It’s bethesda you need to be talking to, and they are extremely and probably wisely aggressive at protecting trademarks.
Cas 
I went straight to Id Software’s site, and the contact links eventually took me to ZeniMax’s contact form.
In any case, since the whole project is a learning experience for me, it isn’t out of line to learn how big publishers react to these situations ;D
Unfortunately, it probably does increase the chances of you getting a C&D, since if their lawyers are made aware of potential infringement, they have to pursue it, otherwise they’ve essentially waived any claim against you. Legally speaking, an email off a contact form likely doesn’t constitute real notification, certified mail does, but it does look like good faith on your part.
Still, unlike the music industry, who sues mothers for putting up youtube videos of their kid singing along to pop songs, game publishers aren’t usually total bastards: the worst that’s likely to happen is that they send a DMCA takedown to your ISP who yanks your site offline.
We’ll see, I’d rather get C&Ded on this project now than on something more serious once I’ve actually invested money into setting up a domain/site/infrastructure.
I mean, it’d be a bother, but I can open a new DooM-free blogger page if need be
Edit: It’d be neat if there was some sort of non-profit “fangame license” that publishers could issue that did not affect future copyright claims on their part, so they wouldn’t need to systematically bash fan projects (and suffer the community backlash). Kind of like the fansite kits they sometimes provide.
On the other hand, I think this works a bit like unsolicited submissions, if they accept it, someone could accuse them of copyright infringement in the future if they end up developing something similar to the fangame.
Meh, I’d better stop, if I keep rolling this in my head I’ll scrap all my DooM-ish sprites and get stcuk again in developing original ones. :-\
Ok but do it in a way that does not mean that you claim they allowed you to do this.
You guys are blowing this way out proportion.
Here’s a guy thinking about starting a game. An online pokemon game. If your project ever gets well known and someone at Nintendo might notice it they still probably won’t care. If for whatever reason they do start to care they’ll send you a letter. At which point your game is either infamous for its poor portrayal of pokemon (bad rep for nintendo) or way too famous (in which case you might get hired by nintendo).
All of this talk is fluff. You haven’t even started to make a game yet and all this talk shouldn’t discourage you either. If it does - this forum has failed.
Don’t sell it. Don’t claim it as your own. You’ll be fine. Nintendo isn’t known for hunting down their fans.
I will go for it 
When its done I tell you guys and well I might ask some questions here again if I face any problems where I get stuck
Thanks for your answers
Just don’t use copyrighted contents and don’t try to benefit of the fame of artworks you have never contributed to create without the prior consent of the author(s). It’s not just a legal problem, it is a ethical and political problem. Who is legitimate to decide what can be done with artworks? Copyright owners? Authors? I vote for the latter and I expect from them to be kind enough not to use abusive licensing terms.
I prefer having crappy graphics than graphics infringing intellectual property.
The rules can be patented, in which case you can’t copy them. Eg, Magic: The Gathering’s rules patent expires 2015, which patents “tapping” a card (turning it 90 degrees to denote state), etc. The rules text, card/character names, card text, art, etc is copyrighted, you can’t ever use it.
That said, there is nothing wrong with making a similar game.
My game’s rules involve “activating” a card, where you turn it 89 degrees. :yawn:
The fact is, it does not matter whether or not a game is sold or credit is given to Nintendo, it would still be a violation of copyright or trademark. The only point where the free vs. commercial comes into play is when deciding the amount of damages to pay. Someone selling a game that violates copyright is going to dish out a lot more money than someone giving it away for free.
Is it likely that Nintendo will sue? No. Is it possible? Absolutely. The best course of action is always to avoid using any content that can cause this sort of legal trouble. Advising otherwise is irresponsible.
I know this project you mention. They shut it down because it was becoming too popular. The reasons for this are quite obvious.
They didn’t hunt them down or anything of the sort. Just put a stop into it. You’re more likely getting hit by lightning twice in a week than getting sued to the bone by making a small pokemon fan game.
I wouldn’t put too much weight on that statement. Just because the infringing content was ‘free’, does mean they cannot claim huge numbers in damages.
If you go around being scared someone might sue you, I hope you don’t live in the US.
Turning it 90 degrees was just an easy indicator when playing the real TCG. When you have all the graphical posibilities in the world, why would you go with turning a card? There are much better ones, but they don’t work in real life.
If your non-ios game uses tap, apple will sue you! ;D
Fear of being sued has nothing to do with it. There’s a big difference from someone suing you because they slipped on ice in your driveway and a company suing you for blatantly copying their stuff. When someone asks advice on this issue, I very much think it’s wrong to tell them not to worry about it. They need to be aware that a cease & desist order can come at any time, at which point all their effort is for naught. That can be a huge let down for someone who isn’t expecting it. Much better to avoid that disappointment completely by using legally available content. Still, if they continue to insist on going down the copying road, at least give them enough info that they do it with their eyes open.
Riding on the coattails of an existing IP is a valid reason to sue for infringement. If your game is popular not because of it’s mechanics, but because of the IP it is based off (Which happens), you are in essence skipping some of the hardest parts of developing a product (All that promotion and raising awareness and whatnot).
It is understandable that an IP owner doesn’t want others to benefit from their work without compensation. And thus is follows that if a project based off another becomes insanely popular, the original IP owner will be pissed.
My recommendation (and personal plan, mind you) is to not rely on the “borrowed” IP for the long term. If the core gameplay you are building takes on a life of its own and starts enjoying some success, phase the “borrowed” content out in favor of original stuff.
Examples of this would be the Quake 3 Dragon Ball Z mod that was forced to remove all DBZ characters and became Bid For Power (retaining the gameplay), or even the Warcraft 3 map Defense of the Ancients, which transitioned into League of Legends because, honestly, the Warcraft 3 IP content was irrelevant to the gameplay.
But just keep in mind, as I do, that if you keep using someone else’s toys, they are entitled to just drop by and take them from you.
You explain that better than me, thank you so much and sorry for my poor English.
The court will consider intent when considering damages. Intent to profit will quite likely result in higher damages than just putting something out there for fun. There’s more to it than just that consideration, though.