0
2

[–] scandalous-goat 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

At least they don't use copyrighted characters and artwork. Nintendo can't copyright the game mechanics so those games are left alone. Honestly, an obvious knockoff isn't attractive unless it improves what it is copying. On the other hand, using copyrighted material may induce a sense of legitimacy and Nintendo is absolutely right to crush them.

There's a reason why artwork and design can be copyrighted and even trademarked: it has a value, people are willing to pay money based on the design alone. See hello kitty: there's no other material than the character design and the brand is lucrative.

0
1

[–] Wahaha 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

To be fair, copyright is completely arbitrary and there's little reason involved, if any. It's all about making the most money. I also don't think it's a coincidence that the works that are considered to be most important culturally are made before copyright was invented or have their copyright expired. Same reason open source software spread around. You can just reuse it and keep it relevant without any hassle.

0
0

[–] scandalous-goat ago 

That's a pretty naive, in my opinion. We need to make money, why are there some crafts that can't make money, or have their revenue restricted? And what makes you think there would be any motivation to make works without a possibility of revenue.

You bring up open-source software, how much truly useful code is written by unpaid volunteers and what is the quality of that code? In reality, there's a lot of programmers working on open-source project that are paid, be it from IBM (redhat) and other corporations or from foundations.

Good will and ideals will leave you hungry.