Video Game Forums

Interesting...

If this is true then yes, this does throw a serious money wrench (haha...) into new DK productions. Don't count it out though:

- Does anyone besides Nintendo know the contract agreement that Nintendo and Rare had? I would suspect that the character Donkey Kong would specifically owned by Nintendo, that in the future if such an event like this would happen, Nintendo would own DK and the name. I would say that there is a really good chance the contract leaves Nintendo with DK... however (plays sinister music) Diddy, Cranky and the rest were created both from Rare and Nintendo collectively, such cases before (ie. Super Mario RPG) have shown that both parties own the characters, and if they don't come to an agreement then those characters are dead.
- Nintendo is slowly starting to have better connections with their liscensees, and other companies in general. DK is one of Nintendo's most lucrative series, I have no doubt that Nintendo and Rare would sit down and talk to each other (and on the flip side, Rare and Microsoft) all three sitting together would deffinately take a while...) about the future of DK.

More interesting things being said I see.

I think some people could use a bit more video-game legalities clarity.

Who owns what?
-Nintendo owns the Donkey Kong franchise. This includes the name, and the title character. Nintendo is also sure to own all characters before Rare's involvement, which is only a handful: Donkey Kong Jr., Pauline, Stanley the Bugman, and Mario... (note, Mario has only ever been given a name in the DK series in Donkey Kong Jr. Originally he was reffered to as Jumpan, but that was not copyrighted) This has no relevance at all, but just some history for you.) And besides characters (talking baddies now) they would also own those things called klaptraps (are that what they called?) as they were shown and named in for DK Jr.
-Characters and baddies from Donkey Kong Country have unknown futures right now. Nintendo could have made an arrangement that would have given them sole copyright of the characters and enemies should they part with Rare. But again, Super Mario RPG has shown that they have ignored (or not been able to agree) on that in the past. Thus Cranky, Diddy, Funky, Candy etc. King K. Rool could be jointly owned. What does that mean? Unless Rare works with Nintendo in the future (which is still not completely impossible) the characters can not be used by either company!
-Rare deffinately does not have sole ownership of the jointly made characters. Nintendo would not have allowed that to happen. Thus there is no chance that Rare could go its seperate way and produce 'Super Cranky Kong.' Or even a game featuring such characters in cameos.
-Cranky Kong is a new character. I know he's made out to be the original DK, but it is name, and appearence (not to mention the fact of being the main character) that actually makes the DK sporting the tie owned by Nintendo.
-Nintendo could produce future games resembling anything they've done with Rare (ie. on an island, DK wears a tie etc.). Within reason though.

Final point though, we don't know! Wait and see who owns what!

I knew 9/11 would be bad