Slashdot Mirror


All Emulation is Illegal

jvalenzu writes "Matt Matthews is at it again! The venerable owner of curmudgeongamer.com has posted his latest missive, All Emulation is Illegal." From the article: "Now, if this is how we interpret the law, then practically every use of a videogame system emulator is illegal. Even a user who dumps the contents of a videogame cartridge for an Atari 2600 game he owns to a ROM file cannot use that ROM file with an emulator unless the original's loss requires resorting to the archival copy. If true, then even my attempt to stay legal by buying games and only then using an emulator to play them is way out of bounds."

4 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. He missed the first part by spectral · · Score: 3, Interesting

    (a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.-- Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
    (1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
    (2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.
    (emphasis from the article)

    Ok, so why can't it be under section 1? Making the copy of the game is essential since I no longer own a Commodore 64, NES, SNES or whatever, even though the games are all sitting on the shelf behind me.

  2. By that logic... by MMaestro · · Score: 2, Interesting
    (2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful

    Try this analogy : If all newspaper and printed documents were under this same law, you would not be allowed to use any back up copy unless all original copies were destroyed. By that logic, we should be passing the original copy of the Declaration of Independence since we would not be allowed to use any copy of it as long as the original existed. Not very logical is it?

  3. Re:No blood no foul... by Dr.+Mortimer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What if the publisher plans to eventually re-release emulated versions of its older games for a newer system?

    This is exactly what they did with their old NES games for Gameboy.

    If there's enough demand for something "old" like EVO that a re-release is potentially marketable, then downloading without paying for it in some form may be regarded by some as questionable.

    However, it can be difficult to find out if a re-release is in the works to begin with....

  4. So, Sense is ruled out, eh? by VernonNemitz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    According to the guy's logic, then this should be illegal too:
    Buy an original copy.
    Make a copy.
    Archive the original
    Use the copy until it wears out.
    Make another copy from the archived original.
    Use that until it wears out.
    Etc.

    After all, it is pretty well known that the average person cannot make a copy that is as high-quality as the original. (CD-rot seldom happens to originals, just to CDRs, see?). So, if I use the original, and it suffers wear and tear, then how can I be sure that my archived copy is really going to save my bacon when needed? While archiving the original practically guarantees it!

    Anyway, if the preceding is illegal, then we need a new law!!!