Sheff, David. .Game over : how Nintendo zapped an American industry, captured your dollars, and enslaved your children / David Sheff. [0679404694 : ] New York : Random House, c1993.
Call#: Lippincott Library HD9993.E454 N577 1993
Call#: Lippincott Library HD9993.E454 N577 1993
The book Game Over documents video game giant Nintendo's rise to fame and fortune, from its humble start as a playing card company to what it is today. However, the chapters "From Russia with Love" and "The "Tetris" Song" were what specifically attracted me to this book. Within these two chapters, Sheff recounts the intensive legal battles surrounding the game Tetris since its inception as a PC game. As soon as Tetris was revealed it was obvious to video game developers that is was to become a tremendous hit. In their impetuosity to obtain the first platform right to the game, software company Spectrum Holobyte purchases the game from a small software house named Andromeda before they had even confirmed ownership, and thusly, before they even had the right to sell. This lead to Spectrum Holobyte creating an illegal version of Tetris for the PC. Unfortunately, the PC version was a complete hit, and so the illegal rights continued to be sold. When Soviet company Elorg signed the actual right of the game to Nintendo, a tempest of legal disputes began pertaining to the multiple illegal copies that could be found on several consoles. Most notably is the Tengen/Atari version of the game, created for the NES. The chapter "The "Tetris" Song" particularly focuses on the legal battles between Atari and Nintendo, which culminated in Nintendo gaining all rights, including those for its handheld system, Game Boy, and Atari having to recall 50,000 copies of its version of Tetris, having been deemed illegal.
In regards to my paper, the Tetris cases represent a major problem within the game industry during its shaky beginnings. Much like other forms and mediums, it took a series of court cases to define the standards of copyright practices. The Tetris case serves as a good example of video game copyright gone wrong, along with proof that such copyright decisions at the time could drastically change the market. Nintendo gaining the rights to Tetris may have had just as much to do with luck as it did with negotiation skills, however, the proceeding cases definitely set a precedent within the video gaming industry. In addition, although it is not discussed within the book, further legal proceedings regarding Tetris were to take place later in time.
In regards to my paper, the Tetris cases represent a major problem within the game industry during its shaky beginnings. Much like other forms and mediums, it took a series of court cases to define the standards of copyright practices. The Tetris case serves as a good example of video game copyright gone wrong, along with proof that such copyright decisions at the time could drastically change the market. Nintendo gaining the rights to Tetris may have had just as much to do with luck as it did with negotiation skills, however, the proceeding cases definitely set a precedent within the video gaming industry. In addition, although it is not discussed within the book, further legal proceedings regarding Tetris were to take place later in time.
belongs to The Influence of Video Games on Copyright Decisions project
tagged atari computer_software copyright copyright_protection intellectual_property nintendocopyright_protection tengen video_games by mymorg ...and 1 other person ...on 28-NOV-06
tagged atari computer_software copyright copyright_protection intellectual_property nintendocopyright_protection tengen video_games by mymorg ...and 1 other person ...on 28-NOV-06
Merger and the Machines document the issues of compatibility regarding both computer software and video games. Licensing is needed for not only consoles or computers but for cartridges, and operating systems as well. Basically the compatibility wars are battles for Monopolization, which Teter uses the term "Wrestle Mania" to describe. The question he proposes is whether or not the law should in fact allow the steps (such as borrowing from already existing software) necessary for compatibility to occur. Teter believes that in fact, the law should allow for such things. Teter's argument is that interfaces which have become standards are able to thrive because there is a balance between intellectual property protection and standardization. Therefore, the deliberations upon policies regarding compatibility should not be that hard to solve, considering that perhaps Copyright Law is unsuited to take on such issues. The statues of basic Copyright law in his opinion are simply inappropriate for determining issues regarding software of both video games and computers, considering that the protection is so long that it's quite easy for one case decision to allow one company to dominate the industry. Mergers and compatibility should become standards for the industry in order for the "Wrestle Mania" to cease. The question of compatibility is a pertinent one in regards to my paper. This article documents the struggle and fear of monopolization that was present during the boom of both computers and video games, and the inability of the Courts to quickly come to a decision regarding the rush of technology.
belongs to The Influence of Video Games on Copyright Decisions project
tagged compatibility computer_software intellectual_property licensing video_games by mymorg ...on 28-NOV-06
tagged compatibility computer_software intellectual_property licensing video_games by mymorg ...on 28-NOV-06
This article discusses the rise of computer software technologies and the challenge of protecting intellectual property that is a result of such technological advancement. While Dam believes that copyright and patent law in its present form (within the year 1995) is a definitely sturdy basis for dealing with and understanding these issues, the strict definitions of transformative and substitutive work must be carefully taken into consideration. The life of software is not necessarily long enough to constitute a new patent for each body of work represented. Dam goes on to discuss the controversies over software copyright protection. There is a thin line between copyright of ideas, and the copyright of software, and this aspect of Dam's article is of most interest to me regarding my paper. The idea that Copyright law is loose enough to be interpreted allows for the examination of new technologies. However, Dam believes that the sui generis approach is not useful because of the 1984 statue on computer chips, and questions regarding the competency of lawyers and judges to determine the law when it comes to rapidly changing technology. The question remains relevant to my paper because along with rapidly changing technology comes the need for legislation that will accommodate it. Determining the economic need for intellectual protection within this article shows that there were so many unanswered questions during the rise of software, and whether or not copyright was useful at all. This of course is contrasted with actual cases within my paper, in which copyright was indeed proven necessary for video game software. However, it is important to gain the perspective of those in various fields in order to make an educated guess.
belongs to The Influence of Video Games on Copyright Decisions project
tagged computer_software copyright_protection intellectual_property technological_advancement by mymorg ...on 28-NOV-06
tagged computer_software copyright_protection intellectual_property technological_advancement by mymorg ...on 28-NOV-06


