Slashdot Mirror
IDSA Goes After Abandonware
unicron writes "IDSA is trying to shutdown Home of the Underdogs, the biggest and oldest Abandonware site 'round. I personally run an Abandonware site and I'd like to see how this will end. People, talk to and its members with messages that they should pick on 0-day warez sites, not on Abandonware sites! Long live classic gaming!"
Isn't it OK to copy games that are no longer distributed in the stores or commercially exploited?
No, the current availability of a game in stores is irrelevant to its copyright status. Unlike trademarks, copyrights are not considered abandoned if they are no longer enforced. Copyrights do not enter the public domain just because they are no longer commercially exploited or widely available. Therefore, the copyrights of games are valid even if the games are not found on store shelves, and copying or distributing those games is a copyright infringement. (From http://www.idsa.com/piracy.html)
What exactly are the IDSA doing wrong here? People should write to the member companies and ask them to change their corporate policies, not flame the ISDA. The companies signed up because they didn't want their IP put on the web for download.. you're allowed to complain to them but you can't just ignore them because you don't like what they have to say. The ISDA are doing what they're paid to do. They hit high profile sites because it is easy, low risk (they clearly have legal right whatever the moral viewpoint) and sends a message. If they let these high profile sites go it whould imply acceptace of copyright devalument after, say, 6 years or so. The members don't want that.
I know people here get very worked up about GPL violations, well these guys appear to be engaged in wholesale licence violation. Its not as if these companies aren't trading anymore or that these games have no value. Companies like Namco still make good money from 20yr old games being sold today. Maybe EA want to put Gunship in thier next flight sim as a secret sub-game in the air traffic control system computer (Day of the tenticle anyone?). These guys were giving Gunship away, which devalues such a promotion.
Am I missing something or is this whole "Abandonware" tag being abused. Who says these games are Abandoned? Doesn't that happen when the Publisher/whoever formally Abandons it, or changes the licence or the copyright expires? Maybe if they go bankrupt (although such rights usually find a buyer even then). There are examples of companies releasing old IP because they don't need it, think its good PR, had a fit of humanity etc.. but this site doesn't look like a repository of that to me.
I don't see the IDSA overstepping any marks here. This one of the roles they exist to carry out. Complaining to the members makes sense. If you alert them to a market for old games them may make them a $1 dload...
0daymeme.com: Great stuff.
Just because someone feels the GPL, or certain licences are logical and valid, does not mean they need to accept en mass all of copyright law. That's like saying because you agree with the right to freedom of speach, you must agree with later constitutional amendments with no regard to their content or effect since they are all part of the same 'law'.
/. bitching about GPL violations are NOT the same folks championing Napster, emulation, etc. Please keep that in mind.
As a side note, quite often the folks on
-={(Astynax)}=-
-={(Astynax)}=-
"Darkness beyond Twilight"
If a manufacturer stops selling a title, why don't they partner with sites like this who are already making the title available, and come up with a licensing agreement? You can't buy Electronic Art's "Balance of Power" anymore. They're not making money. Why are they spending money to send out cease-and-desist letters? Where's the revenue stream? What's the business model?
Does this make sense to anyone?!?
Or is this just a FORM LETTER that someone at the IDSA sends out everytime they see software on the Internet?
You decide...
--
What happens when you outlaw guns
>who are they representing in these cases?
I don't think the IDSA needs a publisher's consent to move into action. This is what they DO, it's their prime function. Does the RIAA need an excuse to be a pain in the ass?
As a gamer I think this sucks, but I can sure see their point of view. Abandonware, despite the catchy name, is still piracy. It's people distributing commercial video games that aren't in the public domain.
As sad as it is, the publishers would rather let these games vanish, rather than letting us play them for free. After all, they may put out a compilation of classics someday, so they want to protect their rights. At least I assume that is their reasoning.
Time to start downloading.
Their theory is that if you want games you *have* to buy the current games and that you should be forced to either upgrade or buy a new device to play said game. It's all meant for them to get more and more money out of you. Suppose you have every game ever produced since games were first produced for "computers" and you could play them anytime you wanted. There wouldn't be much desire to buy the new titles.
Respond to s
Most of us aren't picking on the copyright system in general. What we complain about is the abuse of this system. Examples:
1) Constant lobbying for unreasonable lengths of time on corporate copyrights, such that a corporation can screw people long after their products have ceased to make them any money whatsoever.
2) "Copy-protection" measures which effectively extend a copyright indefinitely by enforcing a copyright after it has expired (when the maker no longer has any right to do so).
3) Licensing terms which abridge fair-use rights on what is, effectively, a written work. Such practices would get a person drummed out of the book publishing industry; why should it be different for software (or music, or movies, or other copyrightable works)?
Copyrights are, by and large, a Good Thing. It's the current U.S. implementation of copyright that we complain about, because it's far too open to abuse in its current form.
----------
If a manufacturer stops selling a title, why don't they partner with sites like this who are already making the title available, and come up with a licensing agreement? You can't buy Electronic Art's "Balance of Power" anymore. They're not making money. Why are they spending money to send out cease-and-desist letters? Where's the revenue stream? What's the business model?
My guess is that this is partly an "on principle" thing, but also largely an action to protect their character trademarks.
"Balance of Power" may not be selling copies, but if they cease to enforce trademarks on their characters/designs, the designs may become public domain. This would prevent them from releasing "Balance of Power VII" down the road - and worse, it would let someone *else* release it!
So, I can see where they're coming from (though I agree that it's a pain).
Seems like one of the most ancient edicts of naval law allows the commandeering of any abandoned vessel and recognizes the commandering party as the rightful owner.
Seems logical enough. Why not apply this to software?
I mean hell, if a program is no longer being marketed nor developed by it's respective corp/programmer, then by all means it should be deligated to public domain.
But, of course... that line of thinking would require an ounce of common sense... Something on very short supply in the electronic media industry.
As I wrote in August in the last abandonware thread:
Section 108 of the copyright law says that, among other things, libraries and other publicaly available archives may (under section e of the law) make a complete copy of a work that they have determined is otherwise unavailable at a fair price and give it to a library/archive user, provided a) they do not do so for commercial advantage and b) they display a particular notice as specified by the Copyright Office in 37 CFR 201.14 (PDF, scroll down to about page 20). The full text of the section e) reads:
Important: other parts of the section and of the law influence the legal interpretation of the above (so consult a lawyer), but the important point is, "abandonware" sites CAN be legal!