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.

17 of 46 comments (clear)

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

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

  2. 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?

  3. 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 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.

    2. 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 =/

    3. 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.

    4. 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.

    5. 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.

    6. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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!
  6. 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.

  7. 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"
  8. Tell me we can play No One Lives Forever again... by Quake1v1 · · Score: 1

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

  9. 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?

  10. 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?