Slashdot Mirror
Sega Shutting Down Hundreds Of ROM Sites
hakker writes: "It seems that Sega is drawing on the opinions handed down by the judge in the Napster case regarding who is liable when copyrighted files are distributed over file-sharing networks. This C-Net article describes how Sega has already shut down more than 200 ROM sites in the last couple weeks and is now after the ROM file sharing service Swapoo, which is run by a 17-year-old student. This is probably just the first of the repercussions we will see from the Napster case. How can companies like Sega be convinced that products that don't make them money anymore should be made GPL?"
How can companies like Sega be convinced that products that don't make them money anymore should be made GPL?
(from the submitters comment)
Man, that is a dangerous rationale for making something free - if you take, say, the RIAA argument that copyright violations are theft, then what you're basically saying is 'well, people are stealing it - gpl it!'. Uh-Uh. I don't want to see the GPL being some kind of copyright junkyard, I prefer to think of it as moving forward and encouraging progress and development. I love free software, and the spirit in which it is made produced and distributed and would hate to see us giving ammo to 'the other side'....
There is a bit of difference between the MP3 copyright issues and those faced by those of Sega/Nintento/whoever. In alot of cases, ROMs are licensed to Sega and have copyrights retained by dozens and dozens of various companies. Sega is responsible as well for upholding all those copyrights.
The thing that makes it tricky to "GPL" ROMs is the fact that permission would need to be asked of each of the companies who make ROMs (except for the ones developed in house by Sega, of course)
This is how it is with Nintendo, at least..I'm pretty sure Sega has the same issues. It's pretty understandable why they'd take action on ROM pirates.. not because it's in their own personal interest (ie, they're losing money), but because if they don't stand firm on the issue then the people whose ROMs are getting stolen may be hesitant to develop for them in the future.
--
(Disclosure: I'm a former video game developer for one of the companies mentioned below)
Classic video games are still profitable. While we may look back at some of the old games and say they're worthless now, they're still being sold in many cases.
Activision is selling 30 Intellivision games on one PSX CD for $29.
Midway is selling their "Greatest Hits" Volume 1 and Volume 2(no longer on their site).
Atary (admittedly part of Midway now) is also selling a Greatest Hits cd.
Namco has a Museum 1, Museum 3, and Museum 64 collection out now.
Also, making the games GPL'ed is really silly. Lots of old games get remakes, why would manufacturers want the market filled with 500 versions of a past title when they want to make a new one?
While this is surely going to be considered flamebait by many... The same copyright law that allows the creators of video games to set their own terms of distribution is the SAME LAW that allows GPL developers to set which restrictions there are on distributing GPL'ed code.
So many people say that copyright laws need to be thrown out or changed... Want copyright laws reduced to 5 years? That means a 5 year old Linux kernel would be free for anyone to do as they wish with, without GPL'ed restrictions. All the old GNU binutils would have no protection at all. While I agree that insanely long copyrights don't do a lot of good for society, people are trading ROMS for some rather recent games.
MAME now supports Rampage World Tour, a Midway game released in 1999. A quick check of a few big ROM sites turn up the ROMs for this game. This game is STILL ON THE SHELVES for consoles, and the ROMs are being traded. Any half-way excuse of "preservation of classics" is out the window at this point.
I like classic games more than most. I've got an extensive library of old game boards in my basement. I also like having the games on my PC, but I buy the classics CD's when they come out.
Remember, just because something isn't for sale anymore doesn't mean it's free, or even should be.
-- Kevin
How can companies like Sega be convinced that products that don't make them money anymore should be made GPL?
The copyright isn't just on the actual games themselves; it's on the characters too. So even if they're not making any money off the original "Sonic the Hedgehog," for example, making it GPL would release Sonic to the public --allowing people to make bootleg Sonic games, merchandise, etc. And it would almost certainly damage Sega's image, not to mention making it less profitable for them to sell "Sonic the Hedgehog 13" (or whatever number they're at now) for the Dreamcast.
This would be akin to Disney GPLing "Fantasia" and releasing Mickey Mouse to the public. I can only imagine the flood of bootleg Disney merchandise once the copyright runs out on "Steamboat Willie."
In short: sometimes if something isn't free, there's a very good reason for it.
Cheers,
IT
Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.
Capcom has been very supportive of emulation. They allowed HanaHo Games to distribute a CD of roms for old Capcom games with their HotRod Joystick. I don't think Sega ever really did much to support emulation.
Your request has already been filled. Don't get greedy, mmmkay?
GOD
Why must everything be under the GPL?
How about, make the ROM binaries freely distributable, but not resellable or modifyable.
Putting them under GPL requires a lot of work, as then you'd need to release the source code as well, and keep source servers around, and deal with hoards of linux nuts asking for more source, and why isn't X under the GPL when Y is, and why isn't all new games under the GPL, blah blah blah.
Also, it isn't Sega's decision that all Sega games are free. Sure, they can make freely distributable ROMs of Sonic (made by Sega), but not of Contra (made by Konami).
Furthermore, if Sega wanted to implement a system of redistribution, they would want to control that as well with licensing agreements, which means the rom sites would be shut down anyways.
It seems to me that it has done them some good. ./ :-)
According to their webtracker they had 2880 visitors July 31 and 32534 visitors August 4 when the article was posted on CNET.
They also gained 12000 daily visitors when they were linked to from
---