Nintendo Loses In Court: Super Mario Supermarket Still Open

by

Mario is adept at navigating Bowser’s castle to rescue the princess, yet he remains the most formidable fighter in his native environment – the courtroom. Over time, entities like Nintendo and Disney have gained notoriety for employing lawsuits to prohibit any trace of similarity to their characters. At times, they stretch or establish new laws to ensure their intellectual properties remain eternal. In this peculiar case, however, the lawsuit was not directed towards modding, piracy, but a supermarket. Here’s everything you should know about this intriguing legal matter.

Super Mario Beats Nintendo

The situation arose when José Mario Alfaro González attempted to secure the name “Super Mario” for his supermarket, using “Super” as a typical term for grocery stores in Spanish-speaking regions. However, Nintendo challenged this registration, arguing that they owned the name because of its connection with their famous video game character named Super Mario, and filed an objection to prevent the registration from proceeding.

Initially, González’s group mulled over renaming their product to dodge a potential legal conflict, but they ultimately chose to stand their ground. On January 21st, they emerged victorious in court, preserving their ability to use the name. The court decision favored González as Nintendo doesn’t extensively sell food items, rendering their claim on “Super Mario” unfounded in this situation. This case raises an intriguing question: What type of food is Nintendo peddling? Could it possibly be shell-less tortoises?

A History of Lawsuits

On previous occasions, and likely again in the future, Nintendo has resorted to taking legal measures to protect its proprietary ideas.

Jesse Keighin, also called “EveryGameGuru,” is under legal scrutiny due to his streaming of unauthorized, pre-release Nintendo games such as Tears of the Kingdom and Pokemon Scarlet across various platforms. Despite previous attempts to remove these streams, Nintendo is pursuing a claim for approximately $150,000 in damages for each infringement, which amounts to at least $7.5 million for more than fifty instances of copyright violation.

In a similar vein, YouTuber PointCrow produced multiple videos featuring a customized, multiplayer edition of Breath of the Wild that was flagged by Nintendo as ineligible for monetization. PointCrow asserted these videos were transformative and fell under fair use, but Nintendo enforced its copyright rules nonetheless. On the other hand, Valve permits modders to construct a separate cooperative Half-Life game, enabling players to enjoy the game alongside a friend. If PointCrow attempted to modify this version with another player, however, Nintendo might view it as a form of cooperation in “jail,” suggesting restrictions or penalties.

Read More

2025-02-04 18:09