User Profile



Tue 14th Feb 2012

Recent Comments



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

>I am reading you posts. I read alot of things. Like the legal information in Nintendo's software, where it says: YOU DO NOT OWN THIS PRODUCT. YOU OWN A COPY. YOU DO NOT OWN THE CODE OF THIS SOFTWARE AND ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TOO SHARE THE CODE.

You're actually licensed a copy. I am aware of the software agreement, but the license only applies to Nintendo software and games. The Amiibo data have no such license and have not been explicitly copyrighted.

>I'm paraphrasing but it's actually capitalised originally as well. You dont own the complete amiibo when you buy them, only the physical part.

Nowhere does Nintendo assert rights to the Amiibo data. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that you own it just as you do the toy.

>Unless you bought the rights or coded it youself, you do not own anything digital.

Are you so sheltered that you've never heard of GNU and the open source movement?

Digital and physical ownership, fundamentally, are not different. Thus, you should be entitled to full ownership rights with digital content as you are with physical goods.

>If you buy something an amiibo from the store, you dont gove money to nintendo, the store gives money to nintendo. Thats completly legal. Thats free market. If you start cloning it and selling it without giving nintendo money, Thats not.

Are you against used amiibo sales as well? Because Nintendo gets no money from me if I buy an Amiibo secondhand.

That is exactly free market. People resell things. It is entirely moral and ethical, although no one is doing it yet, the price of the Amiiqo is the device itself.

>So by your logic, a person who took a few minutes out of his day to copy something and distribute infinite copies over the internet has more of a claim to the profit than the person who spent time, money, and love into the thing they created.

I wouldn't say that, I never implied that. My post was about your example, but the parallels aren't there because it doesn't cost more for the creator to copy the film than the pirate. Of course, people should be allowed to copy content and sell it without any money going to the creators. But people would still be allowed to support the creators, and they will do so. As I've already stated, we have enough proof of this as it is. It's easy to download movies and music for free, yet they continue buying DVDs, iTunes, and Netflix, and they still go to theaters. Why? To support the creators.

>If all the profits go to the person who copied the software, movie, ect. Than the actual creator, no one would create stuff.

Again, you're hinging on an iffy if. All the profits would not go to copiers, see above. Also, if you've read my freaking posts, you'd see that I've already addressed this. Filmmakers don't make their money off DVDs and iTunes, they make the HUGE majority just from the initial theater screening. After that, it's just a small added bonus. Musicians don't depend on album sales, but live performances. Software is different, but in the end, you need only see the HUGE success of Linux to understand how wrong you are.

>You sir, are simply a bafoon who knows nothing about business, law, and economics.

You're an idiot who can't think critically, and apparently can't read because you're repeating THE SAME EXACT ARGUMENTS I'VE ALREADY REFUTED. You know nothing of business, law, or economics beyond simpleminded argumentation tactics characteristic of young children.



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

@Action51 I'm not a communist, man. I'm as free-market as they come, and that's why I support Amiiqo. Anyone who supports "intellectual property" is not one. But your comment is so utterly contentless I can't imagine you understand the meanings of the labels anyways.

>However, most of us live in capitalist society and what you describe in your original post is based on 1) a device that does not exist 2) presumably does not have demanding energy requirements.

It's a hypothetical. Just an illustrative example.

>Your response is purely creating a justifaction for your piracy and sense of entitlement. If work...whether it creates a physical product or not...does not generate revenue for those who create it, they will cease to create that content and choose to devote themselves to activities that will feed their families and pay their bills.

It seems you didn't read my comment. Of course this is true. But sharing would not lead to lost revenue that would lead to no works being made. People created works all the time before copyright even existed, and this was shared, first through scribed and copiers, then with the printing press. People will still buy movies and music and games even if they can get it for free, to support the creators and to feel peace of mind. Really, because no one is actually arrested for piracy anyways, and it's very easy, you can be sure that anyone who buys a film or song does so out of choice and support for the creators, not because they have to.

Plus, a vast majority of the money made from movies are from the initial screenings, and then only a comparatively miniscule amount of profit is made in the sales of the movie after that initial screening, unless you're milking old films as much as you can, like with Disney re-releasing Fantasia and The Lion King every five years. Same with music, musicians make money from live performances, not iTunes sales. People like the feel and longevity of physical books, and will thus buy them, and people would buy DRM-free ebooks also to support the author. Gamers will buy games if they ever want to see a sequel made and want to show their support, even if they can get a copy for free from a friend.

This is MPAA propaganda that has gotten you to believe sharing will hurt creative industries, because it won't.

>It's pretty simple really.

snort snort chortle chortle



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

>they go to the store, who bought the Amiibos will use the profits to buy more Amiibos.

That's not my example. My example is buying a used Amiibo off eBay or being gifted an Amiibo. Not a single dollar is given to Nintendo from you in that case.

>Thats not like the Amiiqo. The evil corporation that makes Amiiqo dosent pay for the Amiibos you download. They stole Amiibo data and are now mass-producing it without giving a single penny to nintendo.

Again, it. Is. Not. Stealing. They don't give a single penny to Nintendo, true. They're copying, sharing Amiibo data.

>That bread comparison is bad. Anyone can make bread and no-one owns bread. Amiibo is owned by nintendo and only them.

This is the big issue. Aha. See, anyone can make bread in the same way anyone can copy Amiibo data. No one owns "bread" because people would say it's ridiculous to claim "ownership" of "bread". You can own a loaf of bread, but the concept is free.

When you say "Amiibo is owned by Nintendo", you are making some bad assumptions. When you buy an Amiibo, you now own the toy, and as such can do whatever you want with it, including copying the data stored on it. Why should they disallow it? Nintendo should not license it to you, and they don't, they do not because you bought the toy, and so it is yours. This is how ownership works. "Bread" is not owned by the bread companies, and they have no right to dictate to you what you can and cannot do with their loaves of bread, because when you buy that loaf, it's yours and no one else's.

>Plus amiibos cant be used to feed people (unless they have pica).

Stop trying to distract with irrelevent comments.

>Just imagine a product. Only one person owns that product and produces that product. A person comes along with a device that can clone that product and only that. He sells that product and makes a profit, without the owner seeing any of it. People buy the cloning device instead of the original product, causing the owner to lose money. All the products sold are still his products, but he dosent profit even though he owns it.

You do not "own" a "product". You cannot own an idea. Consumers own the products they bought, the physical items. But no one owns "product".

Let's say that does happen. The cloner can sell it for far cheaper, because he need only buy one original and build a few cloners, and can clone the product indefinitely and for free. Consumers would buy the product from him, because they want to save money. That money they save will go to other things. This is how the free market works.

If you forced the cloner to stop selling the product, consumers who want that product now have to spend MORE money for the SAME EXACT product. Because it's not being cloned, their capital is going to support a much less efficient and highly resource, money, and time-wasting endeavor. The money they would have saved with cloner would have gone to other things they wanted, and thus support production and employment in other efficient firms. But in this way, consumers are forced to waste money on an industry that wastes money and employs a huge number of people (engineers, safety, workers, etc.) that COULD have been contributing to more useful and efficient things rather than going the roundabout way.

In my view, the man who made the cloner has more entitlement to profits than the man who creates the product the traditional way. Why spend more than you need to? Why bring the entire economy and every industry down? Because of this arbitrary and ridiculous concept of ownership of ideas? If the inventor can't keep up, he deserves to fall. This is the real world.

>Nintendo can take action against Amiiqo because because it copies the Amiibo name and logo. They can also take down the amiiqo app from appstores, like they did with kill the plumber.

But it doesn't. Amiiqo is different from Amiibo. They're similar, but ultimately not the same, but I do see a trademark violation lawsuit. But I don't see Nintendo going through all this trouble when 99% of Amiibo customers buy them for the figures and not just the content. Those people wouldn't be content with Amiiqo, because they want a knick-knack to display on their shalves, so they'll buy Amiibo. Amiiqo is an alternative for everyone else.



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

@Action51 Exactly. This is how free information works. We lived without copyright for centuries.

See, again, no one is stealing anything. This is sharing. What if my friends has a DVD of this movie and gives it to me? All that hard work, investment, and creativity is mine, for free. How is this different besides the fact that the friend can keep his copy, too?

We can't have that. We need an elaborate system in place to keep people from lending, gifting, and sharing books. Oh, and DVDs. And CDs. You should land in jail for giving or lending a book to a friend. Hell, it should be illegal for your friends to read any part of your copy of the book. Get rid of used game sales, those scummy people who buy used aren't supporting the developers of the game. If I bring a friend over, he and I will be arrested for both watching a single copy of a movie I paid for. We both need to buy the movie to watch together. I mean, otherwise, all that hard work and creativity of the filmmaker is being enjoyed FOR FREE by your friend, without paying. Theives. Pirates. To Hell with all of you.

Is this what you want? Because this is the logical extreme of your reasoning.

Here, RMS wrote a little short story about it:



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

@Syrek Holy s**t somebody's butthurt.

"Oh why don't you stop gaming you pathetic negative sad little man we don't need you here your arguments are bullcrap. I mean, they are just SO OBVIOUSLY DUMB that I don't need to argue for my stance because I'm insulting you. Like, seriously, you are foolish just go away."

If you don't have an argument, don't respond with meaningless insults. You talk like a woman who uses her feminity to get the upper hand in an argument, especially with your describing this who disagree with your ideas "negative, warped, and misguided". Grow up and discuss this like a mature adult. If you are wrong, just say, "Hmm, I was wrong".



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

@amiiboacid Again, stealing is not wrong because you don't pay for the stolen good, it's wrong because someone who did is now deprived of it. Really, by your logic, if I buy a used Amiibo off eBay, I'm stealing it, because I didn't pay Nintendo for it. What if someone gifts me an Amiibo? I'm getting the Amiibo for free, and not paying Nintendo for it. By your logic, this is illegal and immoral as well.

Think about it this way: if a man has a loaf of bread and I take it from him without his consent, that is stealing. But if I have a device that can make a copy of this physical item, the bread, and I do so and thus get a free loaf of bread, would you say this is stealing? Is this immoral? Is it stealing because I didn't go to the grocery store an buy a loaf myself? Just take a moment and think about that for a while. Would you sleep well at night if you banned the cloning device? Is that man a theif?

And no, Nintendo has NO legal grounds for asking the retailers to stop selling Amiiqo.



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

@amiiboacid Please tell me you aren't being serious. Please not be serious.

Okay, let's see Google's definition of "steal".

"take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it."

Read this carefully. It implies that "stealing" something means that you take something, and the person you stole from does not have it any longer. This is true for physical goods. It would be stealing if I snuck into a Nintendo warehouse at night and loaded a huge sack with Yarn Yoshis. But this is not, because no one is being deprived of anything.

And, no, it will not be taken down. Amiiqo, let me repeat, is not IN ANY SENSE illegal. Nintendo didn't copyright their Amiibo data, so they CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT claim it is piracy. These websites are moderately large resellers, not "obscure".

Smash, Mario Party, Splatoon, Shovel Knight, etc. all lock substantial content behind Amiibo. Even if the content is just "character-themed extras", it's still wrong.

God, it's like you can't be bothered to have an actual conversation, you're just repeating your conclusion again and again and again, because you don't know how to respond to reason. No, just keep believing the anti-sharing and anti-cooperative propaganda paid for by your friendly neighborhood MPAA.



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

@amiiboacid Amiiqo is not illegal, Nintendo didn't copyright the Amiibo data and didn't patent the NFC technology. It's not being sold on the "black market", but actual, legitimate resellers, and the USB version out soon will be $30.

It's not "ruining nintendo's buisiness", it's controlling Nintendo's behavior. Amiibo is a terrible practice, so I will not give money to Nintendo and encourage them to continue doing it. I'm going to access the content I rightfully should while voting "I don't like this, Ninty" with my dollars. If it ruins their Amiibo business, that is exactly what I'm going for. They'll get the message and stop.

How is this different from not buying from a restaraunt I know has lax sanitation rules, and thus low-quality and contaminated food? If this has been revealed to me, I see this as a bad practice, and I will buy my food from another vendor. I'm voting with my dollars and saying "hey, stop this, you scumbags", and people would join with me to effect change.

In what way is this fundamentally different? Don't spend money on products that hurt you, find an alternative.



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

@ikki5 It is impossible for the Wii U or New 3DS's NFC reader to tell if it is reading a real Amiibo or an Amiiqo. Quite literally, because they use the same exact technology and the NFC readers do not have any kind of security protection. An Amiiqo with the data for Mario acts exactly like a Mario Amiibo, except it doesn't come in a toy.



Bowser908 commented on Shovel Knight amiibo Confirms "Evolving" Relat...:

@ikki5 Buy an Amiiqo. You get to access this content without supporting such a poopitypoopoop practice as amiibo. If everyone did it, we would be able to control this corporate behavior, and locking content behind amiibo will no longer be a thing.

@Bowser908 Is it really that hard to write a post that doesn't include profanity? (Jazzer)



Bowser908 commented on Super-Hard Platformer Volgarr The Viking Set T...:

I don't know. I'll see what people have to say. Judging from the trailer alone, it seems to me to be a cheap and poorly-designed game that tries to get away with it by claiming it's "hard".

There are truly hard games, that actually challenge the player, and then there are the games that are entirely based on memorizing patterns due to the terrible enemy AI and poor level design. This looks Renegade-hard, not Ninja Gaiden-hard.



Bowser908 commented on Review: Devil's Third (Wii U):

Devil's Third is poopitypoopoop, plain and simple. Remember how you were screaming at NoA to get it localized? Yeah. I expect nothing more than a 3/10.

To the people saying that they'll get it because "the Japanese reviews are good, and I click with that audience" (you know who you are), remember that Famitsu is corrupt as hell, and they're paid by developers for good reviews. They quite literally can't give a bad review to a big-name or over-hyped game. This is true for any Japanese reviews. Reviewers are afraid of getting sued, so the Japanese are pretty much in the dark when buying, well, anything. Famitsu reviews aren't even reviews, they're vauge and one-paragraph and can be used with any game just as well because they don't give you any information about the actual game. It's usually something like "This is a very exciting game with immersive visuals and is very enthralling and fun.", accompanied with a 9/10.

Bad games are bad, no matter what country you're in.



Bowser908 commented on Talking Point: The Argument For And Against am...:

Here's the deal. Amiiqo is not any evil. It's perfectly just and good. I am proud it exists, and I will buy the USB model once it's released.

See, Nintendo has locked content that is on the disc behind overpriced hard-to-find plastic figurines. They've locked an entire mode in Splatoon behind the Amiibo paywall. This is extortion, plain and simple. Want to play the entire game you payed for? Buy the right Amiibo.

Needless to say, this is not good. If any company other than Nintendo had done this, we'd condemn them. I do not want to support this, so I will not buy Amiibo. I do not collect figurines, so I won't buy Amiibo.

At the same time, I rightfully want to access this content I purchased with my own money, without buying a cheap overpriced toy. Amiiqo is perfect, because it allows me to do so, without paying Nintendo for such a disgusting practice.

This isn't theft. I'm not cheating or stealing. The entire basis of stealing being wrong is that if I steal something from somebody, they do not have it any longer. With this Amiibo cloning, I'm not stealing anything from anyone. Nobody's toys are going to vanish. Nobody will be poorer, really, because I wouldn't have bought Amiibo in the first place, even if Amiiqo didn't exist.

I do not understand how these fanboys try to claim this is bad. I'm doing my part in controlling corporate behavior and greedy, sleazy tendencies with my wallet, while still being able to access the content I rightfully should for only the price of the game.

It's not stealing, it's sharing. But I suppose sharing is illegal now.



Bowser908 commented on Rumour: Fresh Sources Suggest Shovel Knight Is...:

For one, it seems NintendoLife is quick to believe any rumor they want to be true. Shovel Knight is not getting into Smash and he's not getting an amiibo. Your sources are just messing with you because they know fans want to believe it.

Why would Shovel Knight even make sense? He's been in one game, which is a multiplat. Smash is a Nintendo fighting game, the Japanese call it "Nintendo All-Stars Battle Royale Smash Bros". Some third parties are okay if they've been part of video game history of have some relation to Nintendo (barring Snake). But if Shovel Knight is added they might as well put Crash Bandicoot and Heavy from TF2 in.