This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Square Enix, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Square Enix-related merchandise and video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Square EnixWikipedia:WikiProject Square EnixTemplate:WikiProject Square EnixSquare Enix articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Square Enix, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Square Enix-related merchandise and video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Square EnixWikipedia:WikiProject Square EnixTemplate:WikiProject Square EnixSquare Enix articles
This article was nominated for deletion on 3 March 2008. The result of the discussion was No consensus for deletion.
Category
I didn't know Category:Pirate video games had been nominated for deletion. Apparently the result of the discussion was to rename the category to Category:Pirated video games... However, I disagree with this, or at least the inclusion of Final Fantasy VII (Famicom) in it. This game is not a pirated game, as it was built from scratch. It is definitely illegal and a pirate game, but it's not a pirated version of some other game engine/build/ROM. What should we do? FightingStreet (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that was the best bet for the time being as it gave a blanket title to the category (the original as the guy did point out in the CFD discussion led to the possibility of confusion with pirate themed video games...I really don't know exactly what to rename it to. Unlicensed might work, but that'd include many games in a different category (i.e. Wisdom Tree's bible themed games, the NES porn games, etc). You're right though that it should be named something better at this point.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think a better category would be something more general like Category:Unlicensed video games or Category:Unauthorized video games. This could include the old Tengen NES and Accolade Genesis games also, which gives a little more meat to the category. Even though their circumstances aren't exactly the same as these games, they do share in common that they are not licensed by the first party, and it's much less ambiguous than calling them "pirate(d)". Ham Pastrami (talk) 07:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, might be a problem down the line, though such games could be put in Categoy:Unauthorized fangames. I added more of a distinction to the category's description, pointing out the games are solely commercial games that infringe on intellectual properties but are not rom hacks or mods of existing games. If it does become a problem we can always request a move done the line, but really should be fine. I'll just keep an eye on the category.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't kill me. I'm an expert on this topic and I know that makes me unpopular in the barrel of fun that is Wikipeia. Still, I would interject several points. First off, the use of copyrighted graphics in this game does not necessarily make it "pirated." The problem is that copyright protections are not valued the same in all locales. If you read my coverage on Chinese FC games in issue #2 of PiQ magazine (Meet the Makers p.105), I interviewed the presidents of a few companies. Essentially, those men, notably the president of Kingformation, said that Chinese governments do not protect video games. When I say Chinese governments, I mean China, the contested Taiwan Province and Singapore -- and maybe Vancouver at this point ;) Chinese governments view video games as a diversion and equate their development to volunteer work. This lack of legal protection is one reason the Chinese industry continues to lag behind the Japanese one despite a 20-year history of original development. Chinese courts have historically rarely found in favor of copyright holders when legal action is filed against a pirate or company known to incorporate pirated material in a product. The only notable case being C&E v. Panda Entertainment in the early 1990s, where C&E won but was awarded nothing. Unsurprising, Panda was allowed to continue using its ill-gotten game engine. As such, within the locale this games and others were developed, it would not be seen as a "pirated" work in any legal sense, moreso even as Shenzhen Nanjing is a mainland company, and in a province with even more lax concepts of what copyright protects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.219.229.89 (talk) 16:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
