The touchy subject of emulation

Arznei · Post by **Arznei** » Fri May 19, 2006 7:26 pm

I burn games, if I don't like them, I won't buy them. If I do like them, I do buy them.

And yes, there are shooting games I've burned and not liked. But since no rental stores over here rent out imports, what else am I supposed to do? Go by a biased Gamespot or IGN review, or watch a couple of videos to base my entire judgment on? No way, my money is spent wisely.

dave4shmups · Post by **dave4shmups** » Fri May 19, 2006 10:52 pm

GaijinPunch wrote:
Heck, Toaplan, for example, isn't even around anymore, so what sense does it make for emulation of their games to be illegal?
Doesn't mean that nobody owns the rights to the game. Case in point: If you pirate a Cave game, they don't directly lose any money. AMI does, as Cave has never published a single game (not one). They simply develop. Doesn't make it any less wrong/illegal.

I should've been clearer; someone obviously does own the rights to Toaplan games/roms-so why don't they just "declare", so to speak, emulation of those games to be legal? Wouldn't that make things easier?

Ganelon · Post by **Ganelon** » Fri May 19, 2006 11:27 pm

I doubt many people would open up licenses they paid good money for...but there are always exceptions.

GaijinPunch · Post by **GaijinPunch** » Sat May 20, 2006 1:08 am

I should've been clearer; someone obviously does own the rights to Toaplan games/roms-so why don't they just "declare", so to speak, emulation of those games to be legal? Wouldn't that make things easier?

I guess I don't understand. You're suggesting they own the rights, so they say it's legal to download/emulate said games, therefore taking away any value of a reprint, or also the copyright they may wish to sell at a later date?

popawell · Post by **popawell** » Sat May 20, 2006 1:58 am

Emulation is what reintroduced me to Gradius, Ikagura, and even got me to this website. Lets prey that the video game companys do not deside to bribe the FBI into hunting everyone doing this down. Hey, it could happen! XD

howmuchkeefe · Post by **howmuchkeefe** » Sat May 20, 2006 2:34 am

Well, I've just finished visiting the Bureau of Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights Management's website, and have paid for permission to throw a Birthday Party for my son. As always, it was close, but between scrounging and saving I was able to pull it off. Really, I'm just thankful that the FBI no longer handles the administration for this sort of thing; they were always so slow and inefficient! They've traditionally been much better at enforcement.

Since the licensing fees I'd have to pay to legally build my own Pinata for the party are only slightly less expensive than buying one outright (which also grants me the right to display and festively smash the thing; I even get the Pinata Stick and the right to use Pinata Sticks as often as I want on that particular Pinata), I went ahead and got one from Wal Mart.

Luckily, the Birthday Party license I bought grants me the right to make my own Birthday Cake, provided that the Cake is cut into no more than twenty slices (it's like a quarter per slice thereafter... the basic license may be applied towards up to twenty guests, but the metric is one slice per guest. It's only fair; what kind of leeching scum would want to steal from the company who bought the license from the family of the long-dead inventor of Birthday Cakes?). Good thing, too, as my son is quite the finicky eater, and can't stand the commercial mixes.

Likewise, I may invite the guests to join me for up to two performances of the Birthday Song (I've permission to entertain twenty guests per performance... but you know, sometimes I play the scofflaw and entertain all the guests at once with it. I don't feel it's stealing, because I've never had more than 30-35 guests at my Parties, and besides, the FBI rarely ever enforces this particular stipulation).

To tell the truth, it's all been kind of a PITA. Whoever copyrighted the maxim that kids are expensive spoke the truth (which is why I paid $15 for the license to use the maxim as often as I like; my way of showing support for the company that had the vision to buy the rights to it from him).

dave4shmups · Post by **dave4shmups** » Sat May 20, 2006 4:59 pm

GaijinPunch wrote:
I should've been clearer; someone obviously does own the rights to Toaplan games/roms-so why don't they just "declare", so to speak, emulation of those games to be legal? Wouldn't that make things easier?
I guess I don't understand. You're suggesting they own the rights, so they say it's legal to download/emulate said games, therefore taking away any value of a reprint, or also the copyright they may wish to sell at a later date?

I seriously doubt they'll sell it at a later date. Look at how many shmup ports the PS2 has gotten in Japan-if they wanted to do something with said copyright, they've had ample opportunities.

FRO · Post by **FRO** » Tue May 23, 2006 2:06 pm

howmuchkeefe - your post reminds of the "license to have children" from Starship Troopers. Nice.