The warez party

[Acid King]

I have the same issue with MAME. People label me a "dirty pirate" because I play MAME games. Yet last time I checked, I can't purchase a great deal of games available in MAME locally (nor internationally most times).

I think you may be missing one key point: It's not your call.

Just because you want something at a particular point in time (an older arcade game, for example) doesn't mean the copyright holder has make it available to you, even if you were willing to pay them for it.

It's their decision not to make it available to you, not your decision whether it should be available to you.

Those games that you're stealing now may one day end up in a future Taito Legends or Capcom Classics pack. Just because they're not catering to your particular gaming whim at this particular moment doesn't mean you should simply be able to take the rom.

One of the perks of having a copyright is that you can choose to make it more or less available. Look at what Disney does - they 'retire' their older films. Does that mean that you have a right to download a film if you missed the boat and it's no longer available? Of course not.

With the world literally at your fingertips on the internet, it's as easy to rationalize to yourself why you're stealing as it is to actually steal. A simple internet search using the right words could probably lead me to any rom I could want. And there's thousands of people doing the same thing - the chances of getting caught are pretty much zero.

But just because it's easy doesn't mean it's all right.

Now, if we were talking about something essential to life, that would be a different story. But we're talking about free time entertainment here. I do not think anyone here would suffer any negative physical or emotional repercussions from not playing a particular video game. The same cannot be said for things like food.

Would it be cool to see more compilations or retro releases? Absolutely. I'm all for just about anything that makes it easier for more people to legally play the classics. But it's up to the copyright holders how, and more importantly if and when, they want to make them available.

It's not up to you to decide that it should be available NOW so you're going to steal it until it is made available.

I think his point is that companies forfeit the right to bitch about people downloading roms because they choose not to make money off of their properties. The validity of it is questionable since legally it's up to the copyright holder, but the fact remains that they actively choose not to take advantage of the opportunity.

[benstylus]

I think his point is that companies forfeit the right to bitch about people downloading roms because they choose not to make money off of their properties. The validity of it is questionable since legally it's up to the copyright holder, but the fact remains that they actively choose not to take advantage of the opportunity.

It's funny that someone would assume that releasing a game would automatically make money for the company.

If they were to release it on a compilation disc (such as the Capcom, Taito, and Namco have been doing), they would have to produce, package, market, and sell those discs. Depending on the response from buyers, they may not make any money at all on the games.

Well, what about making roms downloadable? That brings down the production cost significantly.

But then there's the whole issue of support. Millions of computers out there with all different configurations. They have to make sure the games they are selling are popular enough to make it profitable to sell them.

There's also the issue that most of those roms are readily available (albeit illegally) on rom sites. I don't know how much impact that would have, but given the number of people I know on the internet who not only download roms, but openly admit to it, my guess is it would be pretty big. Maybe they see how many rom sites there are out there and just kind of give up on trying to make money on their old games.

The only alternative where they could be guaranteed to make money is to license it out to a service like gametap... and even then - how much would someone pay to license a game like Slap Fight when they've got 500 other games available too?

All of these are decisions that the copyright-holders should make, not you as a gamer.

[Acid King]

It's funny that someone would assume that releasing a game would automatically make money for the company.

If they were to release it on a compilation disc (such as the Capcom, Taito, and Namco have been doing), they would have to produce, package, market, and sell those discs. Depending on the response from buyers, they may not make any money at all on the games.

Well, what about making roms downloadable? That brings down the production cost significantly.

But then there's the whole issue of support. Millions of computers out there with all different configurations. They have to make sure the games they are selling are popular enough to make it profitable to sell them.

There's also the issue that most of those roms are readily available (albeit illegally) on rom sites. I don't know how much impact that would have, but given the number of people I know on the internet who not only download roms, but openly admit to it, my guess is it would be pretty big. Maybe they see how many rom sites there are out there and just kind of give up on trying to make money on their old games.

The only alternative where they could be guaranteed to make money is to license it out to a service like gametap... and even then - how much would someone pay to license a game like Slap Fight when they've got 500 other games available too?

All of these are decisions that the copyright-holders should make, not you as a gamer.

Putting up roms for pay-to-download or even having several companies band together to form a rom service like Itunes would bring down the costs considerably. Regardless, they'd still be taking in money for there properties and, more importantly, have the service out there. They don't have to do any form of support, since the emulators are available, independently created and offer their own support network. ROMs don't need support.

Regardless, I never claimed it was up to us, I don't know why you brought that up again since I clearly said that LEGALLY the copyright holders have their rights, however, for them to complain about illicit rom downloads and sites when they make absolutely no effort at all to make these things available legitimitately is, as they say in Boston, fuckin' retahded. Nintendo is doing the right thing with their download service. They will have a legitimate gripe about people downloading roms. Every other company that gripes about that kinda thing just looks ridiculous to me.

Likewise, if selling the roms as part of a comp costs them too much (which I think is bullshit considering the amount of games you can fit on a single disc nowadays [1100 genesis games fit on two CD Rs] and the nominal cost of emulation development, especially when independent emulators are being developed all the time) or a download service would be unprofitable, why would they complain when absolutely nothing is lost? Sega could probably fit every genesis game they ever published on to ONE dvd. You don't think that they would pull a profit from a collection of that magnitude?

[Davey]

IP law in its current form is BS; a way for potentially immortal mega-citizens to extort rights from actual creators, and keep them for centuries. Few things will ever be public domain again unless something is done about the insanity.

I agree. I was always under the impression that IP was created for the benefit of society, not the individual. It is supposed to provide innovators enough protection to cover their costs and make a profit, after which their idea/product/whatever becomes public domain for the benefit of society. Milking a copyright for decades on end isn't quite in that spirit.

A common complaint of those who pirate things like operating systems, adobe products and the like, is that they are too expensive to legally buy.

I'm willing to bet any software that you need will be affordable. $600 for Photoshop is a bargain if you're a graphic designer. You use it everyday, you make money from it, you can't do your job without it... you need it. If you're just dicking around and making avatars and Photoshop Phriday submissions, then it's a luxury. In that case, it's probably not worth $600 to you. Now, you're probably not going to pay much for Photoshop if that's all you'd do with it, but don't go thinking Adobe is holding you down any more than a Porsche dealer is depriving you of transportation.

It's really depressing to see so much support for piracy on this very forum.

As somebody who goes to college (IIRC), I'm surprised you think this forum is that bad. When I was in school, people were downloading music/movies/games/etc. like it was going out of style. Most of them didn't see a problem with it, and the rest took a weird sense of pride in it (a kind of "who's got the bigger dick" competition, but measured in GB instead of inches). I was often called an idiot for buying games and CDs for which ROMs and MP3s were readily downloadable.

And as stated, many shooter purchases can be seen as longtime rentals. Get DAI-OU-JOU used, have fun with it for a few months, and then sell it back for pretty much the same price, meaning you only lose on a $5 shipping/rental fee. Of course, if we're just going by the "is it hurting the publishers" question here as opposed to the legality issue, then no, either way you're not helping profit the companies making the games.

Which is why I hate when collectors use this argument. Buying an $80 copy of Garegga won't support Raizing any more than downloading the ROM would.

Just because you want something at a particular point in time (an older arcade game, for example) doesn't mean the copyright holder has make it available to you, even if you were willing to pay them for it.

It's their decision not to make it available to you, not your decision whether it should be available to you.

Technically, you're right. But I have no reservations stealing from a company who doesn't even provide me with the opportunity to buy their product. Whether I steal it or not, their net profit/loss on the transaction is approximately $0.00, the only difference being I get the game in one scenario and not the other. They already made a profit on the game when it was released. And if they didn't, the game probably sucked and I wouldn't bother downloading it anyway.

One of the perks of having a copyright is that you can choose to make it more or less available. Look at what Disney does - they 'retire' their older films. Does that mean that you have a right to download a film if you missed the boat and it's no longer available? Of course not.

Does anybody benefit from locking Bambi in a vault?

Would it be cool to see more compilations or retro releases? Absolutely. I'm all for just about anything that makes it easier for more people to legally play the classics. But it's up to the copyright holders how, and more importantly if and when, they want to make them available.

Compilations are lame, despite the coolness of the games. ROMs already preserve the games, the original developers probably aren't getting much (if any) money from them, and the games already made a profit for their owners decades ago. But, that's just my opinion, arrrrr.

[Acid King]

I agree. I was always under the impression that IP was created for the benefit of society, not the individual. It is supposed to provide innovators enough protection to cover their costs and make a profit, after which their idea/product/whatever becomes public domain for the benefit of society. Milking a copyright for decades on end isn't quite in that spirit.

Shhhhh! Why, if all those old Mickey Mouse cartoons became public domain, Disney wouldn't make any money!!

[Ganelon]

Well, if they decide to loosen up on one thing, they're afraid licenses will keep getting destroyed in a domino effect and their license protection will lose credibility.

But there really does need to be a venue where older Mickey Mouse cartoons and movies can be shown. I sure don't recall ever seeing any on The Disney Channel but then again, I don't exactly frequent that channel.

[BrianC]

Well, if they decide to loosen up on one thing, they're afraid licenses will keep getting destroyed in a domino effect and their license protection will lose credibility.

But there really does need to be a venue where older Mickey Mouse cartoons and movies can be shown. I sure don't recall ever seeing any on The Disney Channel but then again, I don't exactly frequent that channel.

Disney Channel dropped all of its classical programming and shows mostly shows geared at tweens and early teens now.

[BulletMagnet]

Reminds me of when Nickelodeon had the old "Bosko" and "Buddy" cartoons on, years ago...

[BrianC]

Reminds me of when Nickelodeon had the old "Bosko" and "Buddy" cartoons on, years ago...

but at least they still have Nick at Nite, though more of the classic TV shows I like are on TV Land than Nick and Nite.

[BulletMagnet]

Even Nick at Nite/TV Land are beginning to slip, methinks...aren't they even showing "Full House" on there someplace now?