Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Sega v. Accolade

Sega v. Accolade[edit]

This nomination predates the introduction in April 2014 of article-specific subpages for nominations and has been created from the edit history of Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests.

This is the archived discussion of the TFAR nomination for the article below. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests). Please do not modify this page.

The result was: scheduled for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 20, 2013 by Bencherlite ^Talk 23:30, 2 October 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc. was a decision in 1992 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that applied American intellectual property law to the reverse engineering of computer software. Issues in the case included the scope of copyright, permissible uses for trademarks, and the scope of the fair use doctrine for computer code. It arose after Video game publisher Accolade published several games for the Sega Genesis (pictured), disassembling it to publish games without being licensed by Sega. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in favor of Sega, preventing Accolade from publishing any more games for the Genesis and requiring them to recall all of their Genesis games on sale. Accolade appealed on the grounds that their reverse engineering of the Genesis was protected under fair use. The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's order and ruled that Accolade's use of reverse engineering to publish Genesis titles was protected under fair use, and that its alleged violation of Sega trademarks was the fault of Sega. The case is frequently cited in matters involving reverse engineering and fair use under copyright law. (Full article...)

October 20th of 2013 will be the 21st anniversary of the decision of this landmark U.S. Court of Appeals case that set precedents on the legalities of reverse engineering and copyrights. It's likely this would fall as both a law article and a video game article, and I'm not sure when the last article involving a copyright court case was (if ever, really; I've seen the amount of FAs that fall under Law, and it's a little low on the count). I am also a major contributor to this article and have never had one featured as Today's Featured Article before (mostly because this is my first FA). This should mean at least two points, and perhaps more if there has not been a related article recently. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 04:48, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good to have a law article and one that blends law with gaming should be popular and fun to have on the main page. Interesting topic, solid article. Montanabw^(talk) 18:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to TFAR! I've added wikilinks to the article as per usual. I'd count it as law rather than video games, and the last law article, again US-related, is Ex parte Crow Dog (8th October), although that was over 100 years earlier and on a very different subject matter. So, points-wise, it's -1 points but that isn't necessarily fatal to this being selected. Bencherlite ^Talk 14:38, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I think this would be best with a PNG as the image. The white on blue doesn't look good. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Articles mixing popular subjects (gaming, sports) with intellectual ones (law, history) are always fun. —Cliftonian (talk) 04:49, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]