When someone posts a period, (.), what does it mean?

Nrvnq[S]r said, April 04, 2008, 11:37:33 pm

My very soul lusts for this.

***WARNING: POSSIBLE STUPID QUESTION ALERT!!!***
Did they get any kind of permission from Nintendo/Famicom to even do that?

Post-patent Famiclones

Some of Nintendo's patents on the Famicom expired in 2003, followed in 2005 by NES-specific patents such as those covering the 10NES lockout chip. While Nintendo still holds various related trademarks, NES hardware clones are no longer necessarily illegal on the basis of patent infringement. This matter is complicated by the effect of different patents awarded in different countries, with different expiration dates. Nintendo sued Gametech in 2005 for selling the PocketFami, despite the patent expiration. Nintendo lost this suit.[citation needed] However, Famiclone manufacturers who incorporate copyrighted games into the unit may still be subject to legal liability on that basis, due to copyrights having much longer terms than patents (in most countries creative works such as games are automatically in copyright for many decades, sometimes up to 85 years after their creation).

While the old-style Famiclones continue to be found, the newly legitimized market has seen several clones that openly advertise support for original Famicom or NES games (or sometimes both), a feature not usually publicized by previous clones, which were often marketed as cheap gifts rather than Famicom-compatible systems. Examples of these newer efforts include the Generation NEX, which resembles a flattened version of the original NES and supports both NES and Famicom games, Gametech's Neo-Fami (also released in both Famicom and NES compatible versions as the "FC Game Console" by Yobo Gameware), and the handheld PocketFami, a more ambitious, albeit still slightly flawed, successor to the older TopGuy, GameAxe and Game Theory Admiral. However, these more legitimate clones are still based on the same NES-on-a-chip architecture as the older systems, and as such still suffer from many of the same compatibility problems.

Interesting.  So from what I'm reading, I guess that due to these patent expirations, it is possible for these "Famiclones" to be manufactured without any possible legal action that would have been against them before the expirations were activated (for lack of a better phrase).

Hm, you learn something new everyday.