Nintendohas come a long way since producing playing cards over a century ago. Nowadays,Nintendois essentially the Walt Disney of video games, not because it has purchased countless franchises and companies, but because its impact on the medium is equivalent to classic Disney’s impact on animation.
Nintendo’s prominent innovations since the 1980s cemented its place in history and pop culture. Despite its general success since being credited for rescuing the video game industry, Nintendo has not been the luckiest company in the legal department. From perpetrating lawsuits to modernissues like Joy-Con drift, the iconic video game company’s legal history has a few huge points.
RELATED:A History of Failed Nintendo Hardware
Donkey Kong versus King Kong
The characterDonkey Kongin his arcade iteration should be immediately familiar to anyone with knowledge of classic American movies. His status as an anthropomorphic gorilla named Kong who kidnaps an attractive woman and climbs up urban structures is reminiscent of the titular star ofKing Kong.Donkey Kongput Nintendo on the map and was the beginning of their gaming empire, but Universal Studios still sued Nintendo, claiming that the arcade game was blatant knockoff ofKing Kongand any of its follow-up media.
Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Nintendo Co., Ltd. in 1982 took Nintendo to court as Universal demanded all its profits made fromDonkey Kong,and the shut down all arcade cabinets. The people representing Nintendo proved Universal wrong by not only having market research analyst Jerry Momoda play throughDonkey Kongand its sequel,Donkey Kong Jr., to show the differences between Nintendo’s games and Universal’s movies, but by also providing evidence that Universal was not the sole owner ofKing Kong.
Looking back at the game’s development, it’s hard to be skeptical of Miyamoto’s claims of originality. Not only wasDonkey Kongoriginally a licensed game based onPopeye, the titular ape is a gorilla rather than a member of a fictional ape-like species. Kidnapping Pauline is not an act of fascination, but of retaliation against Mario (Jumpman at the time), who was his abusive owner. Additionally, the name “Donkey Kong” is a product of Miyamoto’s limited English. “Kong” was more like a slang term related to primates, rather than a specific reference toKing Kong himself.
Nintendo Hits Blockbuster Rentals
Any millennial can probably recall growing up withrental storesthat provided games alongside movies. Before the centralization of distribution and the ubiquity of the Internet, renting was a prominent part of gaming culture. Blockbuster and similar stores were the best way to try a new or unknown game out without dishing out $50 to $100. From the mid-1980s to the late 2000s, renting games was a regular and even expected experience, and it was especially useful for people with lower incomes.
Although Nintendo was always a big player in the industry, it was dominant during the late 80s and early 90s. The advent of competitors like theSega Genesisand Sony PlayStation made the company lose some steam, but its near-monopoly on gaming before the arrival of those consoles was likely one contributing factor that led to the company targeting the idea of rentals, and even trying to ban them altogether.
In 1989, Nintendo sued thenow nearly defunct Blockbusterfor photocopying the manuals of Nintendo-approved video games. This suit, Nintendo of America, Inc. vs. Blockbuster LLC., took advantage of the emergence of the Computer Software Rental Amendments Act, which intended to ban computer software rentals due to alleged concerns about piracy. Nintendo tried to have the act include video games. Although it failed in this, its lawsuit against Blockbuster succeeded. Arguing that photocopies of video game manuals violated North American copyright laws, it convinced Blockbuster to repackage rentals with custom-made manuals.
Targeting YouTube Content
Consideringits history withDonkey Kong, Nintendo is understandably protective of its IPs. This led to one of the most controversial legal actions from the company. Throughout the 2010s YouTube copyright strikes, legitimate and baseless, became more commonplace. Nintendo started using this practice as an opportunity to monopolize profits related to its creations, no matter how popular the monetized videos were.
It became harder for YouTubers, even popular ones, to make videos featuring gameplay with Nintendo titles and expect to get a paycheck. Nintendo’s domineering actions were among the most infamous cases of copyright strikes, as even inoffensive videos featuring music from Nintendo games,especiallyMarioandZelda, were targeted. The YouTuber GilvaSunner, known for baiting people with high-quality rips of video game songs but presenting humorous remixes instead, was one of the biggest victims because of the way their gimmick worked. This eventually led to the “Nintendo Creator’s Program,” which left included creators with 20 percent of their work’s revenue at most.
Nintendo has been on both sides of the courtroom throughout its history. It is especially protective of its classics,likeSuper Mario 64, and its integrity following the Donkey Kong suit. Its case is similar to Walt Disney’s after losing his character Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. After that he, and by extension Disney as a company, became more ruthless with copyright out of fear of losing anything that led to success.
