Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Locker
Play ListsSTATUS
Pokemon just revealed the SV DLC OST and it consists entirely of stolen fan-music from YouTube. How is this legal? And the musitians can't even fight it in court because they're poor hobbyists fighting a billion dollar corporation.
KrimsonKatt- 08/08/2023 08:31 PM
Posts 
Pages:
1
Close
I found this, but it's all I've found.
https://twitter.com/NDMusicChannel/status/1688932299839053824?s=20
(The original post pointing out that Scarlet and Violet are using a fan arrangement.)
https://twitter.com/Zame_It/status/1688939136026136576?s=20
(A reply comparing the two tracks, demonstrating that they are clearly the same arrangement.)
A single song is hardly the entire OST, but it's still really shitty.
https://twitter.com/NDMusicChannel/status/1688932299839053824?s=20
(The original post pointing out that Scarlet and Violet are using a fan arrangement.)
https://twitter.com/Zame_It/status/1688939136026136576?s=20
(A reply comparing the two tracks, demonstrating that they are clearly the same arrangement.)
A single song is hardly the entire OST, but it's still really shitty.
Avee
5794
Thanks for the find.
Let's get the full and truthful information before we overreact here:
The fan arranged a track from a Pokemon game without asking permission from the copyrights holders, and then Game Freak used that arrangement without asking the artist for permission.
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
Quick! We must hide these before they see 'em!
Let's get the full and truthful information before we overreact here:
The fan arranged a track from a Pokemon game without asking permission from the copyrights holders, and then Game Freak used that arrangement without asking the artist for permission.
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
Quick! We must hide these before they see 'em!
Strak
1560
author=Avee
Let's get the full and truthful information before we overreact here
Can this be the default response to like... everything? That'd be great.
Yeah, sorry about this. I gave somewhat incorrect information because I jumped to conclusions during a manic episode. Sorry. And FYI statuses do have a character limit.
Irog
4858
author=Avee
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
These are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
Shinan
4314
author=Irogauthor=AveeThese are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
Fan art in general is a breach of copyright but I guess the copyright holder can be gracious enough to allow people to make fan art as the pokemon company has done there. It's perfectly legal and easier than having to give specific permission to everyone who asks to make something derivative of the stuff you own.
Red_Nova
Sir Redd of Novus: He who made Prayer of the Faithless that one time, and that was pretty dang rad! :D
9192
author=Shinanauthor=IrogFan art in general is a breach of copyright but I guess the copyright holder can be gracious enough to allow people to make fan art as the pokemon company has done there. It's perfectly legal and easier than having to give specific permission to everyone who asks to make something derivative of the stuff you own.author=AveeThese are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
It's true that, in strictly legal terms, using any IP that doesn't belong to you for any purpose is copyright infringement. It's also true that most companies have enough sense to know that going after harmless fan works is a bad idea on, like, every conceivable level.
That being said, I remember listening to a lawyer talk about copyright law a long time ago, and they said that while you can't claim ownership over someone else's IP, no else can claim ownership over the actual work you created. If you drew Pokemon fanart, for example, Nintendo or Game Freak can't come in and say that they own the art you made, only the IP. So, if I'm remembering correctly, I'm pretty sure claiming someone else's fanworks as their own is not the right of the corporations unless there is documented proof somewhere that the person who created the arrangement explicitly agreed to those terms.
Law is convoluted and hyperspecific and goes on a case by case basis, though, so don't bring my name up as evidence if anyone decides to sue Game Freak for copyright infringement XD I'm just not big on trusting corpos following the law just because they wrote a paragraph in a tab called Legal Information.
author=Red_Novaauthor=ShinanIt's true that, in strictly legal terms, using any IP that doesn't belong to you for any purpose is copyright infringement. It's also true that most companies have enough sense to know that going after harmless fan works is a bad idea on, like, every conceivable level.author=IrogFan art in general is a breach of copyright but I guess the copyright holder can be gracious enough to allow people to make fan art as the pokemon company has done there. It's perfectly legal and easier than having to give specific permission to everyone who asks to make something derivative of the stuff you own.author=AveeThese are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
That being said, I remember listening to a lawyer talk about copyright law a long time ago, and they said that while you can't claim ownership over someone else's IP, no else can claim ownership over the actual work you created. If you drew Pokemon fanart, for example, Nintendo or Game Freak can't come in and say that they own the art you made, only the IP. So, if I'm remembering correctly, I'm pretty sure claiming someone else's fanworks as their own is not the right of the corporations unless there is documented proof somewhere that the person who created the arrangement explicitly agreed to those terms.
Law is convoluted and hyperspecific and goes on a case by case basis, though, so don't bring my name up as evidence if anyone decides to sue Game Freak for copyright infringement XD I'm just not big on trusting corpos following the law just because they wrote a paragraph in a tab called Legal Information.
Yeah totally. There's also an added wrinkle of the whole "how will this hold up in court" part. I still think the kosher and morally in the clear thing would be to ask the fanwork creator for permission, but it's not like the Pokemon company is really worried about losing in court to a fan creator remixing a copywritten piece of music. It sucks for the little guy but thaaaaat's copyright! (or captialism? Or law? Or just our world in general? Dunno)
Shinan
4314
Well the wording on the legal page says
Of course it is also true, like you are saying, that these things are a bit like EULAs in that they might not actually be that enforceable.
I guess the second part of what I quoted is actually pretty terrible and should in fact make it so that no one should make pokemon fan art ever :D
But Nintendo are notoriously awful aren't they.
Distribution in any form and any channels now known or in the future of derivative works based on the copyrighted property trademarks, service marks, trade names and other proprietary property (Fan Art) of The Pokémon Company International, Inc., its affiliates and licensors (Pokémon) constitutes a royalty-free, non-exclusive, irrevocable, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license from the Fan Art's creator to Pokémon to use, transmit, copy, modify, and display Fan Art (and its derivatives) for any purpose.so what they are actually saying is that anyone creating fan art grants the pokemon company a license to use their (copyrighted) stuff for any purpose. They aren't claiming they made or own what you made. Just that by using their assets you also consented to having the stuff you made be licensed by the pokemon company. (royalty-free)
Of course it is also true, like you are saying, that these things are a bit like EULAs in that they might not actually be that enforceable.
I guess the second part of what I quoted is actually pretty terrible and should in fact make it so that no one should make pokemon fan art ever :D
No further consideration or compensation of any kind will be given for any Fan Art. Fan Art creator gives up any claims that the use of the Fan Art violates any of their rights, including moral rights, privacy rights, proprietary rights publicity rights, rights to credit for material or ideas or any other right, including the right to approve the way such material is used. In no uncertain terms, does Pokémon's use of Fan Art constitute a grant to Fan Art's creator to use the Pokémon intellectual property or Fan Art beyond a personal, noncommercial home use.
But Nintendo are notoriously awful aren't they.
IrogAveeThese are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
Just so you know, if you create a fan work, while you do not own any rights to what you created the fan work of, you still legally own all rights to your original content. In the case of music, if you make an arrangement of a popular song, you may not own the song, but you own the arrangement, no matter what. An arrangment would be considered a cover. Even if someone has the authority to decide the arrangement is illegal (it's usually not possible to make that definition, though). Look up Prince's interviews about what rights he had with regard to other artists making covers. He explains it really well. So normally, they would not be legally allowed to just use your fan arrangement, even if they owned the song, because legally, they don't own your arrangement.
In this case, the creators of Pokemon will be hard to beat even if you had the money to fight them, and in fact, it's probably impossible. Why? Because they got it from Youtube. And if you wonder what difference does that make, well, it says right their on their webpage that they have permission from Youtube to do it. And if you wonder who gave Youtube the right to do it, well, if you create content for Youtube, then you did. Ex-Twitter, Artstation, Facebook, DeviantArt, Instagram, Tiktok, Tumblr, Youtube; all of them have in their terms of service a condition of use where you will not be allowed to upload or participate in their website if you do not agree to give them a perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to anything you create and post on their sites. This license gives them the right to do anything they want with your work, without recompense or acknowledgement. It almost seems a joke that their terms also plainly states that you do not give up ownership of your work. No, of course you don't give up ownership of your work! You just gave permanent, royalty-free rights to several major corporations that can and do distribute it freely and even give the creator credit to someone else entirely (yes, they have that right!) and tell you to fuck off. You gave these social media companies ownership of your work, and Youtube has decided that the creators of Pokemon can use it as they please, too.
author=pianotmIrogJust so you know, if you create a fan work, while you do not own any rights to what you created the fan work of, you still legally own all rights to your original content. In the case of music, if you make an arrangement of a popular song, you may not own the song, but you own the arrangement, no matter what. An arrangment would be considered a cover. Even if someone has the authority to decide the arrangement is illegal (it's usually not possible to make that definition, though). Look up Prince's interviews about what rights he had with regard to other artists making covers. He explains it really well. So normally, they would not be legally allowed to just use your fan arrangement, even if they owned the song, because legally, they don't own your arrangement.AveeThese are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
In this case, the creators of Pokemon will be hard to beat even if you had the money to fight them, and in fact, it's probably impossible. Why? Because they got it from Youtube. And if you wonder what difference does that make, well, it says right their on their webpage that they have permission from Youtube to do it. And if you wonder who gave Youtube the right to do it, well, if you create content for Youtube, then you did. Ex-Twitter, Artstation, Facebook, DeviantArt, Instagram, Tiktok, Tumblr, Youtube; all of them have in their terms of service a condition of use where you will not be allowed to upload or participate in their website if you do not agree to give them a perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to anything you create and post on their sites. This license gives them the right to do anything they want with your work, without recompense or acknowledgement. It almost seems a joke that their terms also plainly states that you do not give up ownership of your work. No, of course you don't give up ownership of your work! You just gave permanent, royalty-free rights to several major corporations that can and do distribute it freely and even give the creator credit to someone else entirely (yes, they have that right!) and tell you to fuck off. You gave these social media companies ownership of your work, and Youtube has decided that the creators of Pokemon can use it as they please, too.
Fuck corporations and big tech.
Sidewinder
2880
author=Irogauthor=AveeThese are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
It's kind of a murky subject.
Marvel, for example is notorious for stealing fanart in their Star Wars comics. I think the general consensus is that they're probably allowed to use it, but so far nobody's really taken them to court over it.
author=pianotmIrogbig textAveeThese are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
I think to be fair, they ask for those rights so that they don't get sued for even hosting your shit. Like, imagine if someone just decided to go "You know what? I DON'T want youtube to be able to host my stuff. In fact, I'm revoking their right to do so. I'm suing them for doing so!" That kind of bullshit could quickly devolve into all sorts of crazy, so I can see why they'd want to have the rights to 'use' your stuff if you post it on their site.
It'd be like someone on here going "You know what? I'm suing RMN for having my game on it. Sure, I chose to host the game here but I'm now revoking my rights and I'm suing you for having my game on your site without my permission, even though I put it there to begin with. Fuck you."
I'm pretty sure we also have somewhere in our own terms of service or whatever when you sign up that we have the right to host your shit. Probably. It's in there somewhere. Right? o.o;;;
Nevermind
"When you provide the website with your content, such as a game or article, you are merely giving the website explicit permission to make content available to its users. The website does not claim any rights to any user-submitted content, unless the content is submitted by a staff member and the works were created exclusively for the website. Users retain all rights to any content."
We don't retain rights or anything, but we are allowed to make it available. In that case, idk, maybe they're fuckheads.
LibertyWhat they're supposed to be for and what they're actually being used for are two different things. Also, I can't sue a site that I deliberately put my material on for having my material on it. That doesn't need to be protected. What needs to be protected is other people sharing that material. The common example used is Twitter. I can write something in a tweet. Twitter wants to make sure I can't sue someone or Twitter for sharing that tweet with other people. Knowing that that's what the rule is for is absolutely no defense for corporations deciding that that's just a treasure trove of monetizable content that they can just take for themselves.pianotmbig textIrogbig textAveeThese are rules written by big corporations to claim ownership of art they didn't make. Are these rules legal ?
In fact, Game Freak are legally entitled to do so:
https://www.pokemon.com/us/legal/
But it doesn't matter anymore. That legal link that Avee posted explains in plain language that Youtube gives them permission to use any Pokemon-related fan work they want. Which is 100% not what that clause was supposed to be for. They can just do it and so they're so comfortable and assured of it that anyone affected by it can just go take a flying leap.
We seriously need a copyright law rework in the US, but our politions are too busy arguing over if climate change is real and trying and failing to commit a genocide. The democrats aren't much better with "socialist this, socialist that" and they're obsession with a leaf that makes people fall asleep. Can't we just focus on the big issues? IE, stopping those damn megacorps from ruining our lives even further?
Pages:
1
