Topic: The Revenge of Shinobi Altered for Virtual Console Release

[NWR_pap64]

One character sees a makeover due to copyright issues.
 http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/newsArt.cfm?artid=19778

 The Virtual Console release of The Revenge of Shinobi for the Sega Genesis (Megadrive in Europe) has seen an alteration due to copyright issues. The character of Spider-Man (who makes a cameo appearance as a boss) is now pink, so as not to fully resemble the original Marvel Comics character.    

This isn't the first time Sega has faced similar issues due to special characters appearing in the game. Three versions have been released, each featuring variations of boss characters. The first version of the title featured bosses resembling Batman, The Terminator, and Godzilla, as well as an officially-licensed Spider-Man. In the third and final version, Godzilla was altered, but Spider-Man remained.

[TJ Spyke]

Considering that these characters were never licensed to be in the original game (at least in the original shipments, Sega probably got threatened with a lawsuit because they later licensed the characters and added a copyright notice), not a surprise here. I would have been shocked if they were still in the game.

[Ian Sane]

Altering the game for legal reasons is always a bummer.  But at least the game is being made available.  When Shinobi III was released on the VC I figured that we might never see its predecessor because of this.

I still wish though there was a grandfather clause for old media like this.  Prior to the internet becoming big everyone was just a lot more lax on copyright stuff like this.  I think for historical accuracy any media that falls into that time period should be allowed to be re-released without having to pay any extra rights if it is being presented unaltered from its original form.  Sega isn't trying to release their own unlicenced bootleg Spider-Man game here.  And they're not marketing Spider-Man's inclusion in the game as a key bullet point.  Anyone who didn't play this in the past wouldn't necessarily know Spider-Man is even in the game and thus Sega would not gain sales on Marvel's IP.  They shouldn't be allowed to market it or alter the games content in any way and then should be fine.

To me this just makes tons of sense so of course lawyers hate it.  WWE DVDs should be allowed to use "WWF" for footage from the time period they were called the WWF.  All Mystery Science Theatre 3000 episodes should be available on DVD.  Even if this stuff was technically a no-no back then no one made a peep so you can argue that the perpetrators were working under the assumption that what they were doing was okay.  That's a big difference from some bootlegger selling burned DVDs and such.  Legally it may not be different but from a practical and logical point of view it sure is.

But then I also think if a creative work that had been released publicly at some point, is currently not available to the public for a period of time (seven years?  I don't know what number would work best) that it should be allowed to be copied and distributed publicly, if done so in a way where no one is profitting off it, until the parent company makes it so.  So some old show is not being shown in syndication and isn't available on DVD?  I think anyone should be allowed to put on YouTube until the parent company announces a release date for a DVD release or syndicates it.  This is to prevent someone from "sitting on" a creative work.  And being "released publicly" means through official channels.  If an album is leaked to the internet and the artist scraps it and never officially releases it then it doesn't fall into this category.

[Morari]

To sum it all up: Copyright shouldn't exist. It doesn't protect the original creator, it only stifles the continuing creativity and natural flow of progress.

[Stratos]

Agreed. I really hate how it kills off some old classics. We may never see Ducktales on the NES again because of it.

And I always felt the WWE/WWF fiasco was ridiculous, even though I've never been a wrestling fan.

Some preservation law or work abandonment law needs to be made.

[ShyGuy]

I do think Copyright should exist, but it definitely should be a shorter length of time. Also, fair use should be broader.

[Stratos]

Disney is the main reason it is as long as it is. They do not want to lose the rights to Mickey & Co.

[KDR_11k]

I do think Copyright should exist, but it definitely should be a shorter length of time. Also, fair use should be broader.

If using anohter character as a boss enemy was acceptable you could expect pretty much every game to involve killing the competition's main character.

[EasyCure]

Agreed. I really hate how it kills off some old classics. We may never see Ducktales on the NES again because of it.

**** Ducktales, I want my EARTHBOUND dammit! I already got my ducktales cart, and could beat it in one sitting if wanted to and nothing touched my NES to make it freeze up.

[Ian Sane]

To sum it all up: Copyright shouldn't exist. It doesn't protect the original creator, it only stifles the continuing creativity and natural flow of progress.

Well I wouldn't take it that far.  As a songwriter and film maker I have a right to request payment for copies of my works.  I just call for common sense.  If you let something slide for years and then suddenly get a bug in your butt about it, well, you're full of ****.

Rumour has it Earthbound is in limbo because of some music allusions to Beatles' songs.  Well sorry, Paul and Ringo, but the game was on the shelf back in 1995 and was probably in stores for a few year and you could have made a stink then and there but you never did.

The idea of copyright is supposed to be such that people don't outright plagarize you or sell bootleg copies of your work at the flea market.  It should only be to prevent people from profiting off of your work without permission or from outright stealing it.

[GoldenPhoenix]

To sum it all up: Copyright shouldn't exist. It doesn't protect the original creator, it only stifles the continuing creativity and natural flow of progress.

Well I wouldn't take it that far.  As a songwriter and film maker I have a right to request payment for copies of my works.  I just call for common sense.  If you let something slide for years and then suddenly get a bug in your butt about it, well, you're full of ****.

Rumour has it Earthbound is in limbo because of some music allusions to Beatles' songs.  Well sorry, Paul and Ringo, but the game was on the shelf back in 1995 and was probably in stores for a few year and you could have made a stink then and there but you never did.

The idea of copyright is supposed to be such that people don't outright plagarize you or sell bootleg copies of your work at the flea market.  It should only be to prevent people from profiting off of your work without permission or from outright stealing it.

I agree with Ian, Copyrights are a very good thing but there needs to be some common sense way to approach things like Duck Tales on VC.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I say if you licensed something for use in game back in... lets say 1987 and that game in it's entirety unaltered in any way is going to be re-released for a new service, then that should be perfectly legal since they had permission to use that license in that game. All prior agreements towards profit sharing should still apply.

I also think that if you own rights to something and haven't actively done anything with it in X amount years, then it should become public domain. This is mainly speaking towards tech patents. This will stop all that ridiculous patent squatting that is going on. "**** or get off the pot" as the saying goes.

[Stratos]

I thought there was a clause where you had to actively defend your IP or else you forfeited ownership of it. Isn't that why Disney is so sue happy over use of their stuff (even to the point of legally threatening a day care in Florida that had Disney characters on the walls...the daycare replaced them with Looney Toons characters).

Plus I'm pretty sure remixes and interpretations are permitted under fair use. I knew some guys that did remixes and apparently if you remix a song, you own the rights to the remix and the owner of the original song can't stop you from releasing it.

Also, look at Weird Al Yankovich, he does parodies of songs all the time and he technically doesn't need permission to make them. And these parodies sound exactly like the original. Weird Al asks for permission out of courtesy but the "White and Nerdy" song was technically done without permission because there was a miss-communication and the original artist tried to stop and ban it but couldn't do anything thanks to fair use.

[KDR_11k]

I thought there was a clause where you had to actively defend your IP or else you forfeited ownership of it.

No, that's trademarks.

[Stratos]

I thought it might have been trademarks. Thanks for the clarification, KDR.

[GoldenPhoenix]

One of the most ridiculous examples of this was TMNT Arcade that was included with one of the GC Ninja Turtle games. They took out the voices and music because of some stupid copyright thing.

[broodwars]

One of the most ridiculous examples of this was TMNT Arcade that was included with one of the GC Ninja Turtle games. They took out the voices and music because of some stupid copyright thing.

You're kidding.  Despite the fact that no one uses the original (awesome) Ninja Turtles theme song or voices anymore (outside the DVD releases of the original show, which I don't think had started as of that game's release), they had to remove them from an extra on an (allegedly) mediocre game because of copyright restrictions?  That's just BS.  If companies want to keep their copyrights, they should actually have to use them (and in all fairness to Disney, for all the crap they take for forcing the extending of these copyright laws they do actually use their copyrights ala the Disney Treasures releases).  I'm with Ian on there needing to be a "grandfather clause" for pre or early-internet age products in copyright law, because it's just strangling the re-releases of the classics.  It would have to be taken on a case-by-case basis, but there's got to be a compromise in there somewhere.

[GoldenPhoenix]

One of the most ridiculous examples of this was TMNT Arcade that was included with one of the GC Ninja Turtle games. They took out the voices and music because of some stupid copyright thing.

You're kidding.  Despite the fact that no one uses the original (awesome) Ninja Turtles theme song or voices anymore (outside the DVD releases of the original show, which I don't think had started as of that game's release), they had to remove them from an extra on an (allegedly) mediocre game because of copyright restrictions?  That's just BS.  If companies want to keep their copyrights, they should actually have to use them (and in all fairness to Disney, for all the crap they take for forcing the extending of these copyright laws they do actually use their copyrights ala the Disney Treasures releases).  I'm with Ian on there needing to be a "grandfather clause" for pre or early-internet age products in copyright law, because it's just strangling the re-releases of the classics.  It would have to be taken on a case-by-case basis, but there's got to be a compromise in there somewhere.

Yeah it was pathetic.

[TJ Spyke]

Also, look at Weird Al Yankovich, he does parodies of songs all the time and he technically doesn't need permission to make them. And these parodies sound exactly like the original. Weird Al asks for permission out of courtesy but the "White and Nerdy" song was technically done without permission because there was a miss-communication and the original artist tried to stop and ban it but couldn't do anything thanks to fair use.

No, that was his parody of Coolio's "Gangsta's Paradise" (which he called "Amish Paradise"). Coolio's record label said yes without asking Coolio first. Coolio and Weird Al have gotten past that though. After that inciden, Weird Al has made sure to ask the artist themselves and not the record label. Chamillionaire actually said he loved Weird Al's parody of his song "Ridin' Dirty" and actually helped promote the song by putting it on his MySpace page.

[Stratos]

Ah, my bad.

[Mop it up]

Artistic integrity will always lose the battle against the corporations.