The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
there is no way nintendo will win this case, as much as i love nitendo, being a law student nitendo are very unlikely to get any of the prifits sony made, and they are not very likely to be awarded the rights to the name playstation.
this is because, a) the name is sononymous with sony now and there is no way nintedno could claim it,
b) Nintendo did not produce any of the hardware or contriubute to the playstation
the only possibility of nintendo winning anything woul dbe throguh damages.
this would be in the case of
a) the contract clearly stated (express terms) that the name "playstation" belonged to Nintendo, in which case nintendo could sue if the name had been registered, if not then they may be able to prove ownership in other ways such as documents containing the name playustation at the time of the relationship between sony and nitnendo,
b) nintendo could sue for breach of contract if there were express terms stating that sony were only allowed to produce hardware for nintendo, an or nintendo contrbuted to or developed hardware which sony then used to in or as the basis for, the playstation
in short, nintendo are only likely to win damages an or compensation, this may be a considerable amount but they will not be awarded the name playstation or any money from playstation sales, unless the hardware used was developed by nintendo,.
this is because, a) the name is sononymous with sony now and there is no way nintedno could claim it,
b) Nintendo did not produce any of the hardware or contriubute to the playstation
the only possibility of nintendo winning anything woul dbe throguh damages.
this would be in the case of
a) the contract clearly stated (express terms) that the name "playstation" belonged to Nintendo, in which case nintendo could sue if the name had been registered, if not then they may be able to prove ownership in other ways such as documents containing the name playustation at the time of the relationship between sony and nitnendo,
b) nintendo could sue for breach of contract if there were express terms stating that sony were only allowed to produce hardware for nintendo, an or nintendo contrbuted to or developed hardware which sony then used to in or as the basis for, the playstation
in short, nintendo are only likely to win damages an or compensation, this may be a considerable amount but they will not be awarded the name playstation or any money from playstation sales, unless the hardware used was developed by nintendo,.
I really don't know why everyones making such a big deal about this rumour, its extremely far fetched, and until I see a news report on a reliable broadcaster, I simply can not believe that it has ever a sliver of truth to it.
And this is coming from someone who thinks aliens excist.
:)hehehe
:)hehehe
there is no way nintendo will win this case, as much as i love nitendo, being a law student nitendo are very unlikely to get any of the prifits sony made, and they are not very likely to be awarded the rights to the name playstation.
this is because, a) the name is sononymous with sony now and there is no way nintedno could claim it,
b) Nintendo did not produce any of the hardware or contriubute to the playstation
the only possibility of nintendo winning anything woul dbe throguh damages.
this would be in the case of
a) the contract clearly stated (express terms) that the name "playstation" belonged to Nintendo, in which case nintendo could sue if the name had been registered, if not then they may be able to prove ownership in other ways such as documents containing the name playustation at the time of the relationship between sony and nitnendo,
b) nintendo could sue for breach of contract if there were express terms stating that sony were only allowed to produce hardware for nintendo, an or nintendo contrbuted to or developed hardware which sony then used to in or as the basis for, the playstation
in short, nintendo are only likely to win damages an or compensation, this may be a considerable amount but they will not be awarded the name playstation or any money from playstation sales, unless the hardware used was developed by nintendo,.
this is because, a) the name is sononymous with sony now and there is no way nintedno could claim it,
b) Nintendo did not produce any of the hardware or contriubute to the playstation
the only possibility of nintendo winning anything woul dbe throguh damages.
this would be in the case of
a) the contract clearly stated (express terms) that the name "playstation" belonged to Nintendo, in which case nintendo could sue if the name had been registered, if not then they may be able to prove ownership in other ways such as documents containing the name playustation at the time of the relationship between sony and nitnendo,
b) nintendo could sue for breach of contract if there were express terms stating that sony were only allowed to produce hardware for nintendo, an or nintendo contrbuted to or developed hardware which sony then used to in or as the basis for, the playstation
in short, nintendo are only likely to win damages an or compensation, this may be a considerable amount but they will not be awarded the name playstation or any money from playstation sales, unless the hardware used was developed by nintendo,.