Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ESA Rebukes EFF's Request To Exempt Abandoned Games From Some DMCA Rules

Posted by timothy on from the locked-up-forever-in-their-castle dept.

eldavojohn writes It's 2015 and the EFF is still submitting requests to alter or exempt certain applications of the draconian DMCA. One such request concerns abandoned games that utilized or required online servers for matchmaking or play (PDF warning) and the attempts taken to archive those games. A given example is Madden '09, which had its servers shut down a mere one and a half years after release. Another is Gamespy and the EA & Nintendo titles that were not migrated to other servers. I'm sure everyone can come up with a once cherished game that required online play that is now abandoned and lost to the ages. While the EFF is asking for exemptions for museums and archivists, the ESA appears to take the stance that it's hacking and all hacking is bad. In prior comments (PDF warning), the ESA has called reverse engineering a proprietary game protocol "a classic wolf in sheep's clothing" as if allowing this evil hacking will loose Sodom & Gomorrah upon the industry. Fellow gamers, these years now that feel like the golden age of online gaming will be the dark ages of games as historians of the future try to recreate what online play was like now for many titles.

5 of 153 comments (clear)

  1. ESA by internerdj · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am on the EFF's side here, but isn't it the game industry's job? If the game industry wants to be taken seriously artistically, it is ultimately the industry's duty to set up ways to preserve the art. If the industry won't take itself seriously, then individuals attempting preservation are going to end up being blocked over and over again by whatever form our trademark and copyright laws take.

    1. Re:ESA by Pi1grim · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Fun fact, but in some countries it is actually 100% legal to reverce engineer and patch a game to restore it's functionality to original level in case the game was legally obtained and for research purposes. So whoever ESA is, they can go and cry a corner, while other countries enjoy the functionality lost to US. Also, their arguments reek of manure - reverse engineering should be made legal (as any type of research) and "hacking, closely asosiated to piracy" - that's a gem, how about we ban ESA, RIAA, MPAA because they condone "DRM, closely associated with scams, illegal spying, privacy and customer rights violations"? What's really needed is a law, that would allow people to get a refund on multiplayer games in case official servers go down and there is no way to start your own, then ESA would make a quick 180 on their stance.

  2. The Library of Congress by Bonzoli · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just have the Library of Congress step in and ask to have a copy of every game and its backend supporting software for the archives. Have a game assignement number for tracking like a book. We have an institution, it just needs a storage and process upgrade.

  3. The answer to the problem by reboot246 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just refuse to buy any game that can't be played in standalone mode. If it requires an online server, just say no.

    If enough people do this, the companies will have to change their perverted business model.

    Can you live without your online gaming habit for a year or two?

  4. use it or lose it by neghvar1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First off, I believe software should have a different copyright length. (Windows XP's copyright expires sometime after 2100. How crazy is that?) I also believe a "use it or lose it clause" should be added to copyright law. If a publisher or copyright holder ceases to publish, market, support and profit from a product, then after X number of years, that game will fall into public domain. I believe this clause should apply to all copyrights and not just software.