| Main > Main Forum |
| emulation: legal question about dead motherboards |
| << < (2/3) > >> |
| Organic Jerk:
--- Quote from: shardian on June 20, 2007, 01:27:30 pm ---MAME is not licensed for commercial use. --- End quote --- This is really a key point here. Your solution to your problem isn't one provided by the original creator, but a seperate one that was created and is currently maintained by a seperate team under seperate license terms. By adding the emulator and the rom, (even if they produce a similar visual output) you're using totally different products, and you have to abide by those products' terms. Anything else is illegal. |
| Jack Burton:
--- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on June 20, 2007, 01:31:50 pm --- --- Quote from: SavannahLion on June 20, 2007, 01:02:23 pm ---Asking a group of fans who are likely non-laywers is like asking a bunch of football fans what computer you should buy. You'll get an answer, most likely not a very accurate one. --- End quote --- Actually, I'll give him quite an accurate answer..... The answer is NO! it would be a breach of copyright to do that. Simple as that. You'd be running the copied software on a system it was not designed to run on. In the USA that would be a breach of the DMCA. In actual fact the act alone of dumping the ROMS except for archival purposes (backup of the originals for repair of the original hardware) would also be illegal. There are also no emulators licenced for commecial use right now, as if they were, they would be viewed as a method of circumvention of copy protection and would themselves be illegal. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear) --- End quote --- I think this answers the situation the best. I did some reading and found out that any kind of video game rom is illegal for any kind of use. It even seemed to include back up purposes. But that is a seperat issue we should not get into. Let us agree that this particular use is concretely illegal in the United States, and puts a dead stop to any other questions. However, for posterity, I will also address the other issues. --- Quote from: shardian on June 20, 2007, 01:27:30 pm ---MAME is not licensed for commercial use. --- End quote --- I know. However, there are other emulators other than MAME. Additionally, nothing theoretically stops me from coding my own emulator for this purpose. EDIT: This would still be illegal since it circumvents copyright protection. --- Quote from: Jeff AMN on June 20, 2007, 01:29:34 pm ---I don't know. I think you'd lose the UL certification and you could face some serious liability issues apart from the actual legality of using the emulator for profit. --- End quote --- If it is a computer connected to a computer monitor, I don't see how that would lose any sort of certification. But anything is possible, especially when dealing with this sort of strangeness. The liability issue concerning whether it is legal or not is probably much worse. I don't think any company would be interested in anything that was "gray area" legal, or questionable in any way. But, I suppose it was only an idea, one that seemed to be too good to be true. |
| SavannahLion:
Fozzy and Organic Jerk, I agree with you. I gave the same answer (NO). But nowhere does the OP state he is using MAME. It's probably an accurate assumption, but might not be a fair one. It's not even about the possible existence of a commercial emulator or the DMCA (though the DMCA plays a HUGE part in this scenario), it's about the ROMS themselves. Archiving software is specific to volatile media (ie floppy disks). There was a court case preceding the DMCA which crossed the topic of ROMS. I'll have to verify my facts, but IIRC, ROMS are not considered volatile media and, therefor, are exempt from the archiving clause. It's also a persistent myth that having the original ROM (even non-working) somehow allows you to have a copy of it from other sources. Again, if IIRC, there is no section addressing this specific action and probably wouldn't stand up in court anyways. There is a section that does allow a copy to temporarily exist for the purposes of repair and/or though normal operation of the intended (in this case, original) hardware. This is the "archival copy" that Fozzie mentions, though I wouldn't go so far as to actually call it an archival copy. You don't even have to bring the DMCA into this discussion, it's moot. Up until about three years ago, I practically humped the statutes relating to this. If you're going to be around people who are going to break laws, it's a damn good idea to know what's being broken. ;D |
| BobA:
Wasn't the infamous Ultracade basically an emulator licensed for commercial use? |
| ChadTower:
--- Quote from: Jeff AMN on June 20, 2007, 01:29:34 pm ---I don't know. I think you'd lose the UL certification and you could face some serious liability issues apart from the actual legality of using the emulator for profit. --- End quote --- Yes, insurers would not touch you with a 20 foot pole if you had non UL certified machines out there. Or, alternately, they'd write you a policy that you prepaid and then they'd give you the stink finger if you ever made a claim. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |