Talk:ROM hack: Difference between revisions

Talk:ROM hack (view source)

Revision as of 05:49, 22 December 2016

362 bytes added , 22 December 2016

→‎Legality section

Wildgoosespeeder

694

edits

Revision as of 05:43, 22 December 2016 (view source) Evie (talk \| contribs) m (Legality section notice.) ← Older edit		Revision as of 05:49, 22 December 2016 (view source) Wildgoosespeeder (talk \| contribs) (→‎Legality section) Newer edit →
Line 434:		Line 434:

	While a section on legality may belong in the article, we will NOT present any form of rom patches, rom hacks, mods, etc, as legal. First because that's simply not true (gray area), second because Bulbapedia should not be a source of legal advice, particularly not legal advice that disagrees with Nintendo's interpretation of the law. --[[User:Evil Figment\|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment\|talk]]) 05:43, 22 December 2016 (UTC)		While a section on legality may belong in the article, we will NOT present any form of rom patches, rom hacks, mods, etc, as legal. First because that's simply not true (gray area), second because Bulbapedia should not be a source of legal advice, particularly not legal advice that disagrees with Nintendo's interpretation of the law. --[[User:Evil Figment\|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment\|talk]]) 05:43, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
			:Would rephrasing sentence(s) to be started with "''it is believed that''" (or some form of this) instead of making a decisive statement that this is legal? Also, is this related to Pokémon Prism being DMCA'd within the past 24 hours of this edit? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder\|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder\|talk]]) 05:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)