They are not defending Nintendo’s IP, they are worried about having their IP associated with proprietary Nintendo libraries. They also didn’t send a cease and desist but reached out to him directly and asked him to take it down.
They also didn’t send a cease and desist but reached out to him directly and asked him to take it down.
You’re right, and I should have double checked and worded it better. However, for all intents and purposes, politely asking him to take it down is the same as a cease and desist.
they are worried about having their IP associated with proprietary Nintendo libraries.
That is indeed apparent, however I still don’t get it. What do they hope to gain from currying favour from Nintendo? They don’t sell Nintendo games on Steam, and doing so is a pipe dream (lol sleepy Mario).
The result is the same but there’s a huge difference between getting legally threatened by a big company and being asked nicely.
Not really. Asking nicely can easily be a veiled threat.
The knowledge of having zero chance to be sued by Nintendo.
But that’s an excessively risk averse position to take. It doesn’t even really fit for Valve, although it’s common with lawyers. Hence why I don’t think Valve has the right lawyers for their ethos.
If someone was making a valve game with spiderman in it, the same thing would happen. They’re only going to ignore it if the other owner has a pattern of being OK with it, and even then they might want written permission.
It’s not complicated.
If you want to be able to publish something, you don’t use someone else’s IP.
Yeah sure, but why is Valve defending Nintendo’s IP? That’s my issue here.
They are not defending Nintendo’s IP, they are worried about having their IP associated with proprietary Nintendo libraries. They also didn’t send a cease and desist but reached out to him directly and asked him to take it down.
You’re right, and I should have double checked and worded it better. However, for all intents and purposes, politely asking him to take it down is the same as a cease and desist.
That is indeed apparent, however I still don’t get it. What do they hope to gain from currying favour from Nintendo? They don’t sell Nintendo games on Steam, and doing so is a pipe dream (lol sleepy Mario).
The result is the same but there’s a huge difference between getting legally threatened by a big company and being asked nicely.
The knowledge of having zero chance to be sued by Nintendo.
Not really. Asking nicely can easily be a veiled threat.
But that’s an excessively risk averse position to take. It doesn’t even really fit for Valve, although it’s common with lawyers. Hence why I don’t think Valve has the right lawyers for their ethos.
They’re defending their IP.
They’re really wildly permissive with their IP, but combining it with other people’s you also don’t own is very obviously over the line.
I’m pretty confident if someone combined Valve’s IP with anyone else’s this would not have happened.
This is laughable.
If someone was making a valve game with spiderman in it, the same thing would happen. They’re only going to ignore it if the other owner has a pattern of being OK with it, and even then they might want written permission.
… Have you ever played Garry’s Mod?
Edit: Lol, I wrote that before I looked it up: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1384628469