nintendo…
Interesting that you call Nintendo fans "well trained sheep" because that’s not reflected in the sales of the Wii U, or if you go further back, the Virtual Boy.
I mean, why even buy the real thing at that point?
Well, I was going to get a bunch of mario games, but if the model is available on Dreams then clearly that would make for an entirely reasonable replacement, so I can certainly see why Nintendo would be freaking out here.
… Or at least that might have been my sarcastic response had Nintendo’s contempt of their customers and iron-fist demand that they control every aspect of their games and characters not already put them on the ‘never buy’ list right alongside the likes of EA and others for similar reasons.
So Mario is Nintendo's “Michey Mouse”
One time, day care centers was hit with trademark threats.
I wonder if the same thing were to happen but with copyright law instead of trademark if there were paintings of Nintendo characters.
Re: So Mario is Nintendo's “Michey Mouse”
Also somewhat reminiscent to this: https://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-sues-harry-potter-running-club-over-copyright-infringement-200320/
Re: Re: So Mario is Nintendo's “Michey Mouse”
Actually, I was wrong, what could be the reason is because you need to pay for the Dreams game in order to see or download arts…
Nintendo thought that paying for the game just to see mario is hurting Nintendo.
What do people expect?
Even going beyond the baloney click contract/EULA that more than likely prohibits submitting IP you don’t hold copyright over in the first place, is everyone so damn dull there’s no way to use software like this without using someone else’s ideas? Lame.