double_arrow
Article Archive

double_arrow Ask an Expert Attorney

reCAPTCHA


double_arrow
What Our Clients Say ...

5.0
Based on 102 reviews
powered by Google
Andy Matthews profile picture
Andy Matthews
10:42 13 Mar 26
What can I say about Albright IP? They state 'Excellence in Intellectual Property' and that is exactly the service I received. I was really worried about the patent application for my new product and the team at Albright swept in and saved the day in a swift and professional manner, making me feel completely at ease and in safe hands from the outset. I cannot recommend Alright IP enough they are simply a fantastic company!
Martin Hastings profile picture
Martin Hastings
17:07 13 Nov 25
Excellent, professional service
26dragon76 profile picture
26dragon76
15:31 23 Jul 25
A truly exceptional experience – thank you Albright IP!

I want to personally thank Charlie Heal , Emily Fox, Cara McAtee, and the entire team at Albright IP for their hard work, dedication, and professionalism in helping me submit my first ever patent: the Baffer Ball fire suppression system.

From the very first meeting, Charlie and Emily made everything feel clear, comfortable, and respectful. They listened carefully to my ideas, even though I’m not from a technical or legal background – I’m a painter and decorator by trade. But they believed in my vision and treated it with such care and seriousness that I felt truly supported as an inventor.

Over several months, we worked closely by email and phone. Charlie and the team guided me step by step to build one of the strongest, clearest, and most professional patent drafts I could have hoped for. The claims they wrote are powerful, and the language used shows how deeply they understood my invention. They didn’t just file a document – they helped shape a legacy.

Charlie, even though he is young, is incredibly professional and experienced. I am amazed at how he managed such a complex project with kindness, patience, and precision. Emily and Cara were also fantastic throughout.

This was not just paperwork – this was my dream since childhood. And Albright IP helped me make that dream real.

💬 I look forward to working with them again on future patents. The Baffer Ball is just the beginning – and I am proud that Albright IP was there from Day 1.

Thank you so much again — from the bottom of my heart.
— Morteza
See All Reviews


double_arrow
Need a Product Designer?


double_arrow
Helpful Tips

Do I have to identify the designer?
It is possible to waive the name of the designer when filing a European Community Design, but you should be sure that you have the rights to the design

Super Mario’s Image Rights

by | Oct 4, 2022

Super Mario’s Image Rights

This article was first published in October 2013, and has now been updated to included new relevant material

In a previous article, I detailed the UK position on copyright, and how it arises automatically. With Nintendo having aggressively targeted a college student who uploaded a browser-based recreation of the original Super Mario Bros. game for the Famicom/NES for copyright infringement, it is worth going a little deeper into the US copyright situation, and how it relates to the images rights of the hirsute mascot of the Japanese entertainment giant.

US Copyright Law

Although copyright arises automatically in the US upon creation of an original work, there is the option to register one’s copyright, giving the registered copyright holder a more recognisable legal footing should litigation proceedings arise; only if the copyright is registered can the holder claim for statutory damages during an infringement case.

Super Mario Bros. was released in 1985, and has since been under copyright. In the case of a corporation such as Nintendo, the term of copyright is for the shorter of 120 years from creation or 95 years from publication. In this instance, Nintendo hold copyright over the game, and therefore Mario himself, until 2080.

It is not permitted, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to circumvent technical measures designed to control access to copyrighted matter. For example, it is not permitted to ‘jailbreak’ the latest gaming hardware in order to gain access to the underlying copyrighted material. Sony Computer Entertainment America vigorously pursued one George Hotz for jailbreaking the PlayStation 3, Hotz eventually submitting to a permanent injunction preventing him from hacking any Sony products.

However, under the DMCA, there are various exemptions to the prohibition against circumvention of technical measures, for instance, the use in educational setting or for documentary purposes. In 2006, there was an exemption for “Computer programs and video games distributed in formats that have become obsolete and that require the original media or hardware as a condition of access, when circumvention is accomplished for the purpose of preservation or archival reproduction of published digital works by a library or archive.” The NES is long since out of production, and the browser game does appear to have been made in the spirit of preservation. As such, surely the game cannot be infringing on Nintendo’s copyright?

These exemptions expire every three years. The most recent exemptions were drawn up in October 2012 and do not contain the exemption for obsolete video games. The rise of online marketplaces such as the Xbox Arcade or PlayStation Network, in which copyright holders can sell ‘retro’ games more easily for use on modern gaming consoles, appears to have killed the exemption permanently.

More recently, Nintendo have issued takedown requests on YouTube gamer channels on the grounds of copyright infringement, on the grounds that famous game tunes, including Super Mario soundtracks, have been provided free to listen to by the channel owner. This has proven controversial, as there do not appear to be any viable commercial avenues for listening to Nintendo soundtracks – save for purchasing and playing the relevant games, which is, of course, Nintendo’s point.

Nintendo’s aggressive stance

Unsurprisingly then, Nintendo have taken a dim view of anyone seen to be exploiting the world’s most famous plumber, regardless of commercial benefit, given that in the digital age, many obsolete games can be archived and re-accessed with relative ease.

Indeed, you can rather see what Nintendo are attempting to do by ordering the withdrawal of the browser-based game. Whilst the browser game may have been made in the spirit of preservation, it has clearly not been archived; the game is intended to be played. The Mario brand is instantly recognisable and incredibly lucrative. The original Super Mario Bros. game has been both rereleased (for the Game Boy Advance) and remade (for the Wii), so in essence, the browser-based game is competition, even though it is not-for-profit. The high sales and limited release schedule Mario games make them desirable targets for ‘piggyback’ copying for others to attempt to profit from.

In summary, whilst it does not appear as though the browser-based Super Mario Bros. will be troubling the internet for much longer, Mario himself is in for the long haul. Expect to still be looking for the princess in another castle come 2079.

If you have any patent, design, copyright or trade mark queries, please contact us via email, by telephone: +44 (0) 1242 691 801, or using the form below and we will be happy to advise and guide you. 

ASK AN EXPERT


Article Form