-38

pokemon: pokemorphs

Anonymous 7 years ago updated by Lucario_Lover 7 years ago 8

well they have so many so pick some some look more masculine and some look more feminine but Gothorita and Gardevoir would be nice as feminine, Gallade and Lucario would be examples maybe of more masculine ones.

best part is that pokemorphs are fanmade and so they are not copyrighted

ps, there are some nice looking ones out there lol, but the cartoon/game has so many set up pokemon that are great to make pokemorphs out of lol

+5

Definitely not how copyright works.

-5

But in this case, yes. Pokemorphs are public domain.

+3

OK, do you have a source on that? The original fanwork featuring anthro Pokemon might be free to use, but all the concepts involved with Pokemon are not. At all. They're heavily trademarked.


It's not solely the shapes of Pokemon that fall under intellectual property law. Just about anything based on a Pokemon is covered under the legal rights of GameFreak, Nintendo, Pokemon International etc etc.


"A look at the registered “BULBASAUR” trademark (U.K. Reg. No. 2250394) reveals that it has been registered for a wide variety of goods, such as video game software, decorative windsocks, mechanical toys, sports equipment, toy cookware, plush dolls and batteries. Such broad registrations afford Nintendo equally broad power to enforce its trademark rights against potential infringers."


(http://brandchannel.com/2016/08/08/pokemon-go-trademark-infringement-080816/)


So no, legally they don't care if your Pikachu walks on two legs or not, it's still their intellectual property. They allow it to be used but if you make any kind of money off it, they can (and might) sue you.


-2

Copyright is a dangerous sounding terminology to throw around, especially since it's hard to tell how it interacts internationally and with the monkey's wrench of fair use oftentimes leaving cases up to the judges of the law on who's right. So it might be best to avoid the risk in it's entirety, however here's one big thought still in favor that having pokemorphs as a species is fine: Why should the pokemon company care about this? It in no way infringes on the market that pokemon targets. The mere fact that the pokemon company hasn't done anything appearant about pokemon porn (And there are people who specifically sell adult artwork of pokemon, yet alone a mere facet of a product like this) should be sufficient evidence to that fact.


So my vote is for this species group (might be prudent to expand on specific pokemorphs) should still be considered and potentially implemented.

Your forgetting that Nintendo is very well known for protecting anything they make. So adding this would indefinitely have Fek sued for everything he owns.

+1

But if you want pokemorphs, then you can just design a pokemorph in the character creation menu.