copyright speedruns decay
Inspired by Cerb's [art meta] a speedrun, and copyright bad.
Differential copyright enforcement
Fans extending Nintendo's projects without fear of blowback would buffer everyone's bottom line and eliminate the unseen decay of intellectual property (IP) laws. No matter how much your government insists that you must follow all of the laws in their book, not all laws are just. Unlike private property, Leslie explains their view (paraphrased by me) as to how Copyright is about control, not ownership (deleted post):
- Copyright is "used to reinforce a notion of "ownership" over immaterial works in order to justify exclusivity and preventing the free sharing of such works and information."
- Immaterial IPs aren't strictly unique in that they exist in the mind even given physical manifestations. All copies are the same.
- Immaterial works aren't material. You can perfectly recreate immaterial works.
- Copyright is about rights to create/distribute copies, not ownership.
- Copyright infringement isn't theft in that immaterial works cannot be taken. There's no "one" to take.
With that in mind, it's ludicrous how much closer public domain works follow the above model, compared to still-copyrighted yet derivative works from Disney and others. Should corporations and governments override personal consent of mind and body to execute, if not improve, non-unique and recreatable ideas? How much does such an overstep impede phenomena like multiple independent discovery?
Disney had their copyright protection of only their first versions of Mickey Mouse extended to 95 years. For reference, that's years longer than the top average life expectancy per country across multiple studies. How much longer do you think these already gargantuan copyright durations will become? Deregulating government-imposed conditions where corporations can (become overbroad to more aggressively) abuse IP would be wonderful. How much longer should companies rack up unseen damages and concede benefits from resultant product development refinements?
With games so exclusive compared to artforms like remix-heavy music, one wonders how much better gaming could be without IP. It's not just about making the games themselves better either. Think of the potential side effects that a more free gaming ecosystem could gift people across generations. Accessibility, creative expression, and fun are some of many facets that would be improved if IP stopped stifling innovation in gaming. Even ubiquitous franchises like Pokemon would blossom from serious competition like Palworld. Imagine the skyrocketed demand and enjoyment of pocket monster experiences if Nintendo ceased threats and takedowns toward derivative work.
IP threatens gaming
Matthew McCaffrey's Tax Breaks Don’t Hurt Video Games, Intellectual Property Does dives deeper into how the gaming industry is primarily threatened by IP.
Many inventors under modern IP wasted everyone's time in court fighting to uphold patents and copyrights for their inventions. James Watt, inventor of the low-pressure steam engine, won his trials and kept his monopoly going for a long time. His venture stifled the progress of both the high-pressure steam engine and the overarching Industrial Revolution. Tired of formulaic offerings and protecting fundamental ideas like whatever Pokemon's patents against Palworld entail? Well, now you know the perverse incentives behind it.
Even for non-commercial purposes, standout corporations like Nintendo appear to do everything in their power to litigate. Whether it's taking down the next announced fan game or pocketing 40% of ad revenue from copyright claiming videos with Nintendo content, you lose. Talk about a forced partnership. These are good reasons why fan developers and publishers are instructed to ideally not announce their project before launching it. Imagine the state of gaming without such crippling protectionism.
Retro For The First Time's YouTube video, Nintendo lied to its customers with Mario Kart world, ends with some choice words that I think sum up the above well:
Nintendo can't listen to its fans. Instead, they want to manipulate everything in the way that you enjoy their content because Nintendo doesn't care about you. They only care about having control.
Uplift through exchange
Independent artists, being scared of and reacting poorly to "stolen" ideas, end up defending copyright in their own worst interests.
Larger creators using your work without credit incentivizes getting in their good graces. If that doesn't work, then you can try pivoting toward other, possibly more effective strategies.
You don't have to settle for weird feelings. You can choose not to spiral them into anger or hatred. Instead, reach out kindly and politely about credit, collaboration, or otherwise.
When you aren't credited and can't peacefully resolve the matter, wear plagiarized work as a badge of honor and a beacon of value. Alternatively, you can take the approach that inspired curtail copyright confusion and see just how far you get. Your mileage may vary.
When in doubt, do your best. Lift everyone up through encounters like the above when possible: originator, remixer, and audiences galore.
Want to reach out? Connect with me however you prefer:
- Email me via your mail client
- Copy my email address or remember it for later:
yoursimperfect@proton.me - Email me via Letterbird contact form or open it in a new tab