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.
I do think Copyright should exist, but it definitely should be a shorter length of time. Also, fair use should be broader.
Agreed. I really hate how it kills off some old classics. We may never see Ducktales on the NES again because of it. :P
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.
QuoteTo 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 thought there was a clause where you had to actively defend your IP or else you forfeited ownership of it.
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.
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.
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.
