chosaq

Tecmo’s nude patch crackdown

Rik Lambers points to a GameSpot article about the Japanese company Tecmo suing Ninjahacker.net for creating and distributing so called “nude patches”, plugin-like software that removes the (already scarse) clothing of the female characters in Tecmo games. As Rik points out, the charges (“traffick[ing] in technology designed for the purpose of circumventing copyright protection systems built into the games”) are reminiscent of Sony’s arguments against AiboPet’s software back in 2001.

Although Tecmo has won similar cases in Japan, the outcome might be different in the U.S., where Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. v. Nintendo of America, Inc. (opinion) can count as a precedent unfavorable to Tecmo.

Update: in a reaction to this entry, Rik expresses his doubts about the applicability of the Galoob v. Nintendo case: “[I]n the Nintendo case manufacturer [Galoob] was sued for copyright infringement for making a derivative work. Thus not for trafficking in circumvention tools and use thereof, after which an equal claim of copyright infringement is made by [Tecmo].” I agree.

Some links to earlier articles covering Tecmo’s obsessive “nude patch” hunt:

  • “In September (2002), Tecmo won a court case in Japan over computer code which allowed gamers to create a nude model in one of its titles” says this BBC article. If I’m correct, the hackers appealed the district court’s decision (see below).
  • The same article mentions that “Tecmo has warned of legal action against anyone who published information rendering the women in Dead or Alive: Xtreme Beach Volleyball completely nude during gameplay.” Although the warning is offline, it can still be found through the Wayback machine: Tecmo User Forums: Topic: We’re watching you! Nude Patches…?
  • In September 2004, the Supreme Court of Tokyo confirmed the district court’s decision, stating that Westside was “causing violations of copyright laws by allowing purchasers to use the [hacking] software.” Update: I dug up the relevant court document and apparently, the court ruled that Westside’s patch was infringing upon Tecmo’s (moral) right of preserving the integrity.

Comments on “Tecmo’s nude patch crackdown” (feed)

Comments and pings are closed.

  1. I’ve posted a reply to your posting at my blog, expressing some doubts about the applicability of the Nintendo case, though EFF’s Jason Schultz might disagree. We’ll see…

    » Rik Lambers on February 10th, 2005 at 22:41

  2. For Japan, Tokimeki Memorial comes to mind:

    http://www.softic.or.jp/en/cases/Tokimemo_Sup.html

    » Karl-Friedrich Lenz on February 11th, 2005 at 22:34

  3. The Tokimeki case has indeed a similar ring to it, but is different in the sense that it was ruled to infringe upon the software maker’s moral rights (right of preserving the integrity, art 20 – the translation surprisingly talks about “right to preserve the identity”). As the American Copyright Law doesn’t have a moral rights concept though, Tecmo can’t draw this card in the USA.

    » Andreas on February 12th, 2005 at 00:03

  4. its funny how much ppl seem to take tecmo seriously.
    they are not worried about reverse enginnering or indeed copyright. they are just doing this for the publicity.
    the game sales have gone down so they they do this,
    sppreading word that a nude patch exists so ppl will buy the game.
    frankly if surrprising how many would.
    you can get better porn and nudity from a video costing half
    or better yet for free from file sharing

    » xbox modder on March 7th, 2005 at 18:13