"they are vermin vultures"

So, birds of prey who eat vermin? Such as a majestic eagle or deadly hawk? I like it. Or are you trying to be literal and figurative at the same time and mean strictly vultures who eat vermin?

"... and getting mad that he has more than you." More what than me?

"PS. What are you talking about? 39 Trademarks with Nintendo and Mario isn't a handful, it's the entire library"

What I meant was, there's nothing about art at all. It has all of the game titles, but nothing in regards to art. At most there are a few Mario and Nintendo logos. So as I said, I highly doubt it's as…

I would assume because that would mean redoing the artwork, resubmitting a game that has had fundamental changes made to it for approval, and people would have to re-download the game (albeit very likely as an automated patch).

As I've mentioned within this conversation thread. If you appropriate an iconic art style from a medium; in this case games, and then alter it for your own financial gain there-in lies the issue. If people are able to look at two games and say that they bear far too close of resemblance, the owner of the original…

Flying vermin perhaps? Pigeons?

If you appropriate a stylized piece of art from within the same medium and then attempt to change it; only use it as your own, it's no one's fault but yours if you're called out on it. Especially if you're making money off it.

Your reply was blank btw, feel free to let me know if you want me to X it out.

If you appropriate art that is known within a specific medium, for the purposes of making money in that same medium, regardless as to whether you've altered that art, it's enough to have the original owners of the iconic design come after you.

So you're not special, you just believe that images shouldn't be used because they requiring loading time that slow you down. Gotcha. Ok. So it's not that you believe you're special, you just have special circumstances that you'd like to be taken into consideration.

I think you're oblivious if you don't see it as appropriating art from a known medium and using it for his own benefit.

I'm glad you appreciate it =)

I highly doubt it's as simple as that. Even a search for Nintendo and Mario only brings up a handful of games that have to do with Mario.

In the world of art, taking a piece that exists and changing where the "reflection" lines on it are, is the same as adding an up beat that didn't exist. If someone can look at something and say, "oh, that looks a lot like x where it's been known to exist for x amount of time" it's enough to argue IP theft.

No you don't, don't think you're special for being a jerk. As always, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it." You can provide a counter opinion that it's prevalent without being a jerk. The jerk is the one who makes the comment unpopular.

So you're either saying you're doing it on purpose; which invalidates your…

Really, I'm curious about your process of that. Could you detail for me? I'm not being snarky, I'm genuinely curious.

HEY! You stole my video from my post and my idea! CEASE AND DESIST! =D

The green pipes are trademarked, but I figured I'd focus on the milk before the potatoes.

I don't own a console, nor am I a fan of Nintendo in general. I am on the other hand aware of their practices regarding litigation.

How? Quite easily. Compassion? I save that for work.