You are welcome to look at the talkback but please consider that this article is over 12 years old before posting.
Forum - View topicNEWS: Nintendo Responds to PETA's Pokémon Game
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dark Absol
 Posts: 815 |
|
|||||
|
PETA must be sony/microsoft fanboy. :/
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
gsilver
Posts: 649 |
|
|||||
|
Hmm... I wonder why they accepted the Mario one as a parody and got upset about this one. I thought Black & Blue was funnier than the Tanuki one.
If anything, their previous, positive, response was an encouragement to have more of these things done. |
||||||
|
||||||
Sunday Silence
 Posts: 2047 |
|
|||||
My guess is the use of the Pokemon game mechanics perhaps? |
||||||
|
||||||
Dessa
 Posts: 4438 |
|
|||||
|
IIRC, there was a response to the Mario one sooner as well.
My theory is that the negative response and delay in responding is related to the fact that Mario is a first-party property owned solely by Nintendo. With Pokemon, it's Nintendo, The Pokemon Company International, GameFreaks... they had to get input from everyone, and get everyone to agree on their stance. |
||||||
|
||||||
WeirDiE_InC
 Posts: 418 Location: The GVRD |
|
|||||
Hmm... is it me or do they seem pissed? |
||||||
|
||||||
potatochobit
 Posts: 1373 Location: TEXAS |
|
|||||
|
they should just let it go because it can only give them more bad press
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
michaelarroyo01
Posts: 60 |
|
|||||
|
Making fun of a Nintendo owned character: Nintendo can shrug it off.
Making fun of a cash cow franchise owned by a third party: Nintendo better say something unless they want Pokemon to go the way of Final Fantasy. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Tsukento
Posts: 89 |
|
|||||
Last time, Nintendo said that the Tanooki transformation don't reflect real life. As Pokémon has no actual real life alternative to draw from, this falls under defamation and breaks copyright laws. Their "game" would normally fall under parody if the express intent wasn't meant to make the actual product and compan look bad. That and it's Pokémon. Of course they're gonna throw down the hammer on that. |
||||||
|
||||||
MagusGuardian
 Posts: 592 |
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
tuxedocat
 Posts: 2183 |
|
|||||
 uh. no.
Nintendo probably has lawyers who know that (in the U.S.) parody and satire are ruled as protected speech. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_v._Franken |
||||||
|
||||||
Mr Adventure
 Posts: 1598 |
|
|||||
|
So PETA's make the pokemon = animal cruelty joke we've all been making since 1998? Way to be topical PETA.
|
||||||
|
||||||
underlock
 Posts: 247 |
|
|||||
If they were pissed they'd have taken action already. |
||||||
|
||||||
mgosdin
 Posts: 1302 Location: Kissimmee, Florida, USA |
|
|||||
I don't think it means what you think it means. 
If PETA has gone far enough with this, as a game, then it won't be protected speech anymore it will by a copyright issue. As others have said, the mix of companies involved in Poekemon likely dictates a different response. Maybe this falls into the "Hit back twice as hard" category, eh? Mark Gosdin |
||||||
|
||||||
bglassbrook
 Posts: 1243 Location: Gaithersburg, MD |
|
|||||
This could also just be the stern response before bringing forth the fire. Last year was Mario, this year was Pokemon, what happens after PETA finds out about all the horrible things Link has been doing to the wild creatures of Hyrule next year will be the true test. Third time's the charm or strike-three? |
||||||
|
||||||
Mr. sickVisionz
 Posts: 2175 |
|
|||||
|
I like how they don't even acknowledge the nonsense and just hit them with a stfu legal response.
|
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group