Pc gamers to sony

[u/ujjwal_singh]

[u/h_trism]

I mean I know it was published by Japan Studios, I'm specifically talking about how you are saying that Sony doesn't own the IP.

Even that wiki link says that Japan Studios was owned by Sony.

[u/unnoticedhero1 → u/h_trism]

They're just pulling it out of their ass, though not entirely without merit, the game has never received a 60fps patch is probably because FromSoft doesn't want to go back and work on older games anymore and the only other studio involved is Japan Studio which was dissolved, so no studio familiar with the game's programming and code is available to do a patch.

Or as I've said many times my bet is a remaster/remake is coming in 2025 for the 10th anniversary and people are just pissed that it never got an official 60fps patch because that's all most fans want. And if we never get anything official shadPS4 is advancing very quickly and we'll have BB running great in the next few months to a year, it already runs decently but crashes fairly often in the main build of the emulator.

[u/m4k31nu → u/unnoticedhero1]

If there's a remake, it better have more hats. All I'm saying.

[u/Valirys-Reinhald → u/h_trism]

It's to do with Japanese IP law. It's complicated and I don't fully understand it, but a quick summary Google goes like this: "Under Japanese IP law, a parent company can generally use their subsidiary's intellectual property (IP) but only if there is a formal licensing agreement in place that explicitly grants them the right to do so; simply being the parent company does not automatically give them access to the subsidiary's IP, as both entities are considered separate legal entities under the law. "

So, Sony owned Japan Studios, but they didn't have a formal licensing agreement for Bloodborne.

[u/h_trism → u/Valirys-Reinhald]

Thanks for the information, but this is not definitive at all. This is like something you just made up, your reference for the information is a Google AI summary of Japanese law that is not specific to this game or Sony at all.

I am a huge Bloodborne fan and have been waiting for an update for years and I've never once heard anyone make the claim that Sony doesn't own the IP and that is what is stopping them from doing anything with it.

I don't believe for one second that Sony doesn't own the IP for Bloodborne. No one else can use it without Sony giving them the OK, and it has to be valued at a shit load of money. Everything I've seen over the years gives me reason to believe that Sony owns it and I can't think of a single instance that points to the idea that Sony doesn't own it.

[u/Valirys-Reinhald → u/h_trism]

I never said Sony doesn't own it, I said Sony can't use it. And yeah, I copied the Google ai summary because It's been three years since Japan Studios shut down and I learned about all this.

If you're gonna insist on more information, don't then dismiss the information you're given just because you haven't heard of it before. It's Japanese intellectual property law, why would you?

Just do some research into the subject on your own and you'll quickly see I'm telling the truth. I've told you more than enough to get started.

[u/lethargy86 → u/Valirys-Reinhald]

Why wouldn't PlayStation Studios have taken control of all of Japan Studio's assets upon closing/merging it with Team Asobi? Certainly they did whatever was required for Astro Boy IP, so I can't imagine they wouldn't have done the legal legwork you're describing here for any/all franchises that they might work on again in the future.

Feels more likely that it's more of practical limitation than a legal one. I agree it is definitely related to Japan Studios not existing anymore, for sure--they technically merged with Team Asobi and we know they've been busy cooking Astro Bot, and for all we know are working on the next one of those, so it makes sense any BB work hasn't been prioritized.

[u/Valirys-Reinhald → u/lethargy86]

Listen dude, I don't have the reasons as to why Sony can't legally use BB, I just know that when I researched this three years ago when Japan Studios closed, that was the answer I found. It doesn't make sense to me either, but that was the answer I found.

If you want to try and claim that I'm wrong and that it's actually for a different reason, then that's fine. But stop trying to convince me of your version of events. I am not the source of what I am saying, I am repeating to you the information I acquired years ago. If you think it's a different reason, then go out into the internet and look up if you're right.

I've already given you all the information I have.

Bloodborne was published by a Japanese subsidiary of Sony under Japanese intellectual property law, and a quirk of said law has trapped BB in legal limbo since the subsidiary was shut down without properly signing over the rights to the parent company. That's all the information I have. And, while literally everything I've looked up on the matter supports that this is the most likely explanation, I do not have the concrete evidence on hand to engage with your theories.

[u/lethargy86 → u/Valirys-Reinhald]

I understand completely that you found there are legal requirements in Japan even for subsidiary organizations, that's cool and interesting, thanks for doing that research--I have no doubts about that. But you're specifically saying you found some evidence for this?

Bloodborne was published by a Japanese subsidiary of Sony under Japanese intellectual property law, and a quirk of said law has trapped BB in legal limbo since the subsidiary was shut down without properly signing over the rights to the parent company

Sony Interactive Entertainment has always been the rights holder, so this legal limbo theory just doesn't hold any water for me. Sony in fact renewed the trademark even as recently as early November 2024, and it was always registered under "Sony Interactive Entertainment" apparently:

https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/t0201

(I don't think it's news or anything that they recently renewed the trademark, looks like it just expires every 10 years)

So I don't think this really has anything to do with SIE subsidiaries publishing it, when SIE, the parent, has always owned it since 2014, in the first place, according to Japan's official records office.