Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Copyright Law Just Got Better for Video Game History (vice.com)

Posted by msmash on from the major-reforms dept.

In a series of rulings, the Library of Congress has carved out a number of exemptions that will help the movement to archive and preserve video games. From a report: In an 85-page ruling [PDF] that covered everything from electronic aircraft controls to farm equipment diagnostic software, the Librarian of Congress carved out fair use exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) for video games and software in general. These exemptions will make it easier for archivists to save historic video games and for museums to share that cultural history with the public. "The Acting Register found that the record supported granting an expansion in the relatively discrete circumstances where a preservation institution legally possesses a copy of a video game's server code and the game's local code," the Librarian of Congress said. "In such circumstances, the preservation activities described by proponents are likely to be fair uses."

These rules are definitely good news for single-player games. "The big change for single-player games happened during the last DMCA review process in 2015, when the Copyright Office decided that museums and archives could break the online authentication for single-player titles that were just phoning home to a server for copy protection reasons," Phil Salvador -- a Washington, DC-area librarian and archivist who runs The Obscuritory, a site that focuses on discussing and preserving obscure, old game -- told Motherboard. That 2015 ruling was due to expire this year, but thanks to pressure from activists it was renewed today instead.

46 comments

  1. So, what is a museum? by bistromath007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More to the point, why wasn't Emuparadise one?

  2. Re:TRUMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You think Trump is a socialist?

  3. Legally Possess by Luthair · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If they legally possess the server code they probably already have permission from the publisher to ignore digital locks?

  4. Disgusting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's disgusting that we've become ok with having to beg every 3 years for our rights, and for only a few percent of them to be acknowledged, and to a crippled degree (i.e. it's still prohibited to manufacture or traffic in software to help you).

    Repeal 1201! If you're running for Senate or House and you make this part of your platform, I will vote for you, even if you're wrong about a lot of other things. This ridiculous law needs to go!

  5. Re:TRUMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah. He's a regular Bernie Sanders.

  6. This is total irrelevant... by blahplusplus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... since it now doesn't matter since most developer and Microsoft and tech industry in general are pushing towards locked down computing. We're seeing the final push with windows 10+. They have already lawyered it and planted bombs in it to death anyway, there's no way publishers are going to go back to giving gamers full control of the software. We've seen the big final push from Ubisoft with the latest assasins creed and Microsoft has a huge streaming project they are working on, while releasing seriously hostile coded UWP games. This is a far cry from the 90's where we had the raw files because there was no internet they could use to steal pieces of files and game code to prevent gamers from owning nad controlling their software.

    The last 20 years have been a real revolution for developers and publishers to get rid of game ownership by being able to not give the complete game to gamers because their customers can't reach them. The attack on game ownership began with ultima series back in the 90's as all PC rpg's in development were relabelled mmo's and moved over to server locked pieces of software, undermining control and the privacy of gamers as the gullible masses ate it up because they are clueless. The rise of steam, mmo's and f2p games are proof we live in an idiocracy.

    Then today we have overwatch who's entire content is already on your machine but has a lootbox interface for you to gamble to 'set a flag to view the file contents' if you can't wait because they know the average gamer is a fucking computer illiterate moron.

    1. Re:This is total irrelevant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've gotten to the point where I really only play and mod Doom engine content in GZDoom. Everything new might be pretty for a moment, but most of it isn't that fun, and it's not worth the computer upgrade race to mess with it (though you still need a pretty good computer for some of what's going on in Doom these days).

      Doom 2 will live forever. That Doom game from a year or two ago, though pretty good, will be forgotten in no time.

      But that's not the only engine to play with - All of the idTech engines are fairly open and accessible, and there are content development communities for all of them. Also all of Bethesda's Gamebryo titles, though those require a bit more skill to start with.

      There's something out there for most interests, and something you can contribute to at almost any skill level.

    2. Re:This is total irrelevant... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

      > The attack on game ownership began with ultima series back in the 90's as all PC rpg's in development were relabelled mmo's and moved over to server locked pieces of software

      While I agree with 90% of what you wrote you are omitting a key critical bit of information:

      Ultima 1 - 9 were all single player.

      Ultima Online was the first Ultima to offer a multiplayer experience in 1999 using Client-Server networking. While Origin could have offered a 4 - 16 player RPG they wanted to support 1,000's of players on the same server. There is no way ANY consumer hardware could have supported the SCALE of UO's networking. No consumer could afford the "Blade Servers" to host the game. Yes, there were a few different UO server emulators. But supporting 50 people is a completely different experience then supporting thousands of people on the same server.

      Yes, not ALL the game data files were on the client, and yes the MMO's led the way to F2P gaming and ultimately (pardon the pun) "getting rid of game ownership." But this is a SYMPTOM of Bad Law (TM).

      If copyright would stop being hijacked and only lasted 25 years since first commercial sale then we could legally preserve old games.

    3. Re:This is total irrelevant... by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      "Stop liking things i don't like!" is how your comment reads basically.
      There are tons of MMO's, and there's also tons of single player RPG's. They are not necessarily the same genre, at all.

      Take a game like everquest 1, the entire premise for that game, and what made it unique was the social interaction. Even the pace of the game was designed to reward being social. For example in terms of setting up 'camps' waiting for monsters to respawn; or how interdependent the classes were -- soloing was nigh impossible for most. It wouldn't have worked any other way (And not to mention the server based communities that sprung up around the game).

      While some publishers have been abusive towards customers with loot-boxes and silly nickle and dime DLC packs -- such as Black Desert Online. That's an example of a shitty game, made by shitty developers who are clearly out to fleece their customers.

      But it's not the entire industry. For example, the "Witcher 3" -- a beautifully done, artistic game with two expansions that could have been done as stand-alone games in their own right. Nor does it have loot boxes, or a monthly ransom fee.

      And then if you don't want to deal with things like steam, or whatever ubisoft is doing; there's GOG, an entirely DRM free store (coincidentally run by the same company behind The Witcher.. ).

      TL;dr, it's not all doom and gloom =/

    4. Re:This is total irrelevant... by blahplusplus · · Score: 0

      The attack on game ownership began with ultima series back in the 90's as all PC rpg's in development were relabelled mmo's and moved over to server locked pieces of software

      While I agree with 90% of what you wrote you are omitting a key critical bit of information:

      Your "critical bit of information" IS the propaganda, they took the "single player" PC RPG, and rebranded it mmo, also note that Baldurs gate had multiplayer and single player inside the same RPG, don't tell me "it's different", the whole point of corporate PR is to manipulate you for profits. That was the whole point of the MMO scam that stupid people like you fell for. That's why PC RPG's in development suddenly were rebadged "mmo's", it was the biggest scam in all of gaming and gamers lapped it up because they are not very bright. Notice we live in a fucking dystopia today where every game under the sun is being rebadged a service because of the rise of microtransactions. League of legends and DOTA 2 would have been totally owned games like Warcraft 3 if not for the rise of idiots giving money to skins in games they don't own, no level editors, no ownership. Look at what happened to Team fortress in the 90's vs Team fortress 2. All that is because gamers being idiots started giving money to games totally owned and controlled on someone elses machine. Now they got everything and are going to sheer the sheep.

      The company controls the game, that's exactly what happened to every fucking property all our favorite properties from the 90's are now in the hands of giant mega corporations on servers in their offices and they tell you whether you can access or evne play your game, you need fucking permission from a machine 100 miles away to play a game you paid for. All because gamers are stupid.

      Don't think so? Diablo 2 vs diablo 3, diablo 2 we totally controlled, diablo 3 we don't. Quake 3 vs quake champions.

      The whole mmo scam was to normalize non game ownership you were fooled by PR specialists and PHD's in neuroscientists to change public opinion regarding game ownership . The wet dream for the tech industry (of which the game industry was a part) was to undermine legally and otherwise the ability of people to control their machines and software. Which they've gotten in spades.

      AKA "Games as services" are just the same thing that happened with PC rpg's --> Normal PC rpg;s become "MMO's", just as Assasins creed became a "live service".

      The fact that you all fall for this languge shell game is proof positive our species is easy to manipulate.

    5. Re:This is total irrelevant... by blahplusplus · · Score: 0

      "Stop liking things i don't like!" is how your comment reads basically.

      Your comment reads "I'm a moron that bent over for corporations, and now games have literally been stolen and taken hostage, I'll get to pay more money for less game. I'm so savvy, l get to have lootboxes that only give me A CHANCE to reveal SKINS, that are ALREADY ON MY COMPUTER, and that I ALREADY PAID FOR, in a FULL PRICED GAME. Also because I'm such a fucking moron I'll grind out the skins even though they are ALREADY IN THE GAME I PAID FULL PRICE FOR.

      Continue to think I'm "just an old man" crying "get off my lawn". When all your favorite games disappear in 20 years and you want to play them and they are now thrown in the garbage you'll only have yourself to blame for your own idiocy.

      The reality is the entire industry now that it has you as it's customer is moving all future software onto computers inside their offices where you have exactly zero control over the game. Shitty gameplay mechanics are being inserted into games now that they've taken control of the software, you get to pay "tribute" or extra, on top full price.

      The whole thing is a fucking scam enabled by mass stupidity. Gaming when it hit the mainstream attracted the stupid and technologically illiterate, that is why these exploitive dick practices exist. The market is not a self correcting phenomenon. If that were the case mmo's (the original scam game) would have never got off the ground since it was the original trial balloon to see how stupid the gaming masses were, to get you to pay multiple times for the same game over and over instead of just once.

    6. Re:This is total irrelevant... by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      The reading comprehension is strong in this one. Never let anything stand in the way of a good rant though. Well.. just a rant.

    7. Re:This is total irrelevant... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > they took the "single player" PC RPG, and rebranded it mmo

      1. Who is "they" ???

      2. MMORPG != all RPGs!

      3. You are STILL conveniently ignoring the facts:

      * Grim Dawn
      * Torchlight 1
      * Torchlight 2
      * Titan Quest

      ALL of these can be played "offline". They are not MMORPGs, they are RPGs.

      EVEN on PS4 I can play:

      * Horizon Zero Dawn

      Your rant against MMORPGs is ASSUMING everyone has fallen for the F2P we-own-the-server bullshit. Stop ignoring the genre just because the majority of games have gone for the SaS (Software-as-a-Service) model. There ARE exceptions no matter how much ranting you do.

      > idiots giving money to skins in games they don't own, no level editors, no ownership

      Yes, this sucks. Unfortunately your zeal for your proselytizing is not going to win any converts. Instead of ranting I would recommend a different approach -- keep it SHORT and SIMPLE:

      I don't support the following Companies / Games because

      * There is no level editor
      * Can't run my ow private server

      The same thing has happened in TV. People would rather watch another person's fake life then live their own with shit such as Keeping Up with the Kartrashians.

      No amount of ranting is going to change that. Deal with it in a more constructive manner.

    8. Re:This is total irrelevant... by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      ... since it now doesn't matter since most developer and Microsoft and tech industry in general are pushing towards locked down computing. We're seeing the final push with windows 10+. They have already lawyered it and planted bombs in it to death anyway, there's no way publishers are going to go back to giving gamers full control of the software. We've seen the big final push from Ubisoft with the latest assasins creed and Microsoft has a huge streaming project they are working on, while releasing seriously hostile coded UWP games. This is a far cry from the 90's where we had the raw files because there was no internet they could use to steal pieces of files and game code to prevent gamers from owning nad controlling their software.

      The last 20 years have been a real revolution for developers and publishers to get rid of game ownership by being able to not give the complete game to gamers because their customers can't reach them. The attack on game ownership began with ultima series back in the 90's as all PC rpg's in development were relabelled mmo's and moved over to server locked pieces of software, undermining control and the privacy of gamers as the gullible masses ate it up because they are clueless. The rise of steam, mmo's and f2p games are proof we live in an idiocracy.

      The reason everything went online and DRM is simply - PC piracy is out of control. With piracy rates of 90% and higher, it was unsustainable and the system would collapse on itself eventually.

      You saw this as either service side enforcement - online play for example, or through intrusive forms of DRM, or long delayed PC ports that are crap, all of which happened. When PC DRM was relatively ineffective, developers switched to online play, moving RPGs to MMOs like you said. With that, there was the rise of competent consoles - the PS2 and Xbox era started it, but the PS3 and Xbox360 pretty much told developers that consoles were the next big gaming thing and all the big development houses moved over. At the end of the last generation, there were little to no sole PC developers anymore - even Blizzard, a long holdout started console development.

      With the rise of this, it also meant PC ports generally sucked - developers went for consoles first with their lower piracy rates. PC ports came later (unless the game had an online component that server side could check for), and were often crap - limiting screen resolutions, interfaces that sucked, etc. Basically companies knew they weren't going to make too much money so they never put much effort into the port.

      Things changed this generation, not because of the consoles themselves, but the rise of high end protections like Denuvo and UWP. Denuvo showed some strength leading to developers allowing day 1 PC ports again, knowing that piracy would be held back enough for the developers to make some money from it. Of course, with Denuvo gone (it's crackable within hours) developers are once again starting to hold back.

      Things like free 2 play and other stuff arose out of the piracy model as well - from the mobile space where Android piracy rates were comparable to PCs, plus shortcomings in the Android model w.r.t. paid apps pretty much meant free apps got worldwide exposure while paid apps were limited to a few countries. Developers took note and applied same towards the PC market as well. And it's also infected console developers for no good reason at all.

      It's really the war between PC users, pirates and developers that has lead things to where they are now.

    9. Re:This is total irrelevant... by blahplusplus · · Score: 0

      It's really the war between PC users, pirates and developers that has lead things to where they are now.

      No it's because the internet allowed companies to steal PC game software, before the internet existed they couldn't literally steal the game or keep part of the software hostage on their computers, they had to give you the entire thing you paid for. The internet radically undermined customer power and gave it all to companies so they could just keep the fucking software. So no it's total theft.

      I suggest you read what lawrence lessig has written about the corporate agenda of the copyright mafia.

      http://www.lessig.org/new-blog...

    10. Re:This is total irrelevant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were people being manipulated or falling for a scam, when they played MUDs in the late 80s/early 90s? Multi-player server games are not a stupid or corrupt idea, in themselves. They can be a blast, and that's why people played MUDs and all the modern alternatives.

      The majority's mistake is just that they happen to be playing the games where you never get to "wiz" and then get to add to the game. People are choosing "can't somebody else do it?" for all the creativity, instead of just for intro.

      But you, yourself, used some interesting terminology. You call these proprietary games's trademarks properties. You're not wrong to call them that, but I wonder how you picked up that lingo (while simultaneously resenting it), since the entire idea of property is that some single entity owns it. If you don't like it, you should try playing or writing some games which aren't someone else's "properties." You might enjoy the fuck out of it! Really, I think you would.

      Notice we live in a fucking dystopia today where every game under the sun is being rebadged a service because of the rise of microtransactions.

      Yes, if we're very, very patient, some day the number of games where that has happened may become as high as 1% of all games. You might need to delete a lot of old games to fudge the numbers, though.

    11. Re:This is total irrelevant... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Until today, I've never heard of of any claim that Baldur's Gate was an mmo, or game as a service, or similar. You'd have to present some evidence of this.

    12. Re: This is total irrelevant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The upgrade mess isn't as bad as you think. I've been rocking the same board since 2010. All AMD. Swapped out for more RAM, on my 3rd video card, second power supply, and 2nd CPU upgrade. Plays everything I've thrown at it except Wreckfest, which is horribly optimized on the platform. Still working my way through the DLC in Ass Creed Oranges. Everything that was upgraded, except the power supply due to failure, was put into other builds or sold. Play your cards right you can have your cake and eat it too; the cake isn't always a lie. Now if this was still the 90's or early 2000's then yea prices were a bitch and major improvements meant throwing the baby out with the bathwater; don't have that excuse these days. Still, expect more of initial investment then your console brethren; but if you go AMD the upgrade path will save you in the long run. Always get the best board you can find, and build around it.

  7. It's almost like copyright needs a time limit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's almost like copyright needs a time limit. If only someone had thought of this before!

    1. Re:It's almost like copyright needs a time limit by jellomizer · · Score: 0

      Time limit isn't the problem it is the fact that Copyrights are designed for printed material vs digital ones.

      Back in the 1700's if I were to copy a book. It would take me (adjusted for inflation) at least $10,000 in labor and specialized equipment. And I would need to copy and sell thousands of books in order for me to break even. So copyright violators were doing serious business and were quite intentional on what they did. So the fines and punishments were just to the level of preventative action needed.

      Now today we can use a Computer that costs less then $20.00 (say a raspberry Pi) We can take an exact copy and distribute it a billions of times. If we had gotten some malware on our system, it could had even do this without our knowledge. This throws justice into a difficult situation.
      The violator has tools which make copyright violation super easy, and effort is usually need to make sure you do not violate the law. While the company that is being violated is getting a bigger set of damages from not being able to sell such product, because of general availability.

      Currently the punishment is very harsh to the violator, which isn't necessarily just to the crime, while the volated companies need to work hard to enforce their IP.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:It's almost like copyright needs a time limit by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Time limit is the problem, and it's gone the wrong way...
      The original copyright terms where what, 14 years plus 14 year extension? This made sense in the original context of printed media in the 1700s, where it could take years to print copies and distribute them world wide. Now you can distribute a work worldwide in seconds, so the terms should be shorter - however they've been made massively longer.
      Now anything that's released today will be long forgotten by the time copyright expires, as anyone who was around for its original release will be dead. Also any original media is likely to have degraded by this point, and functional compatible playback devices will be hard to find.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:It's almost like copyright needs a time limit by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      The original copyright terms where what, 14 years plus 14 year extension?

      Yes. Note, by the by, that the extension was only possible if the AUTHOR was alive to extend it. Not the owner of the Copyright, but the author of the copyrighted work.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re: It's almost like copyright needs a time limit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Back in the 1700's if I were to copy a book. It would take me (adjusted for inflation) at least $10,000 in labor and specialized equipment. And I would need to copy and sell thousands of books in order for me to break even. So copyright violators were doing serious business and were quite intentional on what they did. So the fines and punishments were just to the level of preventative action needed.
      Not exactly, you could have hand written the book if you already had a copy. Sure it would have taken a lot of time but you didn't need very much fancy equipment like you make it out to be. In fact during the late 1800s you could have done it with a typewriter and some carbon copy paper, making it possible for around 10 copies of a page per typing. Niether of those options are near $10,000 in equipment.

  8. Ross Scott did it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The captain of the inter-galactic house of pancakes did it! More Doritos for everyone!

  9. Valve saw it coming by rsilvergun · · Score: 0

    and fired a few warning shots with Steam OS and some more by bundling WINE with Steam. Nobody wants to see Microsoft take over because nobody trusts them. They've got a worse reputation with partners than Apple or even bloody Nintendo.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  10. It expires in three years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It'll be pretty sweet to have a video game archive for those three years though.

  11. I propose a sane solution 25 year copyright by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1, Funny

    Since technology changes so fast I would propose a common sense solution:

    Software should only have copyright protection for 25 years from the date of first commercial sale.

    This would give commercial entities more then enough time to make money from their product.

    This would give consumers the legal protection to archive ancient games.

    It is BULLSHIT that 8-bit games & productive software from 1980's for the Apple, C64, Atari, etc. are STILL copyrighted. NO ONE is using them EXCEPT for collectors and us old farts.

    i.e.
    It SHOULD be legal to run Diablo 2 server emulators in (2000 +25 = 2025) without getting bullshit DMCA, C&D, and sued to kingdom come for wanting to play a game 25 years after the fact it first entered our culture. Blizzard has had more then enough time to make money off of it.

    It SHOULD be legal to run WoW server emulators in (2004 + 25 = 2029).

    Can we get a lawyer / politician who is looking out for preserving our culture???

    1. Re:I propose a sane solution 25 year copyright by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The copyright is often maintained for the purposes of protecting the franchise. Ie, they may want to create a remake, reboot, or sequel someday. Remember, Wasteland got a sequel relatively recently. I also remember people once claiming that Fallout was abandonware but that franchise is alive and well today.

  12. 25 years and buildable source code submission. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Copyright, like patent law was expected to have a legitimate/functioning copy of the IP filed with the copyright office, since the entire purpose of it was to promote the common good and the public interest. Patents got coopted when they stopped demanding proof that the version documented and/or possessed by the copyright office was in fact a functioning example of the patent in question, and in the case of copyright was cooptd when the US joined the Berne convention, which made copyright automatic with no requirement to document or provide a copy of the copyrighted work to the copyright office, something the US government had formerly required. Furthermore the US should really increase the LOC's funding and have digital or physical warehouses to store at least two copies of all copywritten works in order to ensure no copyrighted works are lost. If someone is making money off of it the work should definitely be documented for future generations. Even if it isn't, for many non-commercial works it should be protected and backed up as well.

  13. Tell me we can play No One Lives Forever again... by Quake1v1 · · Score: 1

    It's stuck in limbo...but, best FPS ever.

  14. Wiil that work for say OS like windows XP? needed by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Wiil that work for say OS like windows XP? needed to run the game?

    The os in a embedded arcade game?

  15. Can you fake dialup or is that an FCC issue? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Can you fake dialup or is that an FCC issue?

    Say to get old golden tee online?

    1. Re: Can you fake dialup or is that an FCC issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, may not connect to their severs for random online match, but you and a buddy could pull it off using an emulator + parsec FTW!

  16. Re:TRUMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, his opposition to American vendors having to compete with imported goods and labor for American customers' money, shows he's passionately against free markets.

    But I think I see your point: as long as those American businesses are privately owned, then even if they are heavily subsidized by the government by raising taxes on customers who buy from the competition, it's still technically capitalism. You have to actually seize ownership of the businesses to make it socialism. Government raising taxes and giving out free handouts isn't socialism, it's just mundane corruption.

    People should stop conflating criminality with communism; don't let the Russian accents confuse you!

    People should also remember that as long as hippies actually own the commune, they're capitalists whether they want to be called that or not! A centrally-planned economy does not a communist make.

  17. Re: TRUMP by youngone · · Score: 0

    We've voted B-Western actors into the White House so reality TV doesn't surprise me.

    I can remember when that happened. The rest of the world laughed at you behind our hands, but we thought "Well, he's an idiot, and corrupt, but they can't do worse, can they"?
    The next couple of guys were pretty much standard US presidents, so the world could more or less do business with them.
    Then of course you elected the idiot son of a former president, and we thought "Holy Shit!. This guy's a moron, and America has gone into the hereditary monarchy game"! but we didn't actually laugh into his face or anything, because manners.
    The next guy was black, which made a nice change, but of course there was no other actual change, despite the campaign slogan.

    This guy however, is so sleazy, corrupt, and ridiculous that the UN assembly actually laughed at him when he made one of his stupid boasts.
    The world is laughing at your president America.

  18. TFS is wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The TFS is wrong, and the publishers have already released a statement on the matter: "See you again in 3 years bitches!"

    Copyright law won't get "better" for video game history until the exemptions themselves become just as permanent as the copyright on the games. At the very least, it won't get better until the first games developed start falling to public domain, which as of this posting will not happen in our lifetimes.

  19. Re: Tell me we can play No One Lives Forever again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can PLAY NOLF right now:
    http:// n o l f revival . t k /