Talk:Capcom U.S.A. Inc. v. Data East Corp.

Capcom U.S.A. Inc. v. Data East Corp. has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: May 6, 2022. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Cake Mania (series) (0 participants)
Omocat (4 participants)
Fortnite Chapter 5 Season 2: Myths and Mortals (9 participants)
SpongeBob SquarePants (disambiguation) (9 participants)
Stick Soldiers (2 participants)
Rick Jay Glen (4 participants; relisted)
Do You Like Horny Bunnies? (16 participants; relisted)
Atlus USA (15 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Featured content candidates

Good article nominations

DYK nominations

Reviews and reassessments

The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask (nom)
Hogwarts Legacy (rev)
Pokémon Channel (nom)
Rain World (rev)

Articles that need...

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Resurrected reply from WP:GAN#Law[edit]

Deleted by Legobot:

Note: I had trouble finding a digital copy of the case itself but there should still be no major gaps in the research. Anyone who can find the case would be a huge help. --Jorahm (talk) 20:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jorahm: I have no doubt it's difficult. I requested three documents from my PlainSite account: the complaint (Entered: 09/03/1993); the response (Entered: 10/26/1993); and finally the ruling with prejudice on the case (Entered: 11/14/1994) and some odd ruling about a "floor plan" (Entered: 11/28/1994). We can only wait as these were requests from the archives. I suggest you put this on hold until you read the documents. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 12:49, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 13:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making the request. I am not sure how to hold the nomination but I don't think anyone is in a hurry to review it so I will just wait in the mean time. I will read the docs when I get them. Jorahm (talk) 16:53, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good news and bad news. The good news is, I received the scanned PDF's from the National Archives via PlainSite and uploaded the ones that were public domain to the Commons:

Memorandum Decision and Order dated August 18, 1994 (Docket №243)
Capcom U.S.A. Inc. v. Data East Corp. Stipulation and Order Regarding Floor Plan and Photographs of Data East's Premises dated October 26, 1994 (Docket №441)
Capcom U.S.A. Inc. v. Data East Corp. Stipulation and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice dated November 8, 1994 (Docket №439)

@Jorahm: The bad news is that a lot of the documents are pleadings, complaints, and answers, which aren't technically public domain in the US. I will have to email you those, or upload them another way to a site less strict than Commons. Also, to be clear, I don't have the entire docket. I requested the most important stuff in it only, not every minute motion. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 21:59, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Psiĥedelisto: This is already a big help thank you! I believe this article is a good article and if there is any confusion it will be helpful to have the case to refer to. Thanks again. Jorahm (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Capcom U.S.A. Inc. v. Data East Corp./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cerebellum (talk · contribs) 09:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let's try another one. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same thing I said in the other one that I'm a little overwhelmed these days. But I plan to get to this within a week or two. Thank you for working on this one. Jorahm (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've done a great job with these video game law articles :) It’s cool to see a niche topic covered so thoroughly. The article meets the GA criteria as is so I will pass, comments below are suggestions for further improvement. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably should link to Data East USA, Inc. v. Epyx, Inc. when mentioning the case.
I really like the Claud Stern quote, the fact that it was their lawyer saying that is entertaining. Does trial counsel need to be capitalized?
Data East was confident in their argument, ironically, because Don't need "ironically", readers will see the irony without it.
Only one image, it is appropriately tagged.
Looks like refs #8 and 15 are to the same article.
For ref #4, I would link directly to chapter 4 of the article.
I spot checked several of the other references, no issues identified. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is really good news!! I made the edits that you have suggested and marked them as minor. Thank you very much. Jorahm (talk) 19:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yen to USD[edit]

Can I change the yen amount to USD? This is the English encyclopedia, and it IS a case between two U.S. companies. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 17:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]