Slashdot Mirror
IDSA Requests VIC 20 Cartridge Roms Takedown
An anonymous reader writes "The VIC20 cartridge dump archive has been taken down by FUNET following a request by the IDSA (Interactive Digital Software Association). More info from comp.sys.cbm."
Of course, VIC 20 users are now going to have to buy their cartridges in stores, and by "stores", I mean garage sales, flea markets, and swap meets.
Remember, they are still covered under copyright. For the next century at least, unless Disney extends the mouse again. There's no such thing as abandonware. Which is why Disney can put their movies into "the vault" for long periods of time, only to open it again for the next generation.
I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.
I was just about done downloading these to save to 5.25" floppies! My Vic had been on for days doing this, poor little 300 baud modem, and I'd been praying that my wife wouldn't pick up the phone and cause it to hang up. Now they're gone!
;^)
Can someone please put them up on a BBS so I can try grabbing them again?
Thanks!
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
What is the IDSA?
Formed in April 1994, the Interactive Digital Software Association (IDSA) is the U.S. trade association exclusively dedicated to serving the business and public affairs needs of companies that publish video and computer games for video game consoles (such as Nintendo 64, Sega Saturn, and PlayStation), personal computers, and the Internet. Our members collectively account for more than 90 percent of the $5.5 billion generated by the entertainment software industry in the U.S. in 1998, and billions more in export sales of U.S.-made entertainment software. The IDSA offers services to entertainment software publishers including a global anti-piracy program, government relations, business and consumer research, and First Amendment and intellectual property prote ction efforts.
What is the scope of the IDSA Anti-Piracy program?
The IDSA Anti-Piracy Program is designed to combat entertainment software piracy both in the U.S. and around the world. Worldwide piracy is estimated to have cost the U.S. entertainment software industry $3.2 billion in 1998.
IDSA anti-piracy efforts include: direct investigation and enforcement actions domestically, internationally and in the on-line environment, working closely with government agencies such as United States Trade Representative, the United States Customs Ser vice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and foreign government officials and training and educating customs agents & law enforcement officers in the United States and around the world.
The IDSA is authorized by its members, who own the copyrights and trademarks for their hardware and software, to act on their behalf against violations of their copyrights and trademarks. This includes taking action against unauthorized ROMs, unauthorized hardware and software emulators, and pirated software.
Does the IDSA have any affiliation with the U.S. government?
The IDSA is an independent trade association that is funded by dues and revenue from other association functions. The IDSA is not affiliated with the U.S. government, or any other government, in any way, shape or form.
Isn't it legal to copy video & computer games as a backup as long as you own a legitimate copy?
U.S. Copyright laws permit making a "backup" copy of computer programs for archival purposes. However, the right to make backup copies of computer programs for archival purposes, as embodied in 17 U.S.C. Section 117(2), does not in any way authorize the owner of a copy of a video or computer game to post or download a copy of that game to or from the Internet. Section 117(2) only gives the owner of the copy a right to make an archival copy of the actual copy that he/she legally possesses, not to make a copy of the ROM that someone else legally possesses, nor to post an archival copy of his/her original copy for distribution. Also, there is not an unfettered right to sell "backup" copies. In fact, Section 117 is quite explicit in stating that any archival copy prepared under Section 117(2) can only be transferred to another person if, and only if: A) The original copy is also transferred, and only with the authorization of the copyright owner, and B) The transfer is part of the sale of all rights in the program.
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.
Haven't the copyrights for old games (like Atari & Commodore) expired?
U.S. copyright laws state that copyrights owned by corporations are valid for 75 years from the date of firs
I used to buy this argument, but I don't anymore.
(Note on the last one, I purchased that once for $2 just for Beamrider, which remains a truly awesome game.)
Of course it need not be a "threat to civilization", it need only harm a bottom line, and the argument can be made that it indeed may. (Note a lot of old stuff is coming out for the Gameboy Advance, for instance; I purchased the Phantasy Star Collection recently, and I am pleased. What I'd really like is the Bard's Tale on the GBA, though. If it weren't for the infernal need to make money that would be a cool development project to undertake.
We all know that the copyright system needs a bit of an overhaul in the face of the technological changes of this and the previous century.
We all know that it is in the most profitable interests of large content holders/providers to fight these changes.
Whining will help, but not much.
If you want the Vic20 cartridges, buy the rights from the copyright holder and release them.
If you want to win the right to all the old cartridges and games and the technology that has blended into our cultural heritage in decades past, but is no longer profitable to package for consumers, support the EFF and change the law. This is not simply how honorable people fight these battles, it is how we win them in such a way that our children can fight new battles with these safely behind.
I recall some ROM site (TI99/4A site perhaps?) where the owner got explicit permission from the copyright holders to post their ROMS, but he still got a letter from these goons.
Short of the discovery process of a lawsuit, is there any way to force the hand of these organizations to prove they are in the right for each specific case?
Method of processing duck feet
1. Are there any VIC 20 games that are actually worth playing, and aren't inferior versions of games available for other formats?
2. Is there a comprehensive list of VIC 20 software (like Cowering's goodtools)?
3. How big would a zip file containing all available software?
You can see where I'm heading with this...
P.S. kids, where are the automated tools to automatically download rom list updates, locate the missing data through various channels (web, news, irc), download, verify and update?
VIC20 = The first computer I ever owned.
...or maybe that's just me remembering my childhood jealousy when I was stuck with the Vic playing a poor-man's version of space invaders, while everyone else was playing Hungry Horace on their C64s.
Direct predecessor to the Commodore64, and identical in shape, though it was a slightly different shade of beige.
Not a particularly inspiring machine really, if truth be told. The C64 was fantastic, but the Vic was just a little too underpowered.
(Spudley Strikes Again!)
I'm one of the lucky few who still owns a perfectly working Atari 2600. Although I've had to make some repairs on it over the years...
To me, these 10-in-1 games are a really great idea for getting the games that I played growing up out to the "unwashed masses" who otherwise would not have had the opportunity to play them. Believe it or not, most computer users AND computer games, I would dare say, do not know about emulators.
Go down to your local RPG or war game store. Most of those people probably play video games. Ask them, "Did you know you can play old NES and Atari games on your computer using an emulator?" Most of them will give you blank stares!
But I digress - the on-topic part of this post is simply this. Retail outlets for these games no longer exist. When you buy them at a garage sale or at a flea market, the publisher and/or copyright holder do *not* receive any portion of that sale.
So how can the IDSA argue that it's hurting the copyright holder since these games are no longer available for retail sale (or, for that matter, for purchase directly from the probably-out-of-business-by-now developer)?
All of this copyright and patent stuff that's going on right now WILL have serious consequences for the future. I, for one, do not want to live in a world where I merely lease content for a certain period of time where I only can use it in one of three "pre-approved" ways or some such.
The IDSA be damned. Someone with some money needs to put up a big site full of these games for free download. Wait for the IDSA. When they come, BAM!, take them to court. Yes, you'll lose the initial battle, but take it up. Keep appealing. Once it reaches a court high enough, you'll begin looking at the laws themselves, and maybe people will start to see how corrupt the copyright and patent system has become. It'll be a long and expensive fight, but it MUST happen before things will get any better.
Yes, this is about carts, but it made me think of the ubiquitous tape drive. Those things sucked, didn't they? Anyway, has anyone tried to copy those tapes to a cd, then hooked the cd player up to the tape drive port? That would be cool.
I think I'll do that right after I finish strapping the JATO bottle on my Impala.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
This actually makes me think of my grandfather's old farm. Don't mark me offtopic yet. Wait for me to tie it back in. Some of my grandfather's farm, as he explains it, was taken and given to a railroad company for a right-of-way. The rules were simple, if that rail line did not handle a certain capacity, then the land reverted to my grandfather's ownership--eminent domain. So, forty or fifty years later, once a quarter the rail company would drive a very small train, very, very slowly over nearly unusable tracks--just to keep it. Unfortunately, the rail company's stall tactics outlived my grandfather.
"Eminent domain is the right of the state to take private property for public use." Eminent Domain DefinedHow does this tie in? Perhaps we are vainly trying to use an old system (copyright) to apply to a new medium (software). I agree that generations long copyrights (ala Disney) are invalid, but the rights should be of sufficient duration to prevent the media giants from outlasting an author's rights to his work. I mean, if I write the "Great American Novel," with a short copyright term (7 to 14 years), a corporation would just refuse publication until I lost rights--and then publish without having to grant royalties. After all, David Brin's The Postman was published in 1986 and the movie The Postman based on the book came out in 1997. If the copyrights were only seven years long--the original length, then he would not have had any say in the movie--or been able to profit. So, overly long "Disney" copyrights are bad for the public, and overly short ones are bad for the author. Still, this does not speak to my point on software and copyrights.
We seem to agree that when a company, or an owner of software, ceases to maintain said software (i.e., Abandonware), that this software should be released to the public domain. Thus, Windows 3.1 would be public domain simply because Microsoft has abandoned it--as would all the VIC-20 games in our current discusion. This does not fit into our copyright model--I doubt this fits anywhere in Intellectual Property law. However, as my early rail tie-in (pardon the pun) suggests, there is presidence elsewhere. So, I propose that software adopt a new model of Intellectual Eminent Domain.
This model should establish reasonable guidelines for when software is deemed abandoned by its original author. When the software is deemed suitably abandoned, then it becomes public domain. Perhaps age of software could reasonably be part of the criteria used, or perhaps a certain number of years since the software was abandoned or last publically supported. What should also be considered valid is when the software's author or company publically ceases to support that code--such as Microsoft and Windows 3.1.
I believe the product being made public, as opposed to allowing a different private party claim absolute ownership, is better for the public for prevents large software houses (e.g. Microsoft) from gobbling up all the abandoned software and then 'maintaining' it to prevent another from invoking eminent domain. It also allows abandonware sites to make available the software; and allows individuals and organizations the chance to maintain or improve the software. I suppose the question then would be, "at what point does maintenance/enhancement of abandoned code constitute a new product protected by IP rights?"
What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
... M$ will push their mobile phone platform into everyone's ass sooner or later and these games are just waiting to be repackaged in a cool new .NET shrinkwrap (or .99 $ one-click dl ;-) You all know the crowds are holding their breath to play pacman on the cell... sigh! Sad to think I'm only joking while those fools are probably dead serious, eh? Let's play an old game instead: guess how many PowerPoint presentations have been wasted on these scenarios?
Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan