Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Well, you must be an expert then. In which case you are familiar with the concept of precedential judicial system adopted in US. Still, even experts should learn something new every day.
Let me quote Arnstein v. Porter, 154 F.2d 464 (2d Cir. 1946), a case in the law of copyright in the United States which set a precedent for determining substantial similarity for copyright infringement:
That introduced a court practice of establishing breach of copyright by substantial similarity through appealing to "striking similarity".
There's a big difference between working in an established genre versus emulating a facsimile of a work you don't own rights for.
Stardew Valley only pulled it off because Harvest Moon is not a current franchise nor is it owned by Nintendo, at least fully — maybe it left a finger in that pie. Last I heard, Natsume held rights for it.
Lastly, it's not really about the law, unless you're stuck in idealism-land.
It's about who's got more lawyers and rolls in more cash for palm-greasing.
And Nintendo is ruthless, remember that.
Now, if they literally named the game Animal Crossing, brought characters from that game, and used stolen assets like textures, scripts, etc, THEN there'd be a case. They didn't. Besides, pretty sure game publishers have far smarter and more well paid lawyers than any of us do or will ever be. Team17 and Wonderscope more than likely crossed their t's and dotted their i's before bringing this to fruition.
This would be like Capcom going after SNK for King of Fighters (Street Fighter existed long before that series)... or Natsume going after Concerned Ape over Stardew. This is just pointless low key complaining, I'm sure of it.
You can join him.
I just don't care for edgelord apologetics.
Blindly lashing out in defence of a game they haven't even played seems to have become a sport on Steam among angsty teenagers...
And also not the one quoting a whole message in a response immediately following it.
You should reconsider your intelligence and then scram.
Okay. You know what, I don't need any of your leaky brain cell droppings.
I've made my point in the first message. It's safe and cozy there.
You can spam on, but edgelord apologetics will get ignored from now on.
I'm just not here to waste my time arguing with idiots.
Dude, you ARE lashing out and to an extreme. You're randomly attacking everyone that disagrees with you all because of a singular accusation of you being an "AC fanboy". And no one's apologizing for anything because no one has done anything wrong here. You're also blatantly ignoring people's statements and escalating vitriol for no reason. You need to calm down. It's fine to have a different opinion on things. All you're doing now is making you and your position look very, very bad.
You went from "This is how I feel about this" to "Screw everyone who disagrees you all are scum" in record time. Pot, meet kettle.