View Single Comment
"Also like I've said, I heard if you don't defend your copyright you lose it, I'll like to have the details on that."
Strictly speaking, that is not true. Once granted, copyrights essentially belong to the owner for a specific set period of time. Since Nintendo is a corporate author, they own whatever they copyright for 95 years after a work is published, and this will be the case regardless of any actions they take.
(It used to be 75 years until Disney successfully lobbied to add another 20 years to it about... 18 years ago, which means that in two years they are probably going to lobby to increase it even more.)
What Nintendo would be at risk of losing if they did nothing in this case is their trademark, which is a related but ultimately separate filing that they have to affirmatively defend in order to retain.
Failure to Police
Trademark rights may also be lost when a trademark owner fails effectively to police its mark against eroded distinctiveness, which may occur as a result of the presence of confusingly similar third-party marks in the market. For example, if many third parties subsequently begin using the same or a similar mark in commerce in connection with goods and/or services similar to the trademark owner’s after the owner has already begun to use its trademark, and the owner does little or nothing to police its mark, the mark is likely to lose some or all of its value as a source identifier in the marketplace. As a result, the trademark will become weaker, and in some cases it may lose its distinctiveness entirely...
While some courts have determined that a trademark owner need not necessarily prosecute every infringing third-party use of its mark, such third-party uses can still affect the distinctiveness of the mark in the mind of the public