Slashdot Mirror
Sony to Sue Connectix
Millennium writes "By now you've all probably heard about Virtual Game Station, the Playstation emulator by Connectix for MacOS. Well, it appears Sony isn't too happy about it. They've filed for an injunction against Connectix, and are planning to sue for intellectual property rights violations. It looks, however, as though the law might not back Connectix up on this one. Either way, it looks as though this case could well bolster or destroy the emulation community, so it's one to follow. " Initially I sided with Connectix, but the more I thought about it, the more
complex issue I realize it is. Let me know what you think. Update: It seems as though the IGN story is a rumour - my apologies.
Didn't Connectix reverse engineer Sony's game engine, and port it to MacOS? If so, where was the intellectual property damage? Did they use Sony's code to do it?
Sony's simply trying to keep its player platform from being duplicated, with good reason. Sony made the PS with the intention of selling as many boxes as possible before they are obsolete.
Now, here comes a company that soft codes the engine, and for a fraction of the logistical cost, can distribute their product to as many customers who care to download/purchase it. Connectix doesn't need to worry about getting product out the door before it becomes obsolete, because a soft game engine can be patched.
Personally, I think black box gaming systems should have died with the SuperNES, but Sony seems to want to keep this moronic niche alive. Hope they lose.
Those guys at connectix are fucking geniuses. They know more about low level MacOS hacks than Apple. RamDoubler and Mode32 were works of pure genius, plain and simple. If anyone could write a PlayStation emulator LEGALLY, it is connectix.
Furthermore, they HAD to know this was coming, so I doubt they would've screwed it up by doing something illegal in the process.
Even Sony will tell you the majority of money to be made in the console market is off GAMES, so in the long run, this could help them.
Personally, I think its a stupid idea (shell out the extra $50 to buy a REAL playstation and then you can use ALL the games PERFECTLY instead of MOST of the games "good enough") but thats irrelevent, eh?
This is just further proof that the concept of inellectual property is a crock of shit.
If the emulator works just as well as a playstation, and is cheaper, then no one with a computer would need to buy a playstation. OH HORRORS sony will stop making money off playstation. Guess what? If i can do the same thing as you, only better, then you had better come up with something new, not just shut me down. How does preventing people from cloning a playstation help to advance the technology, and benefit consumers? It doesn't, in fact it does just the opposite. With intelluctual property, one group (the owners of the property) benefit. EVERYONE ELSE IN EXISTANCE IS deeply HARMED
So, what intelluctual property laws say is that its ok to extort money from the masses, for the benefit of the few. Isn't that along the lines of what we call inexcusable evil fueled by conspicuous greed?
If this continues i fear deeply for the future. sharing of books will be outlawed, if you invite a friend over to listen to cd's, your friend will have to pay royalties, even though you already bought the cd. I bet that'll be in DIvX version 2.
Down with intellectual property, everything should be under the gpl.
AND IF YOU SAY OTHERWISE YOU ARE A GREEDY SCUMBAG EVIL PIG FASCIST. This is not open for debate or argument. IT is immediately obvious it is not okay to slaughter people, just because it will cause you to get rich.
They're the M$ of Japan. Some of my asian friends used to joke that the USSR was a trick by Sony to drive the market for all the military related electronics they used to (still do?) make. They may not have as much of monopoly as M$ does but they are spread wider over the economy and are trickier than M$ is.
And since when do we have the right to get money at whatever cost?
Slaughtering baby seals with the help of the mafia may cause some pain for environmentallists and lawyers, but it's ok, after all, people have to make their money somehow.
remember the first pc compatibles (compaq)? as long as you don't steal any of the original code, you're okay.
Everyone who believes in free software (Open Source (TM)) should be against sony. "intellectual property" is just what free software (GNU) is all about. Freedom to share information, and no information is "owned".
Sony suing someone for making a product that uses Sony "software" is like IBM sueing someone for making a machine that runs IBM software. How silly! Dont get me wrong - I'm a big fan of high quality Sony products, but if Sony wins this one, it will be a sad day in the world of Capitalism.
it would be easier to add a law saying that
everything is automatically gpl's than to actually remove or change existing laws.
I just bought several Playstation titles to run on VGS. Now would Sony benefit if instead of helping support the game developers market for Playstation I rather get say a Dreamcast/N64 and, instead of supporting Playstation games, developer business, work with the game developers not on Playstation?
I think Sony should work from this angle:
Do not waste effort on Connectix to sell more Playstation consoles, waste effort on selling games, to support the Playstation platform.
Maybe Sony also instead may license VGS...
Um, hi, i just wanted to say that sony is retarded. They lose money on every playstation they sell anyways, so if people start using connectix's emulator as opposed to buying a playstation, it actually helps sony out. Besides, with 2 and a half million G3's (give or take) around the nation, thats a lot more playstations, and a lot more people to go out and buy the games, which is where sony is making all their money. Of course, there's always the issue of pirating discs and all... but that factor will always exist.
Hey what happened when Microsoft built their MacOS emulator?
All's fair in love war and business.
If it really was against the law to do anything unoriginal we'd have to stop making babies.
Finally. Writing an "emulator" that violates the rights of the machine owner is illegal, but trying to sell it is a crime. Connectix deserves anything they will get (and they will).
and how? I'm curious.
Josh
Have the Bleem people been harassed by Sony yet?
Hmm..didn't Jobs use the PSX emulator as a promo for the new Apples? It really would suck if Apple would get held back from selling Macs b/c of a videogame company...regardless of the outcome, this'll be an interesting legal precedent.
This is a two fold problem.....
.... its not the api that Sony is protecting here its the methos in which the API is used.... if you look at psemu.. you'll notice that they have a disclamer saying that you "must" own a playstation before you can download the bios file..... Thus psemu doesn't cut into that revenue base...
...many of the games available on Sony Playstations are also available on Nintendo64, Pc's, etc...thus Sony is not locking developer's into a Sony only paradigm.
In order for Sony Playstation games to work... you have to own... A PLAYSTATION... which cost $179 or so ( depending on where you are ) and thus a sizable source of revenue for Sony....
Now connectix is allowing people to play PLaystation games without having to buy one of these and thus cutting into Sony's revenue... Normally connextix would have to license the right to make such an emulator ( or a clone playstation ). Even if connectix reverse engineered this thing it doesn't matter
This I believe cant happen with Windows emulation or other software emulation... a) because it has been done before ( hence precedent ), b) the method in which that product is used, ie on a pc is the same in both circumstances - whether it be windows natively or emulated... Plus in the case of pure software..... it is intellectal property arguements and as long as the code is not the same or was dervived without stealing, copying etc then it is only functionally the same ( and since there have been many strains of unix around for a long time without anything happening wine, etc should be fine )...
I can understand Sony's position here... if I spent alot of money developing a product only to have someone essentially do an end run around me I'd be pissed to....
Furthermore, unlike software for windows
This should however signal to Sony that maybe there is a market for this? The reason they haven't done this is ofcourse...why would anyone buy a playstation if they did and this is what they fear..
Sony could ofcourse hardware lock the games, like some high end software is which would also solve this problem.
Maybe it cutting the hair very thin but it is the difference between freedom and control.
I guess my feeling is that while it takes very little money to develop most software in terms of research and manufacturing costs, something like developing a playstation and setting up the manufacturing facilities etc to produce a playstation are much higher.
I would like to see companies that do spend a lot of money doing research for new products protected from someone coming along and "emulating" it thus stealing your rightful revenue..
This is as much a question of ethics as it is of law I suppose..... I guess grab your psemu while you can..
...``proprietary knowledge'' (which is saying here you know something but it's illegal for you to use that knowledge and if we could we'd kidnap you and rip it out of the neurons of your brain!) is pure evil and must be done away with. To think otherwise is to think that it's acceptable for people to own the basic concepts and ideas in another person's head, which is just plain sick and demented.
- RF (dfelker@cnu.edu)
The right of the big and powerful to control what other people can think and do??!? Hmm, lemme reread by Bill of Rights and see which Amendment that one was in...
I try not to hate members of humanity, but people like you make me sick...
- RF (dfelker@cnu.edu)
Sony sells the PlayStation for ~$129. The last I had heard, they barely break even or lose money on each console they sell. The money is made in the software. An emulator which plays PURCHASED playstation cd's helps Sony by immediatley boosting the number of consoles it has out there (if the near 1 million iMac users buy the emulator).
Sony, everything that uses your software benefits your Playstation.
Apple wrote the book on IP lawsuits, so I'm sure they have a few IP lawyers on staff that they can spare... if I were Steve Jobs, I'd send them down to Connectix and help them defend against Sony.
Connectix gave Apple a HUGE Christmas present with the PlayStation emulator; it's Mac-only and singlehandedly solves the problem of limited game support on the Mac. What more could you ask for?
What do you mean "the're" is a contraction of "they are"? What English class did you learn this in? Try using "They're".
I can't stand it when people correct someone's grammar/spelling with more incorrect grammar/spelling! If you're going to correct someone, at LEAST make sure that you are right!
BTW, CmdrTaco, I love your site, but one thing that bugs me is your usage of "to" instead of "too"! I'm sorry for being a nitpicker, but please start using "too" when you mean an excessive amount of something or additionally.
>> PS. Those who counter that this practice is
>> evil... ask yourself why you can buy a console
>> cabable of generating near-pc quality graphics
>> for less then a good video card...
Where?
www.pricewatch.com.
That's where.
Sony's shit is overpriced.
If there were no copyright laws, how would you propose to deal with the market failure that would lead to an underproduction of software?
RMS has suggested a tax on hardware to subsidize software development, but that is not a popular suggestion. Do you have an alternative?
I heard that Connectix included the copyrighted Sony .. heh .. own a Neo Geo, and backup the ROM
Playstation ROM in its emulator. That is like making a
batch of PCs and installing Win95 on each one, all off
one CD-ROM. It's illegal. Few emulators currently
available come with the system ROM files, because that is
what the authors would most likely get in trouble for. Not
emulating the hardware, "pirating" the ROM file. MAME
specifically prohibits distributing the package with any
game ROM files. If you want to play Neo Geo games on MAME,
you have to
from that onto your harddrive, etc. Needless to say, some
"backup" sites on the net have the ROMs for download, but,
*ahem* this, is, of course, *clear throat* just for
convenience purposes, and these sites could NEVER be sued
because of their *ahem* perfectly legally sound disclaimers
when you logon.
But Connectix here just indiscriminantly distributes --
nay, SELLS -- Sony's copyrighted System ROM with this package,
or so I hear. I think they have total reason to be sued, no
matter how cool of a company they are. I can't believe
they would put themselves in such a situation.
There is no injunction or lawsuit, its just a rumor. And a particularly shaky rumor, considering it came from a PSX fan website.
This whole idea is ridiculous. Sony makes millions off of GAMES, but barely breaks even on the PSX machines. Sony would make a lot more money if the emulator was a hit.
Remember the lawsuit atari filed, attempting to block Coleco from selling an addition that let colecovision play atari games?
Coleco won. Is there an online resource that'll give the reasons why the court ruled the way it did?
By the way, it doesn't look like the playstation ROM is in there, since the product won't do things like run the software that's built into the playstation (the audio CD player, etc...)
Ahh - but you could make this analogy with the Playstation "OS" just as with Windows. My understanding is that the Playstation hardware has a sort of boot loader ROM and that the "OS" is actually contained on the CDROMs with the game code. In this way, Sony can release updates (to developers) of the Playstation API's without having to update every Playstation console out there. So, in some sense, Connectix is just doing the same thing they do with their Windoze emulator! They just emulate the hardware (MIPS CPU, 3D engine, etc.) and the boot loader ROM, and then everything else comes of a (presumably) legal Playstation CD. You know, it was my understanding that Sony even sells the Playstation consoles at a loss and makes up for it with licensing fees per title sold.
For those who weren't around a few years ago, here's a summary. Someone wrote a free (bear and speech) cryptographically secure mail system.
The code needed an arbitrary precision integer arithmetic library. The author wrote RIPEM so that it could be used with all such libraries commonly available on Unix systems (basically, Berkeley's mp and GNU's gmp). There was a define in the makefile that told it which you had.
RIPEM itself simply contained code to make the appropriate calls to whichever library you were using. It did not contain any code from mp or gmp.
FSF was very upset with RIPEM. They said that because it contained code that was meant to be linked with gmp if the user set the gmp option in the makefile, RIPEM in effect really was being distributed with gmp, and so RIPEM had to be GPL'ed.
However, the author could not GPL RIPEM, because RIPEM also used a binary-only library from RSA that the RIPEM author had permission to distribute.
The eventual resolution was that the author of RIPEM wrote a new library, fmp, that was API compatible with gmp, and made it public domain. According to FSF, that made it so that distributing RIPEM was no longer an implied distributuion of gmp, and so all was well. (It didn't matter that fmp was a minimal, low performance, implementation of the gmp API, so that no one in their right mind would actually use it instead of gmp. All that mattered was that it had the same API).
Also, consider the FSF's position on things like Netscape plugins. Their position is that if program A is only useful in conjunction with program B, then distributing A is legally also a distribution of B. Thus, RMS says you can't GPL a Netscape plugin, because Netscape's license is not compatible with GPL. (Or, more accurately, the author can GPL it, and also distribute it under a license compatible with Netscape, and so other GPL projects can take code from the plugin, but you can't go the other way. You can't take code from some random GPL'ed program and put it in a purportedly GPL'ed plugin without special permission).
Anyway, using this reasoning, it seems to me that the FSF would have to conclude that Connectix is distributing Playstation games. If distributing Playstation games is something that requires permission from Sony, then Sony is legally right here, FSF would have to say.
Does anyone else find it weird that Sony is suing
*now*? I mean, you'd think there would have been
some discussion between Connectix, Apple and Sony
before now. These are big companies, and I'd like to
think they try to do their homework before making
major product launches...
Microsoft sued and lost to Sun over wabi a long time ago. this seems to be a similar case, so i am guessing that Sony will loose on the surface of things
if this is all a bunch of hype and rumors, do the honorable thing and remove the story.
not doing so demonstrates immaturity of the highest level.
Oh, fall back on that "sneaky little Japanese" stereotype to make a point. Refreshing!
The chip. Definitely the chip.
How about just, "You must include the source code with all software licensed", and "You may do anything you want with it, so long as you don't give it to someone who doesn't already have a license". The "5 years expiration on copyright unless a derivative work is still being actively developed or marketed by the owner" sounds fair, as long as it's then generally available from, say, the Library of Congress.
Oh yeah... now that didn't even occur to me! And Apple isn't using genuine Sony Trinitron tubes on a lot of their monitors now, right?
They make a MacOS emulator, which is entirely legit.
Sony is going to have a hard time with this since the CPU, etc was developed by SGI and isn't even sony's property.
Kernel Productions (http://www.kernel.com/) makes an adaptor for playstation, n64, sega/commodore/atari, and pc joysticks for the mac.
John Carmack is the man. I wish all software companies would work like ID Software. Release specs, allow people to port to lots of platforms, eventually release source, write great tech. articles and books...
Wait a minute, I thought you were supposed to play the games off of the original CDs with the Connectix thing. The ability to play copied CDs is a crack.
Which are you saying, reverse engineering is "good", or it's "bad"?
The debate is already over, there are already cracks for playstation games to be burnt and played via the emulator, that is where sony has been hurt, if i were sony i woudl be sueing connectix's ass for that loss of profit. not the player...
That makes no sense. How is this any different from cloning, say, a PPro, undocumented features and all? It contains its microcode to interpret the programs you throw at it, just like a PlayStation contains boot ROMs.
How about if Uhg gets paid to start fires for people or show them how, but doesn't have the right to stamp out anyone else's fire?
Another AC wrote:
"Didn't Connectix reverse engineer Sony's game engine, and port it to MacOS? If so, where was the intellectual property damage?"
I think Sony has some patents relating to the Playstation. Connectix can do all the reverse-engineering it wants; regardless of how it created the code, it can't use same code (perhaps even the same algorithms, depending on how specific the patent is) Sony uses if it's protected by a patent. Connectix would have to make sure it accomplishes the same thing as Sony's code, but does so in a different way that's not covered by the patent.
I doubt very many people are qualified to comment on whether Connectix did this properly or not.
There's NO injunction.
No suit.
NADA!!!!!!!!
The Black Dragoon
After a friend of mine talked to a Connectix rep at MacWorld SanFransico show.. The rep said Apple actually developed the PSX emu and handed it over to Sony (I'm guessing this is because Sony is in the business of emu's and that if there was a lawsuite, Apple didn't want to get involved).
This isn't all bullshit because a few months back, web site MacOS Rumors (www.macosrumors.com) reported a story about Apple working on Playstation Emu. Of course, no info or betas were leaked since this could of allowed Sony to take a look at the VGS before it's release and shut it down.
sg
Gee, I get ~30 fps on my iMac, one of the slowest G3's available. And load times are a lot slower too (not that that is relevant).
tsunami(TM) - not ac just lost his cookie
Gee, I get ~30 fps on my iMac, one of the slowest G3's available. And load times are a lot faster too (not that that is relevant).
tsunami(TM) - not ac just lost his cookie
(nice typo, if you noticed it)
I read some where a few months ago that sony looses money on the systems to keep it competitivly priced. They make all the money from the games that the game makers sell. I don't know if this is true but if it is I can't understand why they are so upset.
These two issues are unrelated. RMS does not believe that the sort of IP sony claims should even exist.
And as for the libgmp issue, it WAS wrong to be using GPL code in a non-free program, assuming you accept the validity of copyright as used by the GPL, which is necessary to the protection of freedom until IP is abolished. RSA is the evil entity keeping it from being free, but that means RSA should be avoided, not that the freedom of the code should be violated. Well, until that day (is it Sept. 20, 2001? I don't remember right off) on which we have a party and call up Rivest and his buddies and laugh at the expiration of that evil thing granted by the corrupt US government to a so-called mathematician who is nothing but a sorry opportunist. To the Freedom of simple mathematics!
- RF (dfelker@cnu.edu)
...have limited ideas about how to make money. Ever heard of waiting tables? Ever heard of fast food service? Ever heard of `hi-tech' jobs in electronics repair? Or how about teaching? Or doing tech support if you like that sort of thing... Hell, you could even be a little Dilbert-person if you want... Ever heard of any sort of work aside from getting paid subsidies for `permission' to use your ideas?
;)
For ages people got by without IP. It's not like it's something natural to our existence or essential to ``making a living''. There are many ways to earn money, depending on how much you need/desire and what you like to do. But to think that it's right to be able to force other people not to use an idea, just because you claim you had it first, and to exploit that ability to your own benefit, is childish (sorry, I don't like insulting children, since many ideas children have tend to have more merit than those of their older counterparts; however, such posessiveness does seem typical of children, at least in my experience) and narcissistic (sp?).
Quit your trolling and argue based on merit, not trying to insult a person. Of course, fans of proprietary software are known for their use of FUD and pseudoproofs to support their junk, while free software generally can stand on its own merit.
Besides...for all you knew, I could have been a professor, in which case I might have been in academia for a long time to come. Who knows; one day I may be...
- RF (dfelker@cnu.edu)
Nothing about US copyright law says you cannot reverse-engineer a copyrighted work. In fact, in some cases (e.g. when reverse-engineering is necessary to adapting the work to make it useful to the owner of a copy, iirc) copyright law protects reverse-engineering.
Now, if Connectix copied sony's rom, then that is unfortunately illegal under US law, but afaik, that did not happen. Rather, Connectix CLONED the rom.
Would you have GNU software be illegal, since much of it is cloned from non-free software? Of course not! It's a completely independent work.
*sigh* newbz...
- RF (dfelker@cnu.edu)
I would have thought my comments on Sony would have gotten more response. So much for that little experiment :-) I'm really not serious about Sony being a monopoly, I was just trying to see what people would say given that hypothetical situation. I guess Sony just isn't seen as threat to most /.er's. And yes, I really did know _AN_ asian who made that Sony joke up. He had a lot of Sony products in the house. Don't forget Sony once had a much larger monopoly than it does now. Remember Beta, they had a monopoly on that. For awhile they had a monopoly on Walkman like devices.
Ferret
ferret@nconnect.net
Well, yeah, porting assembly code is kind of hard. But it's not that bad once you get the hang of it. The worst part is when you find you've just spent an hour translating a few hundred lines which built up to a direct access of an I/O device that is completely different on the target platform.
Last I checked, Sony loses money for every PlayStation sold. However, I bet they make lots off of accessories and since none of those work on a Mac, an extra controller or memory card sold by Sony is less money for them. Maybe Sony should start selling accessories for the VGS...Sony branded bondi Blue dual shock analog controllers, etc.
this story was written on false assumptions, right?
the basis for the story were found to be false, right?
people are still obviously confused about the suit, right?
tell me wtf this LIE is still doing in the article lineup?
oh, that's right. this is slapdash where lies are sold to the slobbering readers every day.
Gumber sez:
A few comments besides reminding people that this suit is an unconfirmed rumor.
1. How sure are you that Sony looses money on every playstation sold? I know that this has been asserted by connectix, but I don't know that I beleive it. I do believe that it was probably the case the case when the playstation was first released, but since then the cost of CD rom mechanisms have dropped, as have semiconductor prices. I have to beleive that if I can buy a prtable CD-player at retail for under $50 and a decent 3-d card at retail for about $70 then Sony can make and distribute a 2-3 year old platform for under $120. They may not be making money, but they aren't loosing it.
2. Even if sony is loosing money on each playstation, if the connectix product cuts into their sales volume, it will cost sony more money for each playstation they do sell, because they will have smaller econmies of scale and the machines they do produce will cost more to produce.
3. Whether the PSX itself is a money looser or not, this breaks Sony's control over the platform and this does cost sony because it threatens the licensing and distribution fees that do make them money.
None of the above means that Connectix isn't free and clear. However, given the above, one has to wonder if Sony hasn't written the game licenses themselves so as to prevent them from being played on anything but a Playstation. They might go even further and say that use of the games for the purposes of testing or developing an emulator violates the license. (This is different from the cloning of the PC BIOS. In that case the software vendors were either neutral, or they were happy to sell to cloner, (Microsoft)).
Gumber sez:
It ain't that simple.
1. Thanks to moore's law, hardware gets cheaper. Even if it started by selling at a loss, production costs have dropped faster than sales costs and at this point I would guess they are at least breaking even.
2. If this costs them playstation sales then the loose some of the economies of scale, pushing up production costs.
3. If this breaks their control over the platform then it threatens their real source of playstation revenue, licensing and distribution fees.
Gumber sez:
Not necessarily the same. The PC cloning was done with the OS and application vendors consent. Sony controls all playstation software either directly or by agreement with the game vendors. If the game licenses prohibit the games use on emulation then Sony has leverage.
Does anyone have a couple of represenative licenses they can post so we can see?
Gumber sez:
The 060 was too late to be considered and the ColdFire was even later
It looks to have the install patch so you can install from disk image and also the MOD chip patch.
I tried it before and it worked with my PAL disks and one I backed up just to see if it worked.
Dudez, we need a PC 3dfx version
the psemu.com's one works 80%, its ok, but not
100%
And maybe connectix has got a licecne from sony? maybe Connectix pays Sony 5% of all VSG's sold?
Excuse me, but this *is* America.
int mult_big_nums( bignum *out, bignum *a, bignum *b) { #if USE_MP ...code to compute a*b using functions ...in the Berkeley MP library #elif USE_GMP ...code to compute a*b using functions ...in the GNU GMP library #else fatal("No math library selected\n"); #endif }
The FSF's claim with regard to RIPEM is that if you write this:
your source code is a derivative work of the GMP library, and since GMP was GPL'ed, your source code had to be GPL'ed.
I consulted lawyers and professors of copyright law on this, and they uniformly said that FSF was wrong on this.
This is a good thing. If FSF's beliefs were correct, we would also need Microsoft's permission to write Windows programs. We'd need Apple's permission to write Mac programs. Even publishing a listing of code that called Windows or Mac functions would require permission, which would mean there would be no unauthorized Windows programming books.
Some people have tried to support FSF's position using the concept of contributory infringement. That happens if A infringes C's copyright, using tools or equipment provided by B, and B's tools or equipment have no legitimate non-infringing use. B can then be held responsible for A's infringement.
The problem with trying to apply contributor infringement to the RIPEM incident is that FSF has said that it is OK for anyone to do pretty much whatever they want with GPL'ed code on their own system for their own use. It is only when they want to distribute the code that FSF cares. You can't have contributory infringement without having a direct infringement.
With all due reference do the previous reply to this topic, I'd like to raise the nearly obvious counterpoint. To wit, if Connectix is merely distributing a Playstation game, they could then pay Sony the normal royalty for such a distribution. Sony would then in all faith, owe Connectix a handshake for expanding their market (G3 Powerbook owners leap to mind). Along somewhat similar lines, I note that Apple and Sony have a long-standing relationship. Sony engineers were closely invovled in the original Powerbook launch, the PB100 was (supposedly) adapted from the MacPortable by Sony engineers. As Apple has made such a public spectacle about the VSX, and it does strengthen the Mac platform, their influence could keep Sony from being too, shall we say, vindictive ? about the whole affair. maserati@flash.net
I distinctly remember that either (or both) of www.macosrumors.com or www.Pelagious.com/AppleRecon/ reported on this back in, oh September or so (neither site has a search function for their archives). The report that Apple handed the emulator to Connectix is plausible but not in any way confirmed.
so an NES emulator on a dual 500MHz 21264 Alpha would be slower than a real NES? I THINK NOT!!!
Software patents are fairly new - so I doubt
Sony has good protction from that side.
Reverse engineering a product is otherwise ok,
as plenty of od cloners have shown...
Let's see what comes out of that.
Paul
Is RMS a lawyer? How do his views on the GPL hold up in court if he has no experience drafting legal licenses?
For some people and some companies, the incentive to make a lot of money is what drives them to make innovative products. Intellectual property is their way to insure that they secure the market for what they've developed. Now, that may seem uncool to some people, but it allows the person or company that spent X millions of dollars developing a product to actually make that money back and make a profit (if the product is any good.) I can't say I side with Sony or Connectix on this one, but I can say that few companies (especially hardware companies with high overhead) would continue to develop new products if they couldn't make back the money they spent on the development process. Sony made a great product and deserves the money they've made. Whether Connectix has violated IP laws... I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. But I can say that the /. audience's cavalier disdain for copyrights and patents makes us look more like theives than anything else. I read a lot of posts that denounce pirating software, then turn around and advocate the pirating of MP3's. Property is property, intellectual or otherwise. Whether you steal someone's albums or rob a bank, you're a thief, plain and simple, and thieves are swine.
It sounds so lame. Sorry!
Gumber sez:
My comments were all intended to address the belief that Connectix was somehow doing Sony a favor and they still stand.
A)I don't dispute that the playstation is priced in order to encourage people to buy into the platform and that this practice meant that the Playstation was once sold at a loss (and may still be today). The example of the video card and the CD player were attempts to find a basis for compairison with other consumer electronics items. I picked two items which share similar technology with the playstation whose prices are not underwritten to support a larger platform and whose prices already include distribution costs and dealer profits. It isn't a perfect comparison, but it isn't a bad one.
B)While I tend to agree that the market for the emulator and the market for the cosole have limited overlap, I don't think either one of us know enough about the market or the underlying economics to argue with any certainty that this doesn't hurt sony's hardware sales with any certainty.
I have to wonder why you are so sure that sony will release a PSX emulators an include PSX support in the playstation. Just as it is taken as a given that hardware costs are manipulated in the interest of fostering profitability or the entire platform, so is it a given that console vendors are very skittish about backwords compatibility because it can slow the release of software that really demostraits the advantages of the new platform.
We both agree though, the threat to Sony's controll of the platform would be the biggest inspiration behind any lawsuit.
"Windows" PSX emulator?
I stongly suspect it to be closed, proprietary,
Windows-only garbage.
Never heard of competition?
There are only 3 protections Sony has: trademark, copyright, and patent. I think they're probably going for copyright, because what the hell could you patent in a games console? If Connectix has left copyrighted material alone, then they simply provide competition, and American laws protect them from mega companies like Sony.
The thing is... Sony doesn't make money by selling Playstations. They actually take a loss for every system they sell. They make their money by selling the game development software and licenses. So, I think Sony would probably like an additional potential couple million people who could buy Playstation games..
And get your ass burned by Fuji when they start selling the film for the real price...
??
:-)
Maybe better. I hear they are less likely to crash the system.
Hmm, okay... planning on writing anything?
When you do, I'll publish it nuder my name and blow raspberries at you, after all, how could it be theft if it doesn't really exist?
Pah
Be nice, however, whit the speed I've heard of, most of it is in mac and PowerPC specific assembly.
I think it's obvious that you've atrophied.
What about the increased royalties they could get from people who are like myself, I have a iMac for myself and the kids, a SparcStation 5 for business and Linux for hobby. I cant justify or have room for another piece of kit, I would ge tthe emulater for games thus giving Sony revenue, but if there is no emulator I'll just live with all the other non-Sony games. Sony no revenue from me.
This is a joke that would be like Sun suing HP for reverse engineering Java, which i think is wrong because 1 platform is needed connectix worked hard on this it is very difficult to program in assembly language and there is a large investment in this software and they deserve to profit.
Sony are probably concerned about some kind of intrusion on the Net Yaroze console. Seems they've already had problems on that front with folks putting out stuff for PCs--didn't I see some tools that would allow a user with GNU tools to write their own games and play them on a regular PSX?
slashdot broke my sig
how do you claim to own an API? I'm sort of
shocked that the companies that produce games for
the Playstation aren't upset at this -- this can
only increase their potential market.
Anyhow, I think this is bull; imagine if Bill
Gates were to sue a company whose software allowed
you to emulate Windows and run Windows
applications on Linux (aka, shut down WINE through
whatever means). This isn't that different; Sony
enjoys a monopoly in the sense that if you want to
play certain titles, you must own a playstation.
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Posted by ElViento98:
It's one thing for Joe Random guy to make an emulator, however it is quite another to make a product to sell. I'm all for free software, but people have to make their money somewhere.
But Windows isn't a MacOS emulator.
Sure it is. Windows runs MacOS binaries every bit as well as its native binaries.
Um, just because they sell it for $129 (not $179), doesn't mean they're making money on it.
Profit != Retail Price
Profit = Retail Price - Numerouse Middleman Cuts - Cost of Goods. With the PSX, I'm almost sure that COGs > Retail Price alone. Sony LOSES money on the consoles.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Howdy. I'm A GREEDY SCUMBAG EVIL PIG FASCIST. I really don't give two shits about Playstation. Playstation is merely one of dozens of ways Sony Corp has at its disposal to separate people from their money and time. I'm not "deeply harmed" by their attempt to hoard their IP; I'm thoroughly unmoved.
But having said that, and not having read the particulars of the case, I support Connectix in this if all they've done is reverse-engineer the thing. That's surely not the same thing as out-and-out theft of IP.
Standard disclaimer: IANAL.
--
--
=8^
The reason sony doesn't want to see this emu released has nothing to do with the immediate economic impact on playstation sales.
The model that sony/nintendo/sega work under demands that the system be as closed as possible...
The programming tools have to be bought from them.
The distribution has to be handled through them.
Anything that threatens this model by opening up the distribution of games or the ability for non-licencees to develop games will get lawyers thrown at it.
They don't care if a few hackers throw some freeware project together... that's not a mass market threat... Connectix's product is. It could set a precident that sony doesn't want to deal with...
PS. Those who counter that this practice is evil... ask yourself why you can buy a console cabable of generating near-pc quality graphics for less then a good video card...
--
OG
Anybody know how Connectix developed their emulator?
This could be very interesting, considering the work by some to get rid of emulators for a lot of the old platforms.
dude, you're pretty fscking funny. ignorant, but pretty fscking funny. oh, and sign me up as a greedy scumbag evil pig, you immature twit.
I can understand people having problems with software patents as there's a lot of duplication of code/effort out there, but hardware patents are a much different thing. You can patent a particular implementation of a hardware system, but you can't patent the generic system idea. Hence AMD, Cyrix, etc. If I develop an idea for how to do something in hardware, I'm gonna patent it. If someone copies my way of doing it, I'll go after them. If someone comes up with another way to do the same thing, more power to them.
IP laws exist to prevent slimy cretins from getting rich off of other people's hardwork. It doesn't always work out quite that way, and there are some problems with it's current implementation, but IP law is not inherently evil in anyway.
I'd think that if you ever patented something, you'd want to take advantage of the protections it affords you, but I highly doubt you'll ever even have an idea worth patenting.
Incidentally, a lot of people have gotten rich off of slaughtering other people. It's the American way (tm).
Umm...isn't the the Playstation built from OTS HW plus some control ASICs?
Dude, that's pretty fscking funny! The idea that the other hunters would inherently take care of Uhg because he did them a favor! Hah! You obivously know nothing about human nature. Of course you apparently also lack the backbone to affix your name to your comments.
> For ages people got by without IP.
For ages, it also was nigh impossible to cheaply and easily profit off of the work of others. Books could not be quickly and easily produced until the rise of the printing press. Music could not be copied until the rise of the record. The rise of the Industrial Revolution made the mass production of nearly all consumer goods possible. The Digital Age has made it possible to perfectly copy another's work, label it as one's own, and redistribute it with astonishing speed.
I know this from personal experience. I was commisioned to produce graphics for a fantasy rpg along with a couple of other people. One of the other people producing graphics stole the graphics I produced and received credit and payment for the work I did. Because it was my word against his, and he wasn't going to fess up, I had no real way to receive restitution. The game never ended up shipping, but I still lost out. If I had some way of effectively watermarking the image and not having to worry about someone altering that watermark. Have you ever actually been involved in an IP-related dispute?
> since many ideas children have tend to have
> more merit than those of their older
> counterparts;
Interesting statement, considering the older counterparts can (and do) get away with taking credit for the works of younger coworkers and because of their reputation. But such is the nature of research.
Fact is, the idea of eliminating IP law as we know it is supported almost exclusively by academians, who are used to the free exchange of ideas and whose motivations are other than monetary in nature. To suggest that someone would change his opinions if he wasn't in academia is an observation of human nature not an insult (unlike your assertion that I'm some FUD-spreading, unenlightened troll). The world isn't a meritocracy. The world is driven by money and power and greed. Your landlord (or perhaps bank, unless your among the lucky few that truly own their residence) could care less about your contributions to the Linux kernel if you can't make your monthly payments.
The world is a greedy ugly place. Face it. Honesty won't get you very far when you're dealing with a liar.
Funny, I have yet to see anything of substance in your side of the argument. Just lots of ranting about greedy megacorps. Take your rose-colored glasses off. Maybe you'll see how easy it is for dishonest people to take advantage of honest people when there's nothing to back up the claims of the honest people. Without IP law, it's even easier for the rich and powerful to take advantage of the less fortunate, but more creative. Groups like ipnot.org operate on the false assumption that all people are inherently honest. However, when your assumptions fail to hold up, so to does your model fail.
ipnot.org argues that everyone will be honest. maybe you need to re-read parts of their manifesto.
perhaps you forget that some people have no care about reputation. only honorable men operate by honorable principles. others will take advantage of every loophole possible. your argument seems to include the acceptance that people will be taken advantage of, and there's no reason to try to prevent it.
I am willing to acknowledge problems in current copyright law, however I fail to see how the existence of copyright law mandates a heavy handed government presence in the lives of the citizens. If government interference is your main concern, there are far greater issues to worry about. However, nothing I have seen has yet to convince me that IP law must be destroyed.
Sony wants to be proprietary with their Playstation, but they realize such a strategy would have doomed them from the start (hence the SDKs and documentation available to anyone with a few hundred dollars). This is a prime example of old company thinking, where they've built an empire around a few little secrets, and it all waits to crumble when those secrets are revealed. In this case, some smart guys have reverse-engineered Sony's little secrets. They have figured out a puzzle, and Sony wants to sue them for it.
I say, if you're in the proprietary game, you lose when you lose. Someone leak your secret? Did someone reverse-engineer your work? Too bad. You can't sanely tell your customers that by using your product they're now not allowed to be curious, or even have _similar_ ideas. You can't use law to force other bright, motivated people from looking at your work and trying to do better from their own fresh start. Sony built their house of cards, Connectix just brought in the winds.
Reverse engineering is NOT an IP theft. How do you think the whole thing of IBM-compatibles came about? Compaq reverse-engineered the BIOS which was the only non-off-the-shelf item to manufacture its first line of IBM-compatibles. I'm sure that IBM was pissed (I don't know if they actually sued), but look where we are now. I understand that SONY doesn't want to become the IBM of the gaming (PS) world, but such is life. As long there is no proof that actual proprietary code was stolen from SONY, they lose.
Aleks
Crap. If Connectix was giving the emualtor away free you might have a point, but they are trying to make a buck of it and that's a big no-no. Connectix has in fact crossed the line here and deserves to be slapped down for it.
Of course, the CD drive in a Mac does not have a barcode reader to check for the authenticity of the CD being played, meaning (presumably) that it can play copied games without modifications. Sony might have a problem with that.
So here they have this audience of ravenously hungry gamers who could go out and buy a bunch a games. Probably controllers to, if they had UDB versions of them.
But no, like so many IP freakouts, this isn't about partnering, it's about protecting. And IP law is so screwed up that if you don't protect like a madman, you can set precedent to lose it. Ick.
My prediction is that they'll at least win the injunction.
Actually, I would have meant Universal Database if anything. But yes, I meant USB.
OK, this was an emulator in hardware, and some of the chips were pretty standard (like the 6502 CPU), but it was an emulator nonetheless. Atari sued Coleco, of course, and lost. Hence, this set the precedent that emulators are legal. You can patent ASICs and board layouts. You can copyright the software (BIOS in the case of the PSX) but you can neither patent nor copyright the functionality. This was all settled a long time ago. Only lawyers stand to gain anything from this action.
This is what also protects WINE, SoftPC, MAME (the emulator, not the ROMs), Linux (a UNIX clone, ne?)
You do not have to own a Sony Playstation to play the games. All you need is some technology that is capable of interpreting these games to reproduce their performance.
There is no intellectual property violation if you independently create this technology from scratch.
Things like machine instruction sets, programming languages, application interfaces, data formats
and communication protocols are not intellectual property, only their implementations are.
If Connectix specifically signed an agreement with Sony saying they would not reverse engineer their product.
If Connectix was given the Playstation API from Sony with Sony's explicit understanding that Connectix was using the API only to develop games.
;)
Otherwise, Connectix is well within its rights (so long as <FASCIST>WIPO</FASCIST> doesn't pass) to reverse engineer the design and develop their own (alternative) implementation. Where would we be if there wasn't an alternative (royalty free) implementation of Unix?
Hello McFly!
:)
Sony don't make their money on the PSX!
In fact the rumors are that Sony LOSE money on every PSX sold.
Where they make bucketloads is the commision from EVERY game sold for the PSX!!!!
Now, 800,000 imacs...
They'll be buying PSX games! Sony get $$$$ from every game sold! To every VGS owner!
And they don't have to lose money on the PlayStation for it
Its really a win/win situation.
Macs get games,
Sony gets $$$
What's to complain about?
---
Live Long & Prosper \\//_
CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
Jedi & Last *-fytr
Interestingly Connectix first trip down emulation lane was with a PC hardware emulator...
:)
:)
:)
Which is god damn perfect!
And MS tried to decline them a windows license... and lost
Now they have a PSX Hardware Emulator.
A Hardware emulator emulates the hardware... NOT the API...
I don't know if VGS is a hardware emulator... BUT VPC *IS*
.
THey also have a JavaVM they are working on. And this one is a REAL virtual machine
Connectix know how to write virtual machines
Their VPC emulator can run about 9 different PC oses!!!
---
Live Long & Prosper \\//_
CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
Jedi & Last *-fytr
Sony actually loses money on every PlayStation they sell. They make it up with the revenues from games. In other words, an emulator actually saves Sony money, as opposed to taking money away from it.
Yes, I know about the burned CD crack. But you can get a mod chip for a "real" PSX for ten bucks (it actually does cost this; I know a Hotline site which sells them) and get the same effect. Piracy was an issue long before this came out, and will continue to be an issue even if the emulator is destroyed.
It takes a hell of a lot more power to emulate something than to do it natively. But if the machine you have is fast enough, emulation can be faster than the real thing. As an example, all Power Macs have emulators for the old 68000-based models. I can use these on my G3/300 and emulate a 68000-based Mac faster than any of 68K Mac ever made.
It takes lots of computing power to do it, but emulation can be faster than the real thing.
Sony has the rights to defend there intellectual property rights, but Connectix should have the right to come up with an emulation scheme so long as they used a black box approach. This is the same suit that IBM tried when cloning took off against Phoenix technologies (I think it was Phoenix, its been a long long time), Phoenix won since they could prove that they didn't actually reverse engineer it nor use any proprietry IBM information. The basically used two groups of engineers, one with physical access to do operations on a computer with an IBM BIOS, and another that could only communicate with those engineers.
This is obviously a bit different in that a working piece of hardware has been emulated on another piece of hardware but the same principles should apply.
1) Some CPU core (MIPS?) was emulated in hardware, this has been done in the past and I haven't seen any suits brought about because of this. This wouldn't be Sony's fight anyway, it would be up to the owner of the CPU core.
2) A variety of proprietary ASICs were emulated for things like 3D rendering, sound, memory access etc. Sony may have a case here, especially if they can prove that reverse engineering was applied. There may well also be patented algorithms involved.
3) Software was emulated or reproduced as well. This is a touchy issue since if they can prove that any of the code was directly copied from the ROMS then Connectix is very much in trouble. I don't know how much program code is contained in PlayStation hardware v.s. the CD containing the game code, I don't have one of the beasts.
4) Connectix did endeavour to adhere to all the Sony PlayStation CD restrictions, or so it would appear. For instance the machine will only play North American games and doesn't (as far as I know) support reading in CD image files. This is probably good for Connectix, since they can maintain that they haven't harmed Sony's financial position (all or almost all gaming consoles are sold for less than the hardware and licensing costs (things like RAMBUS cost money to use, Sony PlayStation uses this)) since consumers still have to buy or rent PlayStation CD's.
Overall its a bit different than the problems facing MAME. The legal issues there are completely involved with the current license holders for the various games exposure to potential financial harm or watering down of copyright status and so on.
I hope that Connectix makes out OK with this, even if they have to pay some small licensing fee to Sony. A loss here could put a lot of things in jeapordy such as any emulation technologies (Virtual PC, WINE etc.) It's really hard to say since due to the length of time it takes to become a judge very few are technically literate. Also since most come from a fairly similar background (very few people from poor or even lower middle class families ever become a judge) justice isn't always quite as blind as its supposed to be.
One reason Sony have for suing: there is probably no way a software emulator running on generic hardware can check for PlayStation copy protection (which consists of a low-level checksum anomaly). Even if there is, patching it to ignore protection/zoning would be easier than modchipping a PSX (especially after the WIPO act when the manufacture and sale of anti-protection hardware becomes restricted). Sony are obliged to protect the integrity of their copy protection and copyright-zoning scheme, which would ultimately affect licensing revenues and the willingness of IP owners to support the PSX format (recall how Hollywood threatened to boycott DVD unless draconian forms of copy protection were implemented).
Heres how things work in the console industry (from someone that actually writes games): Sony doesn't make money off of the console, it makes it off of the games. The profit off of a game console to sony isn't that much if you actually think of it, hardware costs a lot, and lets not forget the middle man. There is a large profit margin on games however, media doesnt cost much. Whats the point? To put out a game for the Playstation, you need to PAY Sony. This is where the ultimate revenue for the Playstation comes from. Whats the point? Sony isn't screwed by the Emulator, and I doubt Piracy will raise from this that much, as the Modchip+CDR Piracy method is already dominant. Oh yeah, and on a side note, Microsoft is NOTHING compared to Sony's evil empire.
They (Connectix) were selling VGS at Macworld. For only $50 too. I would have bought a copy but I only have a lowly 603e. Time to upgrade...
Well if you learned something by reading someone else's work (proprietary or not), then you really don't have basic concepts and ideas, you just have information. Just as I couldn't publish a work of Shakespeare and call it my own and try to make money off of it, I shouldn't be able to find out what some company is doing in their products and then use that information against their wills. To do otherwise would remove commercial incentive to do anything. You may like that, but as for me, I enjoy work; it tends to keep me fed.
--
Aaron Gaudio
"The fool finds ignorance all around him.
"Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." - Jonathan Nolan, Memento Mori
Well if Sony tried to claim that you are licensing the games on the CDs they'll lose right away. I've never seen a console game that has a license agreement on it. No license agreement = no license.
"I wasn't copying it, I was just examining the grooves on this cool new coaster I paid $40 for."
--
Aaron Gaudio
"The fool finds ignorance all around him.
"Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." - Jonathan Nolan, Memento Mori
1. If their rights are infringed, why isn't it a crime?
2. Aren't AMD and Cyrix criminals for making Intel-compatible chips (apparently Intel, from time to time, thinks so).
3. Aren't every 80's non-IBM PC manufacturer criminals for using a bus that was reverse engineered from the IBM PC (and thus led to the "PC revolution")?
--
Aaron Gaudio
"The fool finds ignorance all around him.
"Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." - Jonathan Nolan, Memento Mori
copyright is the source of the next war on drugs.
information is free, the only question is, are you?
__
Scott Draves
it's pathetic, but it's the natural result of intellectual property law. there is a better way: ipnot
__
Scott Draves
i am out of academia. i believe copyright is wrong. you are quick to critisize, but there is no substance to your posts. copyright cannot be justified except as a subsidy. are you for that?
__
Scott Draves
__
Scott Draves
a lot of people are afraid that without copyright someone else will get rich of their idea. but argument applies to that other person too: as soon as they start to make money from an idea, other people will notice and copy it themselves. the result is that everyone gets a little rich from it, and those closest to the creation of the idea get the richest from it since they have a head start.
__
Scott Draves
__
Scott Draves
My guesss at the reason Sony would be upset is simple. If they did not make it, they dont want anyone else too. Really, how could this hurt them? A bigger market for the games and all. Plus, anyone who would buy a playstation still will. I am not going to go buy a $1000 computer then buy software to play the games. Plus, controllers on computers IMOHO are not as good as consoule controllers.
On the other hand, if Sony had thought of it first they would be promoting it as "the next great thing". Hell, I would not be suprised if they would bundle software with the real playstation.
Elwood.
Elwood
As a Playstation gamer, I should inform you that the Connectix VGS emulator is the same speed as the "real" thing. It has tight requirements though - only original-G3 PowerMacs with ATI video cards.
...the person doesn't actually have to install the chip him/herself. There are people that will install it for another 20 bucks. My local video game rental people do it for 50 bucks including the MOD chip, which is still a bargain considering the money you'll save on the games.
---
OK... I can see emulators as not being illegal... but MAKING MONEY off of it doesn't seem A)ethical, B)likely to be legal.
If this is the case it is basically impossible to make new games for the PlayStation without Sony's consent, since they won't work without the OS being on the disc, and copying the OS for the purpose of publishing a game would, obviously, be illegal.
Uh...chill...
and uh...like...yah, chill.
USA-Democracy is 270 million YESes and NOes a day, not one every four years.
IMHO the laws governing software/hardware protection should be worded such:
1)inorder to be covered by copyright, a softwares source code must be available and archived by the government (or government appointed body). This being so no source code will ever be "lost".
2a)to enforce your copyright on another platform you must have a port of it on said platform. i.e. if you don't want to make a Macintosh/Amiga port, you can not complain is someone emulates it(black box rules still apply) or writes a driver for your hardware.
2b)to aid the porters, the gov. will supply before mentioned source/driver specs to aid the individuals in porting the program.
well, this is the gist of what I would like. You give a commercial company 6 months to port or else, if it's the "or else" you have some setup where a group of hackers can go under NDA and port it to any system it's not on yet. The commercial company would still get royalties, but purely based on the same criteria that song writers get thier pay. Of course the ported code would also belong to the commercial company. But god-damnit, I would have X-Com on my mac.
USA-Democracy is 270 million YESes and NOes a day, not one every four years.
Yes, I like this revision very much. The only problem I have with it is the clause concerning to the program's name. Being unable to use the name (assuming a company is being obstinant) would cause confusion. How about, you must hybridize the name, such as adding prefixes. Quicken 98 ported to amiga on PPC becomes AmigaPPC OpenPort Quicken 98 (*breath*) then subtitled a port of Intuit's Quicken 98. Plus a limitation on the payment garnered on the port via contract, to keep a company from forcing a port to charge more than what it cost on the original platform presently.
USA-Democracy is 270 million YESes and NOes a day, not one every four years.
Now, what if Uhg showed all his friends fire. And they all take fire and ignore Uhg. Now Uhg is a pretty poor hunter but he is a good thinker (having 12 more neurons than any other Ooks in Crog valley). Well eventually Uhg dies hungry, ironically after trying to improve fire with black goo called Rhelm big woolies get cuaght in. You see, just as the greatest thing a person can do is allow free use of an invention, a being should be given by the world as much as he gives out. Otherwise why would he share anything if he gets nothing in return? This is real world, greed IS a factor, or your dead. I'm not saying you shouldn't allow everyone to use it, since you should. But also you should get compensated for what you created.
On a side note, I've read that the inventor of the guillotine lost his head at his own device, hows that for irony.
USA-Democracy is 270 million YESes and NOes a day, not one every four years.
I've heard it said that Sony actually losses money on Playstation consoles and that the real money comes from the games. IF that's true, I don't see how an emulator could hurt their business; in fact; it seems that an emulator could be a real benefit to the market.
Oh, and Metal Gear Solid kicks ass.
One of the reasons that Connectix thought this
wouldn't be a problem was because Sony loses money on each Playstation unit it sells. They're just sold to create a market for the games, on which Sony collects royalties. Therefore, having a Playstation emulator would only increase the market for which one could write games, bringing in more royalties to Sony. If this model is true, then it would seem that Sony is just being greedy, and is bargaining to get royalties from the Playstation emulator as well as the games.
>this can only increase their potential market.
;)
Yeah, I'm really surprised on this one. I was sure Sony wouldn't get bitchy about this but...hey...big companies are picky as hell about their "intellectual property".
>imagine if Bill Gates were to sue a company whose >software allowed you to emulate Windows
Ohh, like, Connectix, for instance?
>i'd much rather have a playstation anyways; mac >would be too slow...
Get a clue, big guy, Macs are powerful desktop computers that can easily emulate wimpy little consoles with 4 MB of RAM that sell for $150.
>you get a clue you dumbass the ANY emulation is >slower than the real mccoy
Oh really? My Apple IIgs emulator runs a lot faster on my Mac. I run MAME as well, and most of the arcade games are much, much faster on my Mac than they were originally.
It seems I - again - am the one with the clue, and you are just wasting everyone's time. Go read up and learn something about computers, you moron.
Do you see a problem with your logic? You heard that Connectix including the PlayStation ROM. Then you go on to say that Connectix is selling it. Since you are that easily convinced, take it from me: you should give me your computer.
I personally think that Sony might not have a chance with this suit. Mostly because Connectix did NOT use any actual Sony PSX ROM code in their emulation product.
There's a big difference legally between using a copyrighted firmware for emulation and a "clean room" developed emulation that doesn't use Sony's firmware code (I believe that Connectix is using the latter).
As others have pointed out here, Sony makes the majority of its money for the PlayStation from license fees on the games sold for this system. In fact, one of Sony's biggest revenue sources is 989 Studios, their own in-house group of game developers. The success of the NFL GameDay and NHL FaceOff series is a big source of pride for Sony, that's to be sure.
In short, this could end up being a big PR disaster for Sony if they try to pursue this suit further.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
osOpinion.com
I don't know anything about IP law, but if Connectix did not steal/buy code from Sony, then how can Sony sue? They might be able to make a scene about using the name PlayStation(tm) on the package or something, but as far as the actual software goes I don't see how they have anything to go with. If Sony wins (as I see it), then that means that all products that provide any support for other company's standards are in trouble. For example, since WordPerfect can import some Microsoft Word documents, does that mean Word Perfect is breaking the law? That's almost like game emulation, isn't it?
Hexy - a strategy game for iPhone/iPod Touch
Bingo! If I were quicker on the posting, I might have said basically the same thing.
Thomas Cronin
Never forget, disclaimers and licenses aren't worth the paper the're printed on if the law doesn't back up their claim.
the're -- contraction of 'they are'
their -- possesive; "It is their house"
there -- "look over there"
Thomas cronin
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I always thought that the economics of the Video Game Industry were similar to the Razor blade industry:
i.e....Give a way the razors....charge a lot for the razor blades.
Sony makes a -lot- of money from Royalties from every game that is sold for the playstation. They probably make more from the games then they do from the players themselves.
Apple sold 800,000 imacs since August. I believe they have sold 1.6 million G3's since their introduction 16 months ago.
That's 2.4 million computers capable of running Connectix's new emulator. That's a lot of new 'playstations' in homes around the world. All these new users are going to be buying playstation games...which will go directly to Sony's bottom-line.
Sony should be applauding not suing Connectix.
Is it possible to download playstation ROMs?....
...They seem a bit large for my 56K modem
if some on can figure out a way to emulate something without stealing any sony code i believe that makes the connectix in the right....i believe but i'd much rather have a playstation anyways
mac would be too slow...
"Are you satisfied with fucking?" - Dave Matthews from "Halloween"
you get a clue you dumbass the ANY emulation is slower than the real mccoy
"Are you satisfied with fucking?" - Dave Matthews from "Halloween"
Yeah, and open source, free software is something you can. And easily exploitable greed isn't hard to ignore at all.
Give up. Advocate all you want, you'll never convince all of them, because they know that on a large scale, it won't work.
I agree. Sony makes a lot of money off game sales. The last I heard they actually lost money on the PlayStation console sales.
Really? And how, exactly, is this different from Connectix releasing a PC emulator? Isn't that violating the rights of other PC manufactuers?
Instead of purchasing a PC and a Mac, one can simply purchase a speedy Mac, and run VirtualPC on it. Same thing with a Playstation and a desktop computer.
And don't even start on the issue of pirating. Sure, a patch is d/lable that effectively destroys any location lockouts in VGS. However Connectix can simply do what Sony has done with the latest PSX models; namely, improve the lockouts with each succesive update, making it harder and harder to circumvent.
I honestly think this emulator is a good thing for Sony, as long as Connectix can keep the lockouts in place. Heck, I've already bought two playstations and haven't pirated a single PSX game. I doubt I'll start pirating now that I can play them on my Mac as well...
I think Connectix is in the right here. Emulators are great and I know I would rather play a Playstation game on my 19" monitor rather than my 13" TV.
If Sony does win, I hope the source gets "leaked."
-Jeff
I have an iMac at home, and the Virtual GameStation runs like a champ. I can play every game expect Parappa and Bust a Groove (music synch isn't the best, but for any other game it works great.).
:)
I see a lot of problems for sony, who makes most of their money off of the licensing. Now that connectix has made an emulator, its only a matter of time before someone ports GCC to support it. Then we can all make playstation games, and not give any money to Sony. Also, there is already a crack that lets Virtual GameStation read burned cd's, so software piracy is already going to be an issue.
Sounds like it's time for SOny to rush development of PlayStation II instead of worrying about this. There's not much they can do now... the software is already out there. I feel bad for Connectix because if they lose, they will lose bad. This could potential open up the playstation platform (which is probably a good thing... at least ONE platform out of all those consoles should be open).
It's also made the Mac platform a great one for games. And a $1000 imac can pretty much rock as a playstation. Just wait until you're sitting next to me on a plane with your color gameboy, and I whip out my powerbook and play Einhander and Tekken 3.
jack.
This isn't a matter of whether Sony is making money, it's not a matter of whether Sony did it first even, and it's not a matter of Connectix "stealing" someone else's idea. It's a matter of law. If Sony hold patents that were infringed (and I kinda doubt there are any in this case).
The possible routes of attack on this are: Trademark infringement (does Connectix blur the line between Sony and Connectix?), Copyright infringement (Do they use any Sony code?), or patent infringement (Does Connectix use any machinery patented by Sony?).
On the first, Conncectix makes no use of the Sony or Playstation name. On the second, I doubt they use any Sony code, since it's written for a PPC. On the third, there's no machinery at all. The only precedent I know of (granted, I'm no lawyer), is that, legally speaking, software makes a machine of the processor. But it can't possibly be the same machine as the Playstation because it's a different processor, although I suppose arguments could be made here.
Personally, I think Sony should support the product. I'd like to see a Sony/Apple/Connectix triumvirate. That would produce some neat stuff. No stepped-on toes that way.
-Tesla
-------- oops! I posted!
No, only if the "proprietary information" was patented. You can reverse engineer all you like. It's perfectly legal. It probably just voids the warranty. Which I don't think was their concern. Obviously, if they broke into Sony and stole ROMS or something, that would be illegal, but that's not what happened. They obviously just reverse engineered the thing. The only available avenue of attack is to prove that the Connectix ware makes the same virtual machine as the Playstation itself, as far as I can see (though IANAL).
I don't think that's gonna happen.
-Tesla
-------- oops! I posted!
It was cracked by the time I found a copy.
-Tesla
-------- oops! I posted!
Law is often about precedent. In about 2 minutes, I found these PSX emulators for Wintel:
http://www.rollanet.org/~khigh/emulator.htm
I don't see what Sony can stand on in this. What patent are they claiming has been infringed? Or are they just trying to microsoft away Connectix's money by tangling them in red tape?
-Tesla
-------- oops! I posted!
well anyway connectix says they were pretty sure getting sued by sony, but that it is a fact that sony actually *pay* for every playstation they sell, and that the money comes from the games only.... so they are not too afraid.
And in most civilized countries that license is nil and void exactly because it contains lots of nonsense like that...
As of today you shouldn't be talking about this as if it's a done deal. If you read the IGN page you'll see that they say, "Off the Record is IGNPSX's weekly outlet for gossip, rumors, and words on the street. The following is just that: rumor." A quick scan of Reuters will reveal that nothing of this nature has been reported as yet. I've heard (and this is my rumor, IGN, from one of the VGS demonstrators on the MWSF floor), that Connectix DID secure permission from Sony. (Maybe that was off the record, mm?) Besides, it's been reported that since Sony makes money on only the games (and not the PSX hardware, with which they lose money) the VGS would be a welcomed item. For now though we can only speculate.