| smbhax [sys=NES; cat=Puzzle; reg=UC] |
| | | Made by Tengen. Licensed by Namco but not by Nintendo. Namco would release their own Namco Hometek-made Ms. Pac-Man for NES years later but it is noticeably slower, uglier, and lacking in features compared to the Tengen one, which has loads of unique mazes, two-player, and a turbo speed option.
When I looked on eBay today, ~80% of the listings were the Tengen version, and they were about half the price of the Namco Hometek version.
Nintendo sued Tengen over the unlicensed NES games Tengen was putting out; problem for Tengen was, they'd failed to reverse-engineer a solution to the lockout chip Nintendo built into the NES (not the Famicom though; in Japan, companies could build their own carts--in the States though, Nintendo implemented a draconian licensing system ; D), so they'd resorted to getting a copy of Nintendo's patent application from the US Patent Office, citing potential antitrust litigation--and they did end up suing Nintendo for antitrust practices, for instance if you put out a game on a Nintendo platform, Nintendo insisted you wait two years before putting it on another platform. Anyway, you couldn't normally get a copy of information like that form the Patent Office but you could if it was going to be part of a lawsuit.
So Tengen took the schematics or whatever they got from the Patent Office and were able to use them to produce a functional duplicate of Nintendo's lockout chip, so they could now make and sell their own working game cartridges that would run on an NES without any sort of approval from Nintendo. Ms. Pac-Man is one of those.
Nintendo of course sued and eventually won the case--Tengen for instance couldn't say they'd reverse-engineered their lockout chip, since it contained unused circuitry that was in the patent application but not in Nintendo's actual shipped cartridges--in 1992 (Tengen's NES Ms. Pac-Man came out in 1990; Tengen's NES releases stopped after that, and they seem to have entirely avoided the SNES, while still putting out stuff on the Genesis, for instance).
Pretty good article on this here: https://dfarq.homeip.net/tengen-and-its-legal-battles-with-nintendo/ . It mentions that since this was all pretty late in the day for the NES anyway--certainly by 1992; the SNES came out in late 1990--Nintendo's strong-arming of retailers not to sell Tengen games may have hurt worse than the lawsuit. It also mentions Tengen and Nintendo settled on the antitrust lawsuit--but Nintendo won the two other lawsuits vs Tengen (there was another over Tetris).
That article also clarifies that there were two Ataris at this point, having been sold off in two chunks by WB in the early 80s, after the crash: Tengen was a division of Atari Games, which had the rights to Atari arcade games; the other Atari, Atari, was owned by Jack Tramiel, ex of Commodore, who basically bought the Atari consumer division: rights to Atari home computers, consoles, & games, and the right to put the "Atari" name on things sold to consumers. |
|
|
| | | | (Wikipedia's summary of the legal proceedings in their Ms. Pac-Man article appears to have conflated the antitrust suit and the suit over the copyright violation of the lockout chip.) |
|
|
| | | The two questions I have left are:
- How did Atari Games think they were going to get away with the copyright theft? Like, did they think Nintendo wouldn't figure it out, or would just not care enough to sue?
- What did Namco think about it? I mean, they must have known what Tengen were up to, right?
OH there's a whole Wikipedia article on the court case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_Games_Corp._v._Nintendo_of_America_Inc. . Nintendo had specifically instituted the lockout chip in the US to prevent a flood of knock-off games from leading to the type of oversaturation and crash that had killed Atari.
Ah a district court consolidated the antitrust (Tengen suing Nintendo in December 1988) and copyright (Nintendo suing Tengen in November 1989) cases. Tengen was enjoined from selling any unauthorized games until the trial. Atari Games was in the doghouse with the court because they'd lied to the Copyright Office: in order to get the source code for the "10NES" lockout chip in 1988, they told the copyright office they were in litigation over it--but hadn't actually filed their antitrust lawsuit until later that year.
The settlement was in 1994, "with Atari Games paying Nintendo for damages and use of several intellectual property licenses."
The preliminary injunction--I think where Tengen would have been prohibited from selling more unauthorized games--was in April 1991 https://repository.uclawsf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1346&context=hastings_comm_ent_law_journal page 565 note 25--so Atari Games had had about a year to sell Ms. Pac-Man. Unless the injunction stopped once the trial started, so maybe they could sell more after that before it ended? Or maybe they could sell more once it ended, too? Although that seems unlikely; Namco's version was out in November 1993.
"Although Nintendo succeeded in court due to Atari's foul play, the company faced a trend of litigation over unfair business practices and other monopolistic behavior. Atari Corporation (a wholly separate company from Atari Games) also sued Nintendo for seeking to monopolize the game business, but Nintendo was exonerated of any unfair business practices. Under further legal pressure, Nintendo soon began to shift their legal strategy. When Nintendo was accused of fixing their prices with retailers, Nintendo settled with the Federal Trade Commission without admitting to any wrongdoing, offering to $5 million in legal costs and millions of $5 coupons to their past customers. Nintendo began to ease their licensing restrictions to avoid accusations of monopoly. By the early 1990s, Nintendo began losing developers to the Sega Genesis, and the competition forced Nintendo to make further concessions to developers." |
|
|
| | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namco
Hideyuki Nakajima took over Atari Japan--which was a financial disaster, had high employee theft, and whose previous president had stopped showing up for work--shortly before Nolan Bushnell sold the division to Namco, giving them distribution of Atari games in Japan.
Nakajima suggested to Namco's president and founder, Masaya Nakamura, that he create a US division--he made Namco America in 1978, with Nakajima as president.
In 1985, Namco America bought 60% of Atari Games (Atari arcade rights) from WB, again giving them distribution of Atari arcade games in Japan. Nakamura soon tired of Atari Games and WB, though, and Nakajima became frustrated with Nakamura's Atari marketing attempts in Japan. "...in 1987 Namco America sold 33% of its ownership stake to a group of Atari Games employees led by Nakajima."
"This prompted Nakajima to resign from Namco America and become president of Atari Games. He established Tengen, a publisher that challenged Nintendo's licensing restrictions for the NES by selling several unlicensed games, which included ports of Namco arcade games." "Namco still held a minority stake in the company and Nakamura retained his position as its board chairman until the middle of 1988."
Nakajima died in 1994 (says Giant Bomb)--the year his Atari Games settled with Nintendo. |
|
|
| | | The 1987 sale to the employees meant there were three minority owners of Atari Games: WB (40%), Namco (40%), employees (20%)--leaving Atari Games an independent company, effectively.
Wikipedia cites a June 1994 article for the Atari Games settlement with Nintendo. Nakajima died shortly thereafter: July 12th, age 64 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_Games ).
Also just prior to Nakajima's death, and to the settlement, (NY Times March 26 1994 https://web.archive.org/web/20240708143502/https://www.nytimes.com/1994/03/26/business/company-news-time-warner-increases-its-stake-in-atari.html ), WB re-acquired their controlling stake in Atari Games, and subsequently consolidated Tengen into Time-Warner Interactive (from Wikipedia's Tengen article, which doesn't mention Nakajima at all...). The Atari Games name made its way to WMS Industries--which bought Time-Warner Interactive--and from there into Midway Games ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_Games ). |
|
|
| | | | Tengen is a term from the Japanese board game Go, as is Atari. |
|
|
| | | 1974 - Hideyuki Nakajima becomes president of Atari Japan
1974 - Namco--Masaya Nakamura president--buys Atari Japan
1978 - Nakajima made president of new US arm, Namco America
1985 - Namco America buys 60% of Atari Games from WB
1987 - Nakamura, frustrated w/ WB & Atari Games, sells 33% to a group of Atari Games employees, led by Nakajima
1987 - Nakajima resigns from Namco America, becomes president of Atari Games, which with no majority shareholder (Namco and WB each own 40%, employees have 20%) is effectively an independent company; Nakamura chairs its board
1987 - December: Nakajima founds Atari Games division Tengen (Tengen is a term from the Japanese board game Go; the name Atari also comes from Go)
1988 - Tengen tells US Copyright Office they need Nintendo's NES lockout chip copyright application, complete with the chip's source code, for a (nonexistent) ongoing legal case; under this false pretense, Tengen obtains the NES lockout chip source code from the Copyright Office
1988 - midyear: Nakamura's chairmanship of Atari Games ends
1988 - October: Tengen publishes Nintendo-licensed NES Pac-Man
1988 - December: Atari Games sues Nintendo for antitrust practices and announce they will release their own Tengen-branded NES carts, without Nintendo license
1989 - Tengen publishes Nintendo-unlicensed NES Pac-Man
1989 - November: Nintendo sues Atari Games for copyright and patent infringement of their NES lockout chip
1990 - Tengen releases Nintendo-unlicensed NES Ms. Pac-Man
1991 - April: District court preliminary injunction enjoins Atari Games from selling more unlicensed games prior to trial
1993 - November: Namco publishes their own (Namco Hometek) NES Pac-Man in the US
1994 - March: WB re-acquires controlling stake in Atari Games, subsequently consolidates its division Tengen into Time-Warner Interactive
1994 - June: Atari Games and Nintendo settle consolidated antitrust & copyright/patent infringement suit "with Atari Games paying Nintendo for damages and use of several intellectual property licenses" (Wikipedia)
1994 - July: Nakajima dies age 64 |
|
|
| | | On Nintendo's strong-arming of retailers:
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-03-15-fi-399-story.html
March 15, 1990
"A court has ruled video giant Nintendo can sue retailers who buy patent-protected video games from its competitors.
The decision by U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington nullified a California court ruling that prohibited suits against retailers who sell products that companies say infringe on their patents. The California injunction stems from a lawsuit filed in December, 1988, by arcade-game developer Atari Games-Tengen Inc., which charged Nintendo with monopolistic practices through its licensing agreements. Atari Games also claims that Nintendo has infringed on an Atari patent." |
|
|
| | | https://web.archive.org/web/20060427021708/http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/cases/atarivnintendo.html
"ATARI GAMES CORP. and TENGEN, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
vs.
NINTENDO OF AMERICA INC. AND NINTENDO CO., LTD., Defendants-Appellees.
91-1293
United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit
975 F.2d 832, 24 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1015, Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P26,978, 1992-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P69,969, 92 Cal. Daily Op. Service 7858, 92 Daily Journal DAR 12936, 1992 U.S. App. Decision
September 10, 1992, Decided"
"Atari first attempted to analyze and replicate the NES security system in 1986. Atari could not break the 10NES program code by monitoring the communication between the master and slave chips. Atari next tried to break the code by analyzing the chips themselves. Atari analysts chemically peeled layers from the NES chips to allow microscopic examination of the object code.1 Nonetheless, Atari still could not decipher the code sufficiently to replicate the NES security system."
" In early 1988, Atari's attorney applied to the Copyright Office for a reproduction of the 10NES program. The application stated that Atari was a defendant in an infringement action and needed a copy of the program for that litigation. Atari falsely alleged that it was a present defendant in a case in the Northern District of California. Atari assured the "Library of Congress that the requested copy [would] be used only in connection with the specified litigation." In fact, no suit existed between the parties until December 1988, when Atari sued Nintendo for antitrust violations and unfair competition. Nintendo filed no infringement action against Atari until November 1989.
After obtaining the 10NES source code from the Copyright Office, Atari again tried to read the object code from peeled chips. Through microscopic examination, Atari's analysts transcribed the 10NES object code into a handwritten representation of zeros and ones. Atari used the information from the Copyright Office to correct errors in this transcription. The Copyright Office copy facilitated Atari's replication of the 10NES object code."
"After obtaining the copy of the code from the Copyright Office, Atari made other intermediate copies of the program. Atari made photocopies of the Copyright Office copy, deprocessed chips, and hand-copied the 10NES object code from the deprocessed chip. Atari then entered this copied 10NES object code into a computer which aided in understanding the ideas in the program. The district court determined that this intermediate copying infringed Nintendo's copyright."
" Reverse engineering, untainted by the purloined copy of the 10NES program and necessary to understand 10NES, is a fair use. An individual cannot even observe, let alone understand, the object code on Nintendo's chip without reverse engineering. [F.2d 844] Atari retrieved this object code from NES security chips in its efforts to reverse engineer the 10NES program. Atari chemically removed layers from Nintendo's chips to reveal the 10NES object code. Through microscopic examination of the "peeled" chip, Atari engineers transcribed the 10NES object code into a handwritten list of ones and Zeros. While these ones and zeros represent the configuration of machine readable software, the ones and zeros convey little, if any, information to the normal unaided observer. Atari then keyed this handwritten copy into a computer. The computer then "disassembled"6 the object code or otherwise aided the observer in understanding the program's method or functioning. This "reverse engineering" process, to the extent untainted by the 10NES copy purloined from the Copyright Office, qualified as a fair use.
The district court assumed that reverse engineering (intermediate copying) was copyright infringement. Atari Games v. Nintendo of Am., Nos. 88-4805, 89-0027, 89-0824, slip op. at 11-13 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 11, 1991). This court disagrees. Atari did not violate Nintendo's copyright by deprocessing computer chips in Atari's rightful possession. Atari could lawfully deprocess Nintendo's 10NES chips to learn their unprotected ideas and processes. This fair use did not give Atari more than the right to understand the 10NES program and to distinguish the protected from the unprotected elements of the 10NES program. Any copying beyond that necessary to understand the 10NES program was infringement. Atari could not use reverse engineering as an excuse to exploit commercially or otherwise misappropriate protected expression."
"Specifically, the district court noted that the Rabbit program incorporates elements of the 10NES program unnecessary for the chip's performance. The 10NES slave chip performs some functions beyond unlocking the NES console. For example, the 10NES slave chip shuts down upon receipt of an erroneous message from a master chip. The Rabbit program too contains this feature. This disabling feature is unnecessary to achieve Atari's stated purpose -- unlocking the NES console."
"In another example, the district court noted that Nintendo modified its 10NES slave chip program in 1987. This modification deleted some instructions from the original 10NES program. Nonetheless the Rabbit program contains instructions equivalent to those deleted from the original 10NES program. These unnecessary instructions strongly suggest that the Rabbit program is substantially similar to the 10NES program."
"The unnecessary instructions in the Rabbit program suggest copying, not independent creation. As Judge Learned Hand said, "No plagiarist can excuse the wrong by showing how much of his work he did not pirate." Sheldon v. Metro Goldwyn Pictures Corp., 81 F.2d 49, 56 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 298 U.S. 669, 80 L. Ed. 1392, 56 S. Ct. 835 (1936). Atari argued that incorporation of the unnecessary instructions was necessary to insure future compatibility. The district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow Atari to rely on speculative future events to justify inclusion of unnecessary 10NES program elements in the Rabbit program."
"In 1991, the Copyright Office circulated the following notice:
The Copyright Office has recently become aware that an attorney completing the previous Litigation Statement form provided by the Office could generally allege that a controversy existed when in fact no real controversy did exist. An attorney could thus receive reproductions of deposits not authorized by the regulations. The Litigation Statement form has been amended to require the applicant to give more specific information regarding prospective proceedings and to include supporting documentation." |
|
|
| | | | It's hard for me not to think that basically Namco created Tengen to try to crack Nintendo's stranglehold on the NES games market, while avoiding direct legal liability. Although how anyone thought they'd get away with stealing source code directly from the Copyright Office is beyond me. |
|
|
| | | | Atari Games first tried to obtain more favorable licensing terms for NES games from Nintendo. Nintendo denied the request, and Atari Games agreed to the standard licensing terms in December 1987--and then, on the 21st of that month, created Tengen. |
|
|
| | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masaya_Nakamura_(businessman)#Arcade_successes_and_Atari_Games
"In 1989, Namco had to renew the preferential terms they had for being one of Nintendo's first third-party licensees — when Nintendo president Hiroshi Yamauchi refused to renew them, Nakamura grew furious and publicly denounced Nintendo for monopolistic practices, boasting that his company would shift all home console development to the Sega Mega Drive." |
|
|
| | | From "Game Over, Press Start to Continue: How Nintendo Conquered the World" on archive.org--though book doesn't appear to be public domain.
- 1974 - Nakajima didn't plan to stay at Namco, whom he saw as low-prestige
- Nakamura persuaded him to stay for 6 months
- Nakajima increased Namco international sales from $5K to $500K in that time
- Nakamura persuades Nakajima to stay longer; Nakajima finds Nakamura instructive and prophetic in business (ie buying Atari)
- 1978 - prior to Namco America, Nakamura promotes Nakajima to executive vice-president of Atari & asks Nakajima to join Namco's board
- 1984 - Namco first licensee on Famicom; Nakamura got favorable terms from Yamauchi
- 1986 - Atari Games conducts legal analysis of Nintendo license workaround, determines could sell own games if no copyright/patent infringement; Nakajima has engineers begin work to reverse-engineer NES lockout chip
- Nintendo had originally resisted copyrighting lockout chip because didn't want to register code, but were (somewhat incorrectly) assured by attorney code couldn't be removed
- 1987 - midyear: Atari Games applies to Nintendo for NES license but want exceptions; Nintendo refuses exceptions
- 1987 - (December?): Atari Games couldn't make console games under its own name--that right belonged to Tramiel's Atari Corporation--so created Tengen to be console publishing name
- 1988 - January 18: Atari Games signs licensing agreement w/ Nintendo (not December 1987? I think that was from Wikipedia)
- 1988 - January 28: Atari Games-hired lawyer files affidavit w/ Copyright Office saying copy of NES lockout code required for "pending proceedings" in NDoC
- 1988 - August: Atari Games successfully producing carts w/ their knock-off "Rabbit" lockout chip
- 1988 - December: Morning of press conf, Nakajima called Nintendo's Arakawa: Nakajima expected Nintendo to sue, but "I thought I might be able to settle things before they escalated"
- 1988 - December: Day after press conf: Nakajima & Arakawa meet at Sea-Tac; Nakajima says he was against the theft, blames others at Atari Games, says might not have happened had Nintendo been more flexible, asks Arakawa to "Let us do our own manufacturing"; Arakawa walks away
- 1988 - (December?): Atari Games exec told reporters they'd reproduced the lockout chip via reverse engineering
- 1989 - Namco's licensing contract with Nintendo expires; Yamauchi refuses to renew the favorable terms
- Namco "was earning 40 percent of its sales from Nintendo games," but Nakamura publicly denounces Nintendo as a monopoly
- Nakamura sues Nintendo for monopolistic practices; Yamauchi contemptuous; Nakamura soon withdraws suit
- 1989 - January 24: Nintendo letter to Toys R Us: "If your company handles products which infringe Nintendo's patent or other intellectual property rights, Nintendo intends to avail itself of the full range of its legal remedies"; sends "cease and desist" 6 days later
- Atari Games wins preliminary injunction "to stop Nintendo from threatening dealers," but it's reversed on appeal; Atari Games exec says top 15 US retailers all drop Tengen
- Atari Games defended "pending litigation" claim to Copyright Office by saying it was "imminent"; judge refuses that defense
- 1989 - Atari Games execs "star witnesses" in congressional investigations into alleged Nintendo antitrust practices; Justice Department moves case to FTC, who spends "more than a year" on investigation
- 1991 - March: In preliminary hearings, Atari Games maintained only used reverse engineering; judge's injunction refuses that defense, lambastes Atari for thievery, says Atari Games code virtually identical to Copyright Office code, including "far more information than was necessary to make the chip work"
- Ruling prohibits Atari Games from copying, selling, or using the copyrighted code "in any way," orders Atari Games to halt to marketing, distribution, & sale of its unlicensed NES carts, and to recall all product in stores
- 1991 - April: Judge agrees to allow "Tengen" to sell games pending appeal
- 1991 - April 10: NY AG statement announces FTC investigation of Nintendo for price fixing, says anyone who bought NES from June 1 1988 through Dec 31 1990 would get $5 Nintendo discount coupon; Nintendo would have to redeem min $5M, max $25M of coupons; seen as marketing promotion for Nintendo
- 1992 - September: "Tengen" loses the appeal, has to recall all their NES games; trial date set for May 1993 |
|
|
| | | Ah, Game Over has a Kindle version, so I bought that to assuage my conscience ^ _^ https://www.amazon.com/Game-Over-Nintendo-Conquered-World-ebook/dp/B0060AY98I/
There's a ton more in there about Nintendo--Yamauchi, etc. I should probably read the whole thing some day rather than just skimming for Nakajima/Namco excerpts. |
|
|
| | | | Game Over was first published in 1993--prior to Nakajima's death. Author David Sheff's Acknowledgements section, discussing interview subjects, lists among many others Yamauchi, Arakawa (NoA), "Hide" Nakajima and three other Atari Games execs (Dennis Wood, Dan Van Elderen, Barry Kane). |
|
|
| | | Combined timeline w/ some corrections and additions:
- 1974 - Hideyuki Nakajima becomes president of Atari Japan
- 1974 - Namco--Masaya Nakamura president--buys Atari Japan
- 1974 - Nakajima didn't plan to stay at Namco, whom he saw as low-prestige
- Nakamura persuaded him to stay for 6 months
- Nakajima increased Namco international sales from $5K to $500K in that time
- Nakamura persuades Nakajima to stay longer; Nakajima finds Nakamura instructive and prophetic in business (ie buying Atari Japan)
- 1978 - Nakamura promotes Nakajima to executive vice-president of Atari Japan & asks Nakajima to join Namco's board
- 1978 - Nakajima made president of new US arm, Namco America
- 1984 - Namco first licensee on Famicom; Nakamura got favorable terms from Yamauchi
- 1985 - Namco America buys 60% of Atari Games from WB
- 1986 - Atari Games conducts legal analysis of Nintendo license workaround, determines could sell own games if no copyright/patent infringement; Nakajima has engineers begin work to reverse-engineer NES lockout chip
- Nintendo had originally resisted copyrighting lockout chip because didn't want to register code, but were (somewhat incorrectly) assured by attorney code couldn't be removed from the copyright office
- 1987 - Nakamura sells 33% of Namco's Atari Games holding to a group of Atari Games employees, led by Nakajima
- 1987 - Nakajima resigns from Namco America, becomes president of Atari Games, which with no majority shareholder (Namco and WB each own 40%, employees have 20%) is effectively an independent company; Nakamura chairs its board
- 1987 - midyear: Atari Games applies to Nintendo for NES license but want exceptions; Nintendo refuses exceptions
- 1987 - December: Atari Games, having failed to persuade Nintendo to grant it more favorable licensing terms for NES games, agrees to Nintendo's highly restrictive standard licensing terms (per Wikipedia; Game Over says Jan)
- 1987 - December 21: Nakajima founds Atari Games division Tengen (Tengen is a term from the Japanese board game Go; the name Atari also comes from Go)
- Atari Games couldn't make console games under its own name--that right belonged to Tramiel's Atari Corporation--so created Tengen to be console publishing name
- 1988 - January 18: Atari Games signs licensing agreement w/ Nintendo (per Game Over)
- 1988 - January 28: Atari Games-hired lawyer files affidavit w/ Copyright Office saying copy of NES lockout code required for "pending proceedings" in Northern District of California
- 1988 - June: Nakamura resigns board chairmanship at Atari Games shareholder's meeting; Atari says was due to 'Namco's "acquisition of a major interest in a competitor"'--presumed to be Data East (Cash Box magazine, Aug 6 1988--https://archive.org/details/cashbox52unse_3/page/n27/mode/2up)
- 1988 - August: Atari Games successfully producing carts w/ their knock-off "Rabbit" lockout chip
- 1988 - October: Tengen publishes Nintendo-licensed NES Pac-Man
- 1988 - December: Morning of press conf, Nakajima calls Nintendo's Arakawa: Nakajima expected Nintendo to sue, but "I thought I might be able to settle things before they escalated"
- 1988 - December: Atari Games sues Nintendo for antitrust practices and hold press conference where they announce they will release their own Tengen-branded NES carts, without Nintendo license
- 1988 - December: Day after press conf: Nakajima & Arakawa meet at Sea-Tac; Nakajima says he was against the theft, blames others at Atari Games, says might not have happened had Nintendo been more flexible, asks Arakawa to "Let us do our own manufacturing"; Arakawa walks away
- 1988 - (December?): Atari Games exec tells reporters they'd reproduced the lockout chip via reverse engineering
- 1989 - January 24: Nintendo letter to Toys R Us: "If your company handles products which infringe Nintendo's patent or other intellectual property rights, Nintendo intends to avail itself of the full range of its legal remedies"; sends "cease and desist" 6 days later
- Atari Games wins preliminary injunction "to stop Nintendo from threatening dealers," but it's reversed on appeal; Atari Games exec says top 15 US retailers all drop Tengen
- Atari Games defended "pending litigation" claim to Copyright Office by saying it was "imminent"; judge refuses that defense
- 1989 - Namco's licensing contract with Nintendo expires; Yamauchi refuses to renew the favorable terms
- Namco "was earning 40 percent of its sales from Nintendo games," but Nakamura publicly denounces Nintendo as a monopoly
- Nakamura sues Nintendo for monopolistic practices; Yamauchi contemptuous; Nakamura soon withdraws suit
- 1989 - Atari Games execs "star witnesses" in congressional investigations into alleged Nintendo antitrust practices; Justice Department moves case to FTC, which spends "more than a year" on investigation
- 1989 - October: Tengen publishes Nintendo-unlicensed NES Pac-Man
- 1989 - November: Nintendo sues Atari Games for copyright and patent infringement of their NES lockout chip
- 1990 - Tengen releases Nintendo-unlicensed NES Ms. Pac-Man
- 1991 - March 28: In preliminary hearings, Atari Games maintained only used reverse engineering; judge's injunction refuses that defense, lambastes Atari for thievery, says Atari Games code virtually identical to Copyright Office code, including "far more information than was necessary to make the chip work"
- The district court's preliminary injunction enjoins Atari Games from selling more unlicensed games prior to trial
- Ruling prohibits Atari Games from copying, selling, or using the copyrighted code "in any way," orders Atari Games to halt to marketing, distribution, & sale of its unlicensed NES carts, and to recall all product in stores
- 1991 - April 10: NY AG statement announces FTC investigation of Nintendo for price fixing, says anyone who bought NES from June 1 1988 through Dec 31 1990 would get $5 Nintendo discount coupon; Nintendo would have to redeem min $5M, max $25M of coupons; seen as marketing promotion for Nintendo
- 1991 - April 11: Judge agrees to allow "Tengen" to sell games pending appeal
- 1992 - September: "Tengen" loses the appeal, has to recall all their NES games; trial date set for May 1993
- 1993 - November: Namco publishes their own (Namco Hometek) Nintendo-licensed NES Pac-Man
- 1994 - March: WB re-acquires controlling stake in Atari Games, subsequently consolidates its division Tengen into Time-Warner Interactive
- 1994 - June: Atari Games and Nintendo settle consolidated antitrust & copyright/patent infringement suit "with Atari Games paying Nintendo for damages and use of several intellectual property licenses" (Wikipedia)
- 1994 - July: Nakajima dies age 64 |
|
|
| | |
0:00 - Ms. Pac-Man NES (Tengen)
8:49 (1970s) Masaya Nakamura & Hideyuki Nakajima - Namco execs into Atari
14:22 (1984) Nakamura gets favorable Famicom license from Nintendo's Yamauchi
18:15 (1985) Nakajima's Namco America buys Atari Games
33:40 (1987) Nakajima & Nakamura heading "indy" Atari Games; Nakajima forms Tengen division of Atari Games
52:50 (Jan 1988) Atari Games steals Nintendo "10NES" lockout chip source code from US Copyright Office
1:18:07 (Jan 1989) Nintendo counter-attacks
1:24:05 (1989) Yamauchi humiliates Nakamura
The text of the timeline: https://smbhax.tumblr.com/post/802587799004086272/tengennamconintendo-timeline-combined-from-my
My photos of my Ms. Pac-Man NES Tengen cart: https://smbhax.tumblr.com/post/802770585520390144/ms-pac-man-tengen-nes
Much of the info I stumble through here came from David Sheff's book "Game Over: How Nintendo Conquered the World"--for which he was able to interview almost all of the major players, including Nintendo's Yamauchi and Arakawa, and Atari Games execs including Nakajima. First released in March 1994, Game Over is still available for purchase in ebook form from online stores. |
|
|
| | |
0:00 - what's a Tengen
6:15 - main menu
8:58 - Arcade (Normal)
20:59 - Arcade (Crazy)
24:23 - Arcade (Crazy) Booster
27:55 - Arcade (Hard)
31:59 - Arcade (Easy)
32:42 - Strange (Normal) Booster
59:47 - Big (Normal) Booster
1:13:07 - Mini (Normal) Booster
1:25:54 - Mini (Normal) (lvl 11)
1:27:59 - wrap!
"Crazy" comes before "Hard" in the main men's game difficulty setting, but is actually the harder--ie faster--setting. : P
I'm not sure how many stages there are for the various modes but it's more than you (okay I) might have thought from the menu stage selection option only going up to 7--initially. And then you get 3 (actually 4?) continues but even if you switch modes at that point you still use a continue--it'd be better to reset the game at that point instead, probably. The STRANGE stages have some pretty horrible design elements in them but seeing how far you can get through is kinda something to do I suppose. ; D
I went back and looked at my last Pac-Man Championship Edition NES de-make video from a year ago and yeah that is WAY too flashy for my ol' eyeballs 0_O, I'll stick to MINI mazes w/ Booster here for my funky alternate Pac fix. ^_ ^ |
|
|
| | |
0:00 - BIG
22:10 - Pac rescues Ms. Pac!
24:30 - Stg 17, power pellets don't turn ghosts blue!
(I was Ms. Pac-Man.)
Some funny design decisions / non-decisions for the cooperative 2-player:
- Pac and Ms. Pac bounce off each other! Nearly all the way across the screen!
- In bigger stages, players can move off the visible screen, to part of the maze where they can't see themselves at all! ; D
- Lives aren't shared between the players, and there's no resurrection of the other player or anything like that, so if one person uses up all their lives, they just have to wait until the other player dies off, at which point you can burn one of your (4) continues to restart both players
- When one player dies, all players and ghosts are reset to their spawn points |
|
|
| | |
