The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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 nintendo, being a law student nintendo are very unlikely to get any of the profits 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 would be through damages or compensation.
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 playstation from 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 only for nintendo, and/ or nintendo contrbuted to or developed hardware which sony then used in or as the basis for, the playstation
in short, nintendo are only likely to win damages and/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, but even this may be hard to prove.
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 would be through damages or compensation.
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 playstation from 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 only for nintendo, and/ or nintendo contrbuted to or developed hardware which sony then used in or as the basis for, the playstation
in short, nintendo are only likely to win damages and/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, but even this may be hard to prove.
It's also an internet rumour and a load of bollards.
who cares?
Should Nintendo win, will they instantly start making better games? Will developers cease to support the PS2?
The answer to both is no, so it only affects company pockets - which are already sizeable.
IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO GAMERS.
Should Nintendo win, will they instantly start making better games? Will developers cease to support the PS2?
The answer to both is no, so it only affects company pockets - which are already sizeable.
IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO GAMERS.
there is no way nintendo will win this case, as much as i love nintendo, being a law student nintendo are very unlikely to get any of the profits 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 would be through damages or compensation.
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 playstation from 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 only for nintendo, and/ or nintendo contrbuted to or developed hardware which sony then used in or as the basis for, the playstation
in short, nintendo are only likely to win damages and/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, but even this may be hard to prove.
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 would be through damages or compensation.
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 playstation from 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 only for nintendo, and/ or nintendo contrbuted to or developed hardware which sony then used in or as the basis for, the playstation
in short, nintendo are only likely to win damages and/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, but even this may be hard to prove.