User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:46:48 PM EDT
[#1]
So if the ROM creator changes a few lines of code, it is no longer an identical copy. Does that change anything? How much would have to change?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:47:08 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which is a rather recent development in those games lifespan. As some have theorized, the popularity of emulation software and dedicated hardware to run it is likely the reasoning Nintendo made that decision. They were all like "fuck you, we're not going to take your money and do that" and then people were all like " *shrug* ok I guess I'll download it then." And then Nintendo was all like "oh shit, i bet we could have made a lot of money doing that." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There are over 600 virtual console games for sale on Nintendo’s website. From NES(247 games) through the Nintendo DS. Those who say they don’t sell it, it’s abandonware, they don’t want money etc are either liars or ignorant. As some have theorized, the popularity of emulation software and dedicated hardware to run it is likely the reasoning Nintendo made that decision. They were all like "fuck you, we're not going to take your money and do that" and then people were all like " *shrug* ok I guess I'll download it then." And then Nintendo was all like "oh shit, i bet we could have made a lot of money doing that." You can't take something someone else created and distribute it without their permission. How is this so hard to understand? Nintendo being dumb and greedy does not make it legal to distribute their games. Copyright expiration aside I guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:48:47 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
...and how many of those 600 virtual console games did Nintendo pirate from pirates? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There are over 600 virtual console games for sale on Nintendo's website. From NES(247 games) through the Nintendo DS. Those who say they don't sell it, it's abandonware, they don't want money etc are either liars or ignorant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:49:20 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's part of the problem. You can't start a small business anymore without paying some lawyer $500 an hour on everything. We're well past "problems" with current IP law. The current system is designed to benefit large companies at the expense of smaller businesses who can't afford legions of lawyers. I had a client who put an eagle in their logo, then got the threatening trademark letter from a much larger company in their industry saying it looked too much like their falcon. Seriously. A fucking eagle, in America. How many companies have eagles in their logos? Hell, Star Wars fracking sued everyone, including Battlestar Galactica (classic), and even sued lobbying groups during the 1980s for calling Reagan's SDI initiative "Star Wars." And these suits are expensive, even if you win. "Here Mr. Small Businessman, you were totally vindicated. Now how do you want to pay your $500,000 in legal fees? Cash or check?" IP law is actively crushing innovation. How many great sci fi shows were cancelled or didn't get made for fear that Lucas would sue? This Nintendo case is the perfect example. Does Nintendo have to create a competitive product? Does Nintendo even have to offer a legal alternative? Nope. Just sue. Fuck you small businessman. Please submit your application for you standard no-benefits HR hellscape job at Too Big to Fail, Inc. Also pay your taxes so that when Too Big to Fail, Inc. is looted by the investors and/or the unions, the government can bail them out. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/a-history-star-wars-legal-855337 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
@happycynic I'm not going to disagree that there are problems with the current IP laws. I deal with them every day. But please go learn the difference between copyrights, patents and trademarks, and what they do and do not apply to, before attempting to construct IP analogies. Hell, Star Wars fracking sued everyone, including Battlestar Galactica (classic), and even sued lobbying groups during the 1980s for calling Reagan's SDI initiative "Star Wars." And these suits are expensive, even if you win. "Here Mr. Small Businessman, you were totally vindicated. Now how do you want to pay your $500,000 in legal fees? Cash or check?" IP law is actively crushing innovation. How many great sci fi shows were cancelled or didn't get made for fear that Lucas would sue? This Nintendo case is the perfect example. Does Nintendo have to create a competitive product? Does Nintendo even have to offer a legal alternative? Nope. Just sue. Fuck you small businessman. Please submit your application for you standard no-benefits HR hellscape job at Too Big to Fail, Inc. Also pay your taxes so that when Too Big to Fail, Inc. is looted by the investors and/or the unions, the government can bail them out. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/a-history-star-wars-legal-855337 My rate is under $500/hr. 
If you're a lawyer please take an intro to IP CLE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:49:22 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They were all like "fuck you, we're not going to take your money and do that" and then people were all like " *shrug* ok I guess I'll download it then." And then Nintendo was all like "oh shit, i bet we could have made a lot of money doing that." Nintendo decided there was no market for 20+ year old games. People found a way to distribute the games at no cost to anyone. Interest in the games dramatically increased as they were now readily available. Nintendo comes back into the market (on some of the IPs, not all). Makes huge profits. Wants to kill the original market that created the demand now that they are back in said market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:49:41 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And Nintendo choosing NOT to do their own emulation (then choosing to do it later) justifies the illegal distribution of their property how? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:50:10 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But, that's not what happened, is it? The people who bought the Nintendo retro box were the same people who wouldn't have pirated the ROMs in the first place. The people who pirated the ROMs were never going to buy the retro box, either. In fact, I'd argue that but for the piracy of retro ROMs, Nintendo would have never discovered the retro market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:51:11 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Are you trying to justify being a thief? If all emulators are bad, what makes them suddenly good when offered by a business? This is the paradox Nintendo has found itself in. They say all emulators are bad - yet sell an emulator and pirated copies of their games to you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:53:50 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are over 600 virtual console games for sale on Nintendo's website. From NES(247 games) through the Nintendo DS. Those who say they don't sell it, it's abandonware, they don't want money etc are either liars or ignorant. 721 on the SNES. If you include the N64, GameCube, GameBoy and DS, etc, etc, that you have in your listed timeline, there are over 5,000 titles dating back to over 30 years old. Nintendo due to RECENT (last 3 years) moves based on the retro demand CREATED by the roms themselves, are offering 600+ titles? That's less than 15% of the titles released on "retro" consoles. There are hundreds, upon hundreds, of titles in there that have not had a single thing done with them in 20, 25, 30 years. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:54:30 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Didn't the Library of Congress just change the Copyright rules regarding Abandonware games making it OK to crack DRM and stuff? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:55:13 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are over 600 virtual console games for sale on Nintendo’s website. From NES(247 games) through the Nintendo DS. Those who say they don’t sell it, it’s abandonware, they don’t want money etc are either liars or ignorant. So Nintendo only released about a 3rd. Like others said. Sell the retro with Mario/Duckhunt and offer all other games for $1. And also, if I remember correctly from another discussion, Nintendo is not even the IP holder for some titles. Companies do not even exist to be injured by these ROMs in some cases. And the NES classic has 30 games. Steaming pile of shit in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:56:40 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know. Is it different when a thief steals from another thief? If all emulators are bad, what makes them suddenly good when offered by a business? This is the paradox Nintendo has found itself in. They say all emulators are bad - yet sell an emulator and pirated copies of their games to you. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Are you trying to justify being a thief? If all emulators are bad, what makes them suddenly good when offered by a business? This is the paradox Nintendo has found itself in. They say all emulators are bad - yet sell an emulator and pirated copies of their games to you. Now if a rom site thinks Nintendo stole their roms to sell then let’s see the rom site sue Nintendo and explain to a judge how they are morally or ethically ok to have stolen Nintendo’s property in the first place. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:57:01 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd want to see both logos before speculating on whether or not the letter was justified. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:57:39 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But, that's not what happened, is it? The people who bought the Nintendo retro box were the same people who wouldn't have pirated the ROMs in the first place. The people who pirated the ROMs were never going to buy the retro box, either. In fact, I'd argue that but for the piracy of retro ROMs, Nintendo would have never discovered the retro market. People are downloading every retro system ever made, then skipping out on buying real hardware because they have it all already. Sticking an entire rom collection on a Raspberry Pi is very common. Or people buy flash carts. Not only does it hurt Nintendo, but it hurts everyone in the retro game business (except for the Aliexpress guy selling RetroPis by the truckload). There's brick and mortar retro gaming stores that would sell more if people didn't download it all online. Not to mention online stores and ebay/amazon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:59:14 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is it hurting you if I steal your old clapped out 68 Chevy pickup off your back forty? You're not using anymore... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:00:11 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A total of 714 known licensed game titles were released for the Nintendo Entertainment System video game console during its life span, 679 of these games released in North America, with an additional 35 released in Europe or Australia. So Nintendo only released about a 3rd. Like others said. Sell the retro with Mario/Duckhunt and offer all other games for $1. And also, if I remember correctly from another discussion, Nintendo is not even the IP holder for some titles. Companies do not even exist to be injured by these ROMs in some cases. And the NES classic has 30 games. Steaming pile of shit in my opinion. At least PC has GOG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:04:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
One site was not charging for games, and seemed like it was trying to archive them instead. Some people actually claim Nintendo took one of the roms off a site and sold it for profit. It would be hilarious if true. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Were they even charging $ for the roms/games? Some people actually claim Nintendo took one of the roms off a site and sold it for profit. It would be hilarious if true. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:04:24 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's brick and mortar retro gaming stores that would sell more if people didn't download it all online. Not to mention online stores and ebay/amazon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:04:41 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are they still selling those games? How are they injured if they're not losing any sales? Piracy of games still being sold is one thing but it's a bit different when it's a decades old game the company has abandoned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:04:55 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, they are still selling those games on the NES classic and probably ports to the Switch too. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Are they still selling those games? How are they injured if they're not losing any sales? Piracy of games still being sold is one thing but it's a bit different when it's a decades old game the company has abandoned. Roms and Emulators have more features, that include things like increasing the speed of the game to speed through boring/repetitious parts... or saving the state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:05:34 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think a better anology would be. If you're hosting a copy of a dvd that is no longer in production and someone downloads a copy of it for personal use. Was there any damage done to the entity since they did not lose any profit. If someone had bought a used copy of the dvd they wouldn't have made profit either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:06:00 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I buy my games from Nintendo. Nintendo has a responsibility to protect their property. If they don't go after one they're saying they're ok with everyone doing it. Now if a rom site thinks Nintendo stole their roms to sell then let's see the rom site sue Nintendo and explain to a judge how they are morally or ethically ok to have stolen Nintendo's property in the first place. You think you buy your games from Nintendo. What is a Nintendo Video Game Emulator? A Nintendo emulator is a software program that is designed to allow game play on a platform that it was not created for. A Nintendo emulator allows for Nintendo console based or arcade games to be played on unauthorized hardware. The video games are obtained by downloading illegally copied software, i.e. Nintendo ROMs, from Internet distributors. Nintendo ROMs then work with the Nintendo emulator to enable game play on unauthorized hardware such as a personal computer, a modified console, etc. Isn't it Okay to Download Nintendo ROMs for Games that are No Longer Distributed in the Stores or Commercially Exploited? Aren't They Considered "Public Domain"? No, the current availability of a game in stores is irrelevant as to its copyright status. Copyrights do not enter the public domain just because they are no longer commercially exploited or widely available. Therefore, the copyrights of games are valid even if the games are not found on store shelves, and using, copying and/or distributing those games is a copyright infringement. I.E. Piracy is okay, as long as we're the ones selling it to you. Just so we are 100% clear. The stance that Nintendo has taken is that unless you are playing the original game on original hardware - you are using an Emulator and engaging in piracy. They just don't care about the piracy as long as you pay them first. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:09:22 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. The point is that somebody else isn't supposed to do jack shit with your '68 pickup without your permission. And you don't need any reason to deny permission. Use a proper analogy ffs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:10:28 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let me fix this analogy: You have a 68 Chevy pickup on your back forty. You want to make it run again. No one sells parts for it anymore. You get a machine shop to fabricate the parts for you. Chevy sues the machine shop for "copyright infringement" for using their designs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Is it hurting you if I steal your old clapped out 68 Chevy pickup off your back forty? You're not using anymore... You have a 68 Chevy pickup on your back forty. You want to make it run again. No one sells parts for it anymore. You get a machine shop to fabricate the parts for you. Chevy sues the machine shop for "copyright infringement" for using their designs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:10:44 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are over 600 virtual console games for sale on Nintendo’s website. From NES(247 games) through the Nintendo DS. Those who say they don’t sell it, it’s abandonware, they don’t want money etc are either liars or ignorant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:13:26 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or hell, give it away for free. 
I seriously wonder what car companies would think of that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Is it hurting you if I steal your old clapped out 68 Chevy pickup off your back forty? You're not using anymore...
I seriously wonder what car companies would think of that? Video games also have to pay to use the likeness of real vehicles in their games. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:16:29 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nintendo is managed by fucking idiots. They could easily throw up a half-rate website and offer those games for anywhere from $1 to $5 a piece and they would make millions at almost no cost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:16:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Doesn’t matter if they’re still selling the games or not. Theft is theft. Am I in before arf starts defending thieves and didn’t do nothing wrong? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:20:45 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But, that's not what happened, is it? The people who bought the Nintendo retro box were the same people who wouldn't have pirated the ROMs in the first place. The people who pirated the ROMs were never going to buy the retro box, either. In fact, I'd argue that but for the piracy of retro ROMs, Nintendo would have never discovered the retro market. Agree 100%. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:29:46 PM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:31:48 PM EDT
[#31]
Both sides make good arguments in here. This is a tough one. I don't know where I sit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:32:00 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread makes me want to order my child slaves to build me another McNuke.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:33:50 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Be careful, your straw man might catch fire when God strikes you down for engaging in logical fallacies. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Oh, I already conceded it was against the law. I just don't think it's morally wrong.   Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:34:42 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are they still selling those games? How are they injured if they’re not losing any sales? Piracy of games still being sold is one thing but it’s a bit different when it’s a decades old game the company has abandoned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:42:08 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This thread makes me want to order my child slaves to build me another McNuke. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:47:07 PM EDT
[#36]
I read that when asked why they didn’t include popular games on their retro sytems, it was said that because those companies didn’t exist anymore, they couldn’t use them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:50:08 PM EDT
[#37]
Copyright infringement is not stealing it is a separate crime. Further if we had judges that truly believed in the Constitution our current copyright laws would be found unconstitutional and scaled back. I doubt the founding fathers intended "limited time" to mean longer than the life of the artist.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 2:56:25 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup. The real issue is that our copyright laws last too long. They were extended 4 times in the 1900s, and now last 95 years after publication. The original copyright law from 1790 granted rights for 14 - 28 years. Patents only last 20 years, with an extension allowed for another 6 - 10. Copyright laws are completely screwed up now. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Different. Can you digitally (or physically) clone that old beat up truck without using any resources nor enduring any cost upon the manufacturer? ETA: I don't pirate, I pay to play games. But I understand the desire to play and even share games that are not available otherwise to play. iTunes exists because Napster filled a desire that no one met at the time. Offer a real solution, which Nintendo has done recently well... I'm not against the ruling, just the comparison. The real issue is that our copyright laws last too long. They were extended 4 times in the 1900s, and now last 95 years after publication. The original copyright law from 1790 granted rights for 14 - 28 years. Patents only last 20 years, with an extension allowed for another 6 - 10. Copyright laws are completely screwed up now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 3:05:38 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is true. Nintendo ripped a ROM off the Internet and resold it. Leaving intact, the code from the guy that did the original work to get NES ROMs running in emulators. If the ROM isn't an exact digital copy of what came on the original cart, and has had to have code added or removed and recompiled then is it even protected by Nintendo/whatever other gaming company or is it that ROM now the IP of the guy who did the work? All that original stuff on the cart was just 1's & 0's created by a computer anyways, so why is a different set of unique 1's and 0's still considered their IP, even if a lot of those 1's and 0's have been created to be exactly the same? If you're having a hard time understanding that, then imagine a digital image that is 100 pixels by 100 pixels. The image is a checkerboard board pattern of white and black pixels. If I go into Paint and create that, and then my wife comes on the computer some time down the road and recreates that without simply using copy & paste, then has she violated my IP? Honestly I don't know the answer to that, but I'm curious how the law accounts for this, as our laws are generally written by people who lack expertise in the technical side of things (example: ATF & bump stocks = machine guns) |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 3:19:19 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, you're confusing the law of supply and demand with IP law. Unless you're just being a smartass in GD, then you're right on. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are they still selling those games? How are they injured if they’re not losing any sales? Piracy of games still being sold is one thing but it’s a bit different when it’s a decades old game the company has abandoned. Is it hurting you if I carbon copy cloned the now yours old clapped out 68 Chevy pickup that you stole? ------ |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 3:30:54 PM EDT
[#41]
Interesting. For the longest time developers didn't really care about people sharing roms because they weren't monetizing that property anyway. I guess now that they have the ability to port some of these games to mobile, smart TVs, STBs, and these cheap classic systems they are cracking down.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 3:44:25 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, you're confusing the law of supply and demand with IP law. Unless you're just being a smartass in GD, then you're right on. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are they still selling those games? How are they injured if they’re not losing any sales? Piracy of games still being sold is one thing but it’s a bit different when it’s a decades old game the company has abandoned. Is it hurting you if I carbon copy cloned the now yours old clapped out 68 Chevy pickup that you stole? ------ |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 3:47:13 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nintendo just revived a 30 year old console. The value of the games on that NES and SNES mini units was hurt by ROM pirates giving away their product for free for all these years. Sitting on IP sometimes allows it to age like wine and grow in value. Nintendo did just that with their NES i.p. How about you write a program, or a fiction novel, then someone somehow gets ahold of it, starts selling it and makes quite a bit of money off it. Meanwhile your plans to someday sell it are ruined by some thief. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How can it be theft when the overwhelming majority of the games are out of print, never to return AND nothing has been taken from the "victim?" Theft involves the transfer of property without consent. Meaning one party is deprived of the property or the value of the property. What value is being transferred from the originator when there is no transfer of property and no plans or action (or market, for that matter) to sell the IP? Calling piracy of deprecated and abandoned software "theft" is akin to calling a self defense killing "murder." In both cases you're calling an activity something it isn't. Copyright laws are a great way to ensure that people will continue to innovate. People should be able to profit from their intellectual property, certainly. However, once that IP is abandoned or removed from the market, copyright restraints should be removed, in my opinion. Though, I have to hand it to Nintendo for protecting their IP. I just hope their reputation is worth recouping money for shit they refused to sell in the first place. How about you write a program, or a fiction novel, then someone somehow gets ahold of it, starts selling it and makes quite a bit of money off it. Meanwhile your plans to someday sell it are ruined by some thief. The rom people invented the market that Nintendo refused to acknowledge for 20 years, Nintendo sees that its actually profitable, releases these old games for 100 bucks and sues to stop the rom guys from giving it away for free. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 4:18:14 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IP laws are pretty interesting stuff. Protecting IP is necessary to incentivize creativity, but taken too far it can badly stifle innovation. Just because you’re the first person to discover the wheel doesn’t mean no one else should ever be allowed to use a wheel. A patent is protected for 20 years and can then be manufactured by anybody else. Patents protect inventions. A copyright protects written work, such as computer code, art and music and lasts for the lifetime of the author plus 70 years (with some variations on work for hire) Wheels benefit society much more directly than a books, images and computer games, and society as a whole is able to take advantage of patented technology much sooner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 4:30:26 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did Shutterstock give you permission to use their copyrighted tard? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This thread makes me want to order my child slaves to build me another McNuke. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 4:31:58 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Better yet if someone that owns an old pickup lets you scan it and Ford got mad that you were selling carburetors. All of these ROMs usually decend from a physical copy someone bought at some point. Nobody broke into corporate headquarters and stole data files. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Your analogy would be more accurate if you asked if you could 3D scan his old pickup and sell an aftermarket copy of his carburetor. It seems like you've got someone protecting their IP from piracy, but at the same time, they're dictating what customers can do with their property. It's slippery either way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 4:32:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not really. The rom people invented the market that Nintendo refused to acknowledge for 20 years, Nintendo sees that its actually profitable, releases these old games for 100 bucks and sues to stop the rom guys from giving it away for free. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 4:36:38 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. It's like burning a copy of a CD or DVD. Someone got paid already... It seems like you've got someone protecting their IP from piracy, but at the same time, they're dictating what customers can do with their property. It's slippery either way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 4:42:57 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
At the end of the day, theft is unrestrained capitalism. It is a system that exists in many places. We have a system of laws to prevent this. Theft is non-consensual subsidization (not capitalistic at all) of somebody else's profits. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 4:44:12 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's a very nebulous standard. If the creator has so little value in their own IP that they can't find a profitable market for it, then whose sales are hurt by copying the IP? What monies are deprived the creator when they refuse to attempt to make a profit on the item you've copied? The cost to produce and market their property became too costly so they pulled it from the market. Tech changed and their costs came down and the profitability returned so they brought their property back to the market. Piracy is now interfering with that so they are getting litigious. The case isn't about copying their property. The case is for the distribution of that copied property. The developers don't have to compete with the individuals who illegally copy their work for their individual consumption. They aren't going to go through all of that work for just your $5 or whatever. Their competition is the people that illegally distribute their property to thousands of people for free which is why they go after them. IP gets a bad wrap because of how the media industry initially handled digital copyright violations in going after the consumers. They were slow to realize that all of those consumers via piracy were just potential customers that their business model failed to market to. Now that they have made their products easier and cheaper to consume there is far less piracy. Technology changed the game though. With it being so easy to copy and distribute works it is far less valuable per capita now which is why everything feels the same as everything else. Music, movies, tv, video games, etc all feel the same as everything else because they have to be to be profitable. They have to market everything to as broad of an audience as they can so they do what they know works. It is very expensive to create new IP because most attempts fail to be profitable now. So the next time you hear someone complain about Fast and the Furious 87 or remaking old IPs know that piracy played a huge role in that. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File