4 ms·

It looks like your app only displays data that is probably copyrighted by the pokemon company (heh, I didn't even know that company existed). I doubt that it wa

It looks like your app only displays data that is probably copyrighted by the pokemon company (heh, I didn't even know that company existed). I doubt that it was rejected due to simplicity.

PeterisP 13y ago
Facts can't be copyrighted, and the trademarks of pokemon names can be used w/o permission if properly acknowledged.
- nkuttler 13y ago
  I'm not a pokemon expert, but I think they are the product of a human's creative work. If pokemons were real there would be facts about them. I'm not a lawyer either, but I think creative works are covered by copyright law.
  - kevinpet 13y ago
    There was a lawsuit over a guide to Harry Potter that Rowling won, but she won it because the guide copied too much from her books. They were later able to publish it by cutting down on the quotations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._and_JK_Rowling_vs._RDR_Books https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._and_JK_Rowling_vs... The courts acknowledge that reference guides to fictional worlds are either non-infringing or transformative fair use. You can't copyright fictional facts either, only the expression of them.
  - PeterisP 13y ago
    It doesn't matter if the facts are about reality or fiction. If I say 'There are 1234 notes in that Beatles song, and C-F-G-C chords are often seen there' then it doesn't matter that the song is product of a human's creative work, the facts are not that creative work. If I say 'hobbits in Tolkien's work have hairy feet' then again, Tolkien made that fact up, it didn't exist before his writing, but it's still not copyrighted or 'copyrightable'. Copyright is about copying the actual prose or drawings from Pokemon, but stating the facts about that prose or drawings is allowed.
    - nkuttler 13y ago
      "Name Charizard, Types fire/flying, electric 2x rock 4x water 2x" etc. don't at all sound like "facts" to me. They seem to be the core of an individual pokemon, they are what makes that pokemon a unique creative work. This sounds more like publishing the chords of a song, it's melody and lyrics, but not using the cover art. Anyway, the fact that there's even a discussion about this is proof enough that apple did good to reject the app. It's not apple's job to have a team of lawyers review apps with regard to the intricacies of copyright law.
  - Snoptic 13y ago
    The abstract rules of a game are not copyrightable. This is long established. The character names are more protectable though.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
shuzchen 13y ago
Pokemon (and I assume all their stats re: them) are owned by Nintendo.
- grogenaut 13y ago
  Incorrect, they're owned by the Pokemon Company

It looks like your app only displays data that is probably copyrighted by the pokemon company (heh, I didn't even know that company existed). I doubt that it was rejected due to simplicity.

PeterisP 13y ago

Facts can't be copyrighted, and the trademarks of pokemon names can be used w/o permission if properly acknowledged.

nkuttler 13y ago
I'm not a pokemon expert, but I think they are the product of a human's creative work. If pokemons were real there would be facts about them. I'm not a lawyer either, but I think creative works are covered by copyright law.
- kevinpet 13y ago
  There was a lawsuit over a guide to Harry Potter that Rowling won, but she won it because the guide copied too much from her books. They were later able to publish it by cutting down on the quotations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._and_JK_Rowling_vs._RDR_Books https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._and_JK_Rowling_vs... The courts acknowledge that reference guides to fictional worlds are either non-infringing or transformative fair use. You can't copyright fictional facts either, only the expression of them.
- PeterisP 13y ago
  It doesn't matter if the facts are about reality or fiction. If I say 'There are 1234 notes in that Beatles song, and C-F-G-C chords are often seen there' then it doesn't matter that the song is product of a human's creative work, the facts are not that creative work. If I say 'hobbits in Tolkien's work have hairy feet' then again, Tolkien made that fact up, it didn't exist before his writing, but it's still not copyrighted or 'copyrightable'. Copyright is about copying the actual prose or drawings from Pokemon, but stating the facts about that prose or drawings is allowed.
  - nkuttler 13y ago
    "Name Charizard, Types fire/flying, electric 2x rock 4x water 2x" etc. don't at all sound like "facts" to me. They seem to be the core of an individual pokemon, they are what makes that pokemon a unique creative work. This sounds more like publishing the chords of a song, it's melody and lyrics, but not using the cover art. Anyway, the fact that there's even a discussion about this is proof enough that apple did good to reject the app. It's not apple's job to have a team of lawyers review apps with regard to the intricacies of copyright law.
- Snoptic 13y ago
  The abstract rules of a game are not copyrightable. This is long established. The character names are more protectable though.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

shuzchen 13y ago

Pokemon (and I assume all their stats re: them) are owned by Nintendo.

grogenaut 13y ago
Incorrect, they're owned by the Pokemon Company