48-in-1 boards, 60-in-1 boards, 1000-in-1 boards, etc.

[saint]

OK - this keeps coming up so I'd like to get some a discussion going and lay down some thoughts.

First - the 30-in-1 boards, 48-in-1 boards, and I believe 60-in-1 boards are not MAME derived as far as I know. I've asked a senior MAME-Dev who indicated this and I've had another source tell me the same as well. If anyone from MAME-Dev is reading this and wants to chime in please do.

The 300-in-1 boards and up are clearly MAME derived I'm told.

So two different situations here. In respect of MAME-Dev wishes, in light of my desire that this site be a MAME-friendly site, and recognizing that inclusion of all those games in the MAME-derived versions appear to be copyright violations, I would prefer that those boards simply aren't discussed here.

The 30/48/60-in-1 boards are a different matter perhaps. Going on the understanding that they aren't MAME derived, I don't believe there are any issues that would counter my intent to be a MAME-friendly site. However, I'm not clear on whether or not there are copyright violations involved in these boards. If there are copyright violations involved, are these any different to discuss than, say, the Multi-Williams, the Double-Donkey Kong, the Multi-Pacs, and other such arcade hacks that folks have created?

I know in at least some of them, such as the Multi-Williams, you are supposed to provide your own copy of the ROMs that you've read in from boards/ROM-sets you own. I'd hazard a guess that there are probably quite a few in the arcade collecting community who've actually done so, while the rest are probably just using pirated ROMs. At any rate, the fact that there is a presumably legal way to obtain and play the Multi-Williams is sufficient that I don't mind them being discussed here.

I have a Double-Donkey Kong, and I have both the DK-Junior boardset it runs on and a couple of sets of DK boards sitting in a box. I don't have an issue with something like this being discussed here either. Etc... for the multi-Pacs and any other new hacks of the like that come out.

The 30/48/60-in-1 boards are another matter. Can anyone comment on their legality? If there is a legal manner of procuring these boards and populating the ROM sets in them then I don't have an issue with them being discussed here. If there is not a legal way of obtaining them then I'd prefer they not be discussed here.

NB - By not being discussed, I mean discussions as to making them work, troubleshooting, or obtaining them. Discussions about their ethics, how they work, and such are fine.

Comments?

[FrizzleFried]

Saint,

Not only are the 300+ -in-1 boards a hack of MAME,  so are others...

111-in-1 are PC based ... though strangely enough they don't require an ATX power supply like the following...

170-in-1
465-in-1
1000-in-1

I just picked up one of the 111-in-1 to take a gander at it...it is different than the "BabyStar" PC-based boards...but I have yet to install it so I am not sure if it is the same beast as the other boards mentioned above (which are all BabyStar).  This board is from a different manufacturer and doesn't require a PC power supply (though it is a 2 board solution and is obviously PC based).

I'd venture to guess it is also a MAME hack...but I am not sure (as of yet).

I can tell you that I know of multiple OPs that have multiple multi-game cabinets on their routes.  Some have been running them for years.  I can also tell you that I have not heard of one single instance where a company has sent a cease and desist to any of these operators,  suppliers,  or resellers.  I also have not heard of any law enforcement agency ever taking action against an operator, supplier,  or reseller because of a 39-in-1, 48-in-1, or 60-in-1 board.

I can also tell you that I know of a reseller who's auction for a 48-in-1 was removed but then re-instated after investigation...but that doesn't say a whole lot.

[CheffoJeffo]

Thanks for addressing this ... I had prepared a post asking these types of questions, but scrapped it in the absence of enough time to make sense of it (which you have done in less time apparently).

 

[shardian]

I think we should limit discussions of where to buy the xxx-in-1 boards. If we ban talking about them in general terms, then we might as well ban MAME and any roms. Discussing, debating, giving advice - there is nothing illegal about that.

[Kaytrim]

These are my thoughts on the issue so take them for what they are worth.  I don't own any of the multi-boards nor do I own any arcade machines.  I use MAME and the roms available online.

The jamma multi-boards seem to be incomplete hacks from original games.  They may also be recreations from scratch.   We don't know for sure.  The MAME devs talking to Saint on this issue seem to be 'ok' with them.  These boards for the most part contain games from the '80s the ownership for most has been lost in obscurity.  The legality is in question but only can be disputed by the copyright owners, whoever they may be.  EDIT* Statement retracted in light of information stating that these in fact are MAME based.

I know that the above paragraph seems to be a bit disjointed but it is hard sometimes for me to get my thought together.  What I am trying to say is if you want to take a chance on them then get one for yourself.  As long as you are using it for personal use and not for profit or gain then I think that they are ok.  Otherwise do what I do and use MAME and the rom files.

I think we should limit discussions of where to buy the xxx-in-1 boards. If we ban talking about them in general terms, then we might as well ban MAME and any roms. Discussing, debating, giving advice - there is nothing illegal about that.

I agree, we don't allow discussion on where to get the rom files but we do talk about them here.  The multi-boards are on the same level and thus should be fair for discussion just not where to obtain them.

TTFN
Kaytrim

[SavannahLion]

I think the question you've applied has several parts of an answer to it.

From a hardware standpoint, these boards are legal. No different than your average PC. The only exception is if they infringe on some hardware patent out there. There would be no way for us to know nor should we really care. If one wanted to get technical about it. I believe AMD and Intel are or have sued each other over hardware patent infringement. Despite the patent infringements between these two companies, we still use PC's based on eithers architecture.

From an emulation standpoint, the emulators themselves are not illegal. Assuming all things are equal and these are not MAME boards.

The ROMs seems to be the sticking point. From what I've interpreted of the statutes and the results of various court cases, the XX-in-1 boards are out if they're already loaded with the ROMs. The boards you describe such as the Multi-Williams boards make the assumption that A) they are boards assembled and/or modified by the end user and B) that the ROMs were obtained for development purposes using appropriate tools.

The end user would have to physically go out and obtain the boards for 48 different games, dump them using tools they've obtained or constructed and apply them to the 48-in-1 board to match the same status as the Mutli-Williams or Double Kong boards. Would anybody actually do that? Maybe. Does everybody do that? No.

I know in at least some of them, such as the Multi-Williams, you are supposed to provide your own copy of the ROMs that you've read in from boards/ROM-sets you own. I'd hazard a guess that there are probably quite a few in the arcade collecting community who've actually done so, while the rest are probably just using pirated ROMs. At any rate, the fact that there is a presumably legal way to obtain and play the Multi-Williams is sufficient that I don't mind them being discussed here.

If that is the criteria you've selected, you need to decide if there is sufficient evidence that people do provide their own copies of the ROMs for these boards. From what I understand how the boards work, I think the answer is no. I, however, would disagree with that answer. Knowledge is more important to me than the legality of that knowledge. I opt for discussion and agree with Kaytrim's suggestion. Discussion is OK, but not information on where to obtain them.

111-in-1 are PC based ... though strangely enough they don't require an ATX power supply like the following...

I cringe every time someone says something along those lines. The ATX is a form factor. A computer doesn't have to adhere to the ATX spec to qualify as a PC.

[FrizzleFried]

I cringe every time someone says something along those lines. The ATX is a form factor. A computer doesn't have to adhere to the ATX spec to qualify as a PC.

What I mean by PC based is that they are MINI-PC motherboards...with INTEL processors...with heatsink/fan units...with PCIe/PCI slots...and sticks of SDRAM.   If you disconnect the JAMMA interface and drop in a graphics card I wouldn't be surprised if you could run them as standard ole' PC's.

39-in-1/48-in-1/60-in-1 boards do NOT have a standard Intel CPU with a HSF...they don't have removable SDRAM....they don't have PCI or AGP ports...etc.

The 111-in-1 looks just like the other 2-board PC-based boards...they have a CPU (though I am not sure if it is an Intel CPU or not)....they have HSF...they have PCI / AGP ports and memory slots...but they don't need an ATX power supply...the standard ole' switcher is all that is needed.

[Goz]

I have a 170 in 1 and 465 in 1 for edumification purposes only. If there is additional info wanted / needed about these let me know and I'd be glad to kick some details. They are in fact Intel P4's running Linux from a flash drive. I believe it was mentioned before but the 111 and up are the PC's running MAME derivitives. The 48 in 1 and 60 in 1 (trackball support) are single layer JAMMA boards with the questionable legality ROMS loaded on EPROMS.

[Dav]

OK - this keeps coming up so I'd like to get some a discussion going and lay down some thoughts.

First - the 30-in-1 boards, 48-in-1 boards, and I believe 60-in-1 boards are not MAME derived as far as I know. I've asked a senior MAME-Dev who indicated this and I've had another source tell me the same as well. If anyone from MAME-Dev is reading this and wants to chime in please do.

.....

The 30/48/60-in-1 boards are another matter. Can anyone comment on their legality? If there is a legal manner of procuring these boards and populating the ROM sets in them then I don't have an issue with them being discussed here. If there is not a legal way of obtaining them then I'd prefer they not be discussed here.

NB - By not being discussed, I mean discussions as to making them work, troubleshooting, or obtaining them. Discussions about their ethics, how they work, and such are fine.

Comments?

As far as I know the 3 in 1 boards etc are just MAME ported to another platform.  I've never heard anyone knowledgeable claim differently.   And since no one knows who the manufacturer is it's a little hard to get their statement on the matter.   As for legality you can't even modify the roms included, much less buy them w/o roms.   

The multi williams board and the other board that's the same platform claim to be not mame based, and do not come with roms.  So would be in a different class regarding both the mame license and the legaility.

[BobA]

These boards for the most part contain games from the '80s the ownership for most has been lost in obscurity.  The legality is in question but only can be disputed by the copyright owners, whoever they may be.

I think this is a good point.  Not that the ownership is lost in obscurity but that it is NOT LOST.  These boards have DK, DKjr DK3 etc on them and we know that Nintendo is still around and has lots of lawyers.  If they are not pursueing the makers and sellers of these boards then they must not feel that they are infringing on their work or their work is now too old to copyright.  Either way if the big guns are not comming enforcing their copyright then maybe there is no problem with the roms being used.

[SavannahLion]

These boards for the most part contain games from the '80s the ownership for most has been lost in obscurity.  The legality is in question but only can be disputed by the copyright owners, whoever they may be.

I think this is a good point.  Not that the ownership is lost in obscurity but that it is NOT LOST.  These boards have DK, DKjr DK3 etc on them and we know that Nintendo is still around and has lots of lawyers.  If they are not pursueing the makers and sellers of these boards then they must not feel that they are infringing on their work or their work is now too old to copyright.  Either way if the big guns are not comming enforcing their copyright then maybe there is no problem with the roms being used.

In a situation like this, I'm not sure it's possible for someone like Nintendo to go after someone who actually has a ##-in-1 board. It's like going after someone who bought a counterfeit purse in New York, it doesn't accomplish anything.

Don't these boards come out of countries that have no laws regarding copyrights? In that case, how does one go after someone in a country when the country officials will do little or nothing to assist in prosecution? That leaves prosecuting sellers.

That leaves the million dollar question. Is it worth it? If company X no longer markets arcade machines, does it make sense to spend 3x$ the money to set up a sting and arrest sellers when there is $0 being gained or lost from sales? The BIG money isn't in arcades anymore, it's in the home console market. That's where Nintendo is focusing their energy and money.

On a side note, there are no video games too old to copyright. None of the copyrights have expired yet.

[Dav]

These boards for the most part contain games from the '80s the ownership for most has been lost in obscurity.  The legality is in question but only can be disputed by the copyright owners, whoever they may be.

I think this is a good point.  Not that the ownership is lost in obscurity but that it is NOT LOST.  These boards have DK, DKjr DK3 etc on them and we know that Nintendo is still around and has lots of lawyers.  If they are not pursueing the makers and sellers of these boards then they must not feel that they are infringing on their work or their work is now too old to copyright.  Either way if the big guns are not comming enforcing their copyright then maybe there is no problem with the roms being used.

http://www.amusezine.com/news/news2136.php

Sound like they don't care?

Every videogame auction I've been to for the last couple of years has had more bootleg pacman/galaga's using the 3 in 1 etc boards than real ones and Namco 's not happy about the situation.    My main issue with the x in 1's is they are set up for location and marketed to ops.  If someone here buys one it's not going to hurt namco, they wouldn't have bought a new machine anyway.  But when the ops start buying them it's definately hurting them.

[Hawk Daddy]

In my opinion, the 48 in 1 and 60 in 1 boards, are ok as long as they do not run MAME, as means of playing the roms, it is the same thing as installing MAME on a pc and putting roms in it that way.  I mean come on, I highly doubt that everybody here has every single game that they have on their MAME machine.  But this is Saint's board, and it is his choice.  Just my 2 cents.

Hawk

[BobA]

http://www.amusezine.com/news/news2136.php

Sound like they don't care?

I think it is like SL said it just costs too much to care if you are off shore and not enforceable.  Maybe that is why there are so few US suppliers of these boards.  I guess namco still has some arcade income to squeeze out while Nintendo has the Wii and probably does not need to squeeze every arcade machine.  Just don't put Mouse ears on it or you will be in trouble no matter where you are based.

[FrizzleFried]

Hey Dav,

Any idea when that press release is from?   I can't find a date anywhere on that bloomin' site other than todays date at the top left of every page.

That is the first thing I have seen indicating anyone getting in trouble for selling multigame boards.  Being he was selling arcades with 24-in-1 boards I am guessing the release is pretty old?  I also imagine Namco wasn't too amused with him dumping their Reunion units and going to the 24-in-1's.

...and I wonder just how many Cease & Desist orders the guy ignored before he was sued.

It IS food for thought though...

[Dav]

Hey Dav,

Any idea when that press release is from?   I can't find a date anywhere on that bloomin' site other than todays date at the top left of every page.

That is the first thing I have seen indicating anyone getting in trouble for selling multigame boards.  Being he was selling arcades with 24-in-1 boards I am guessing the release is pretty old?  I also imagine Namco wasn't too amused with him dumping their Reunion units and going to the 24-in-1's.

...and I wonder just how many Cease & Desist orders the guy ignored before he was sued.

It IS food for thought though...

I believe that was 2005 so yeah it's been a couple of years, but I think you get the idea how they feel about it.  I imagine the problem for them is finding someone to sue.

Edit.  looks like the replay article was from 2005 the story is from 2003.

http://www.twobits.com/sued/

[Kaytrim]

I found found one from April 2003  http://www.twobits.com/sued/
and another from November 2004

Here is the official Press release from Namco, again April 2003.

[FrizzleFried]

...and reading through that material it appears the guy wasn't served a cease & desist (at least according to HIM)...I wonder what ever happened in that situation.

[Zero_Hour]

...I wonder what ever happened in that situation.

From http://www.arcadegrafix.net/, which then redirects to classicarcadegrafix.com

The owner of this domain name has changed!
 
The company that previously owned arcadegrafix.com, arcadegrafix.net, arcadegraphics.net and arcadegraphics.com in Reno Nevada which was known as Pinball Connection is out of business. This domain has been aquired by Classic Arcade Grafix Inc. of California through snapnames.com. Classic Arcade Grafix Inc has no association with the previous owner of the domain. Any questions about orders placed before Aug 13, 2005 under the previous owner should be directed to the previous owner.

The company that previously owned this domain started business in 2001, first in Florida when it was owned by Luis Molinary of PC Amusements in Orlando, FL then they were bought out by Chris Butler of Pinball Connection in Reno Nevada sometime in 2004. Any orders placed before Aug 13, 2005 through this site were made under one of these previous companies. You will need to contact them regarding those orders.

If you are looking for arcade or pinball reproduction graphics please visit Classic Arcade Grafix Inc. of California

Guess Luis got out of the biz.

[BobA]

Looking at Namco's curret site, it looks like they are having a great time selling pacman for your phone.   Looks like arcade games are only interesting if they are less then 5 inches high.   Love to see the old classics back again.

[Haze]

I am led to believe that ALL of the mutligame boards ARE infact MAME based.  The lower capacity ones appear to be running an older version of MAME (0.36 era and before) that has been ported to the SH2/4 and ARM cpus found on the boards.  I've been sent an extract of one of the roms from them which contains MAME-like structures with some copyright strings etc. blanked out.  They're probably ported from the Dreamcast versions and such and only run a limited number of games because each one has been hacked to run faster, and they can make more profit by selling more kits.

I've been pointed here because some people still apparently want to argue that these things are legal.  They're not.

[FrizzleFried]

I am led to believe that ALL of the mutligame boards ARE infact MAME based.  The lower capacity ones appear to be running an older version of MAME (0.36 era and before) that has been ported to the SH2/4 and ARM cpus found on the boards.  I've been sent an extract of one of the roms from them which contains MAME-like structures with some copyright strings etc. blanked out.  They're probably ported from the Dreamcast versions and such and only run a limited number of games because each one has been hacked to run faster, and they can make more profit by selling more kits.

I've been pointed here because some people still apparently want to argue that these things are legal.  They're not.

Noted.  Thanks for the clarification.  It looks like I won't be purchasing them any longer...

[Level42]

Looking at Namco's curret site, it looks like they are having a great time selling pacman for your phone.   Looks like arcade games are only interesting if they are less then 5 inches high.   Love to see the old classics back again.

Read this and think again: http://www.namcoarcade.com/index_fullarticle.asp?art=307

13000 re-union units sold is not bad. And this is also the difference between what they probably will and will not sue. These guys first sold original re-union cabs then switch selling complete cabs with unlicensed games in them. Their target is the arcade industry, money making machines. I don't really think they are too much bothered about home users.

Let's turn things around a bit. I own Donkey Kong, Donkey Kong JR., Ms.Pac Man etc etc. all in LEGAL format games. Only thing is they run on the Atari 8-bit platform or the Atari Lynx platform.So I've paid for the intellectual property of the game. The concept is the same as the arcade games (especially the Lynx Ms. Pac is VERY close to the original). Now, I've paid money for those legal copies, is it now OK to run the arcade version on Mame ?

This is a grey situation IMHO.

I am 100% sure that the multi-willams boards are perfectly legal here in Holland. If you've got an original PCB (f.i. I've got Mario Bros.) then it would be perfectly legal to read the roms, put them on the multi-williams and play the game from there.
Here in Holland we are entitled to make copies of CD's, DVD's etc. for PERSONAL use. I cannot sell them, but it's ok to make a copy to use in my car f.i.. We actually pay an insane extra tax on blank CD-R's and DVD-Rs etc for it !!! (Great if you are backing up your OWN files, you pay for something that you are NOT copying.....)

When I visited the US and my family there, my cousin was surprised that I was carrying a set of copied DVD's and CDs with me. I explained him that I didn't want to risk losing my originals, so I left them at home. He told me I could get into serious problems at customs if they saw it. IMHO this is weird. But it indicates the difference in mind-setting between countries....

The bottom line is, that companies like Namco are still trying to earn money from games that already made millions and millions for them. It's like a record company who releases yet another (compilation) CD full of ancient music. Costs are zero, profit is high, even at low selling prices. I guess legally they are right, but I think there should be laws that say that some things, (Like ancient computer programs=over 20 years) should be free of copyright after a certain period of time.

[FrizzleFried]

Unfortunately because of the fact that they are running a variant of MAME I just can't support that.  I was under the impression (from more than a few sources) that these boards were 100% MAME FREE and until I hear otherwise I don't think I want to promote them in any way.  Which is somewhat of a bummer as they are pretty nifty little devices.

[CheffoJeffo]

Thanks Haze.

I wouldn't argue about overall legality (the ROM issue is pretty clear), but do want to know which boards infringe where.

In particular at this point in time, I am interested in the multi-boards sold by a particular vendor that are commonly used for Multi-Williams machines.

They are not supposed to be pre-loaded with ROMs (and I am happy to dump the ROMs from my boards), and my understanding is that the emulation is not based on MAME, but I would like to know  so that I can then decide whether to take the high road and find one of Clay's MW kits (see below). Your response indicates that you believe (without ascribing any motives) it is based on MAME.

Also, I want to clarify the notion that ALL multigame boards are MAME based ... does that include the boards that are add-ons for existing boards (e.g. the stuff done by Clay Cowgill, Scott Brasington and others) ?

My first instinct is no, but I may be wrong. I am not looking for a legal finding here (since the ROM issue is going to persist), but rather specifically whether you/MAMEDev believe that such boards are infringing with respect to MAME.

I presume that the multiboards that Clay has worked on with BEG and HanaHo are not infringing on MAME. While they aren't available/interesting to hobbyist in general, the idea of a new potential replacement boardset for a game I am having trouble with is attractive to me.

Thanks for taking the time -- I really just want to be able to more accurately judge the various options available to the hobbyist today.

Cheers

[Kaytrim]

I am led to believe that ALL of the mutligame boards ARE infact MAME based.  The lower capacity ones appear to be running an older version of MAME (0.36 era and before) that has been ported to the SH2/4 and ARM cpus found on the boards.  I've been sent an extract of one of the roms from them which contains MAME-like structures with some copyright strings etc. blanked out.  They're probably ported from the Dreamcast versions and such and only run a limited number of games because each one has been hacked to run faster, and they can make more profit by selling more kits.

I've been pointed here because some people still apparently want to argue that these things are legal.  They're not.

Thank you for the information Haze.  I retract my statements above in favor of these boards.  Further in light of this I suggest to Saint and all mods here on the boards to squash any further discussion of the x-in-1 boards pointing the offending post to this thread and the one about being a MAME friendly site.

TTFN
Kaytrim

[CheffoJeffo]

I am led to believe that ALL of the mutligame boards ARE infact MAME based.  The lower capacity ones appear to be running an older version of MAME (0.36 era and before) that has been ported to the SH2/4 and ARM cpus found on the boards.  I've been sent an extract of one of the roms from them which contains MAME-like structures with some copyright strings etc. blanked out.  They're probably ported from the Dreamcast versions and such and only run a limited number of games because each one has been hacked to run faster, and they can make more profit by selling more kits.

I've been pointed here because some people still apparently want to argue that these things are legal.  They're not.

Thank you for the information Haze.  I retract my statements above in favor of these boards.  Further in light of this I suggest to Saint and all mods here on the boards to squash any further discussion of the x-in-1 boards pointing the offending post to this thread and the one about being a MAME friendly site.

TTFN
Kaytrim

With due respect to everybody, I think you are jumping the gun here ... Haze said that he has been led to believe this is the case, not that this is the case.

I think some clarification and degree of specivicity are in order before we jerk our knees all over the place.

For example, there is a multiPac board that is often called a 96-in-1. I am not convinced that it infringes on MAME (and if it does, it isn't as if the guy who makes them is hard to find), yet you would block any discussion.

Let's be specific about what infringes where so that we can all make more informed choices.

What may be infringing for some may not pose problems for others (for example, my Williams boardsets and desire to build a MultiWilliams cabinet, and the fact that I live in another country). We can't make reasonable decisions unless we have reasonably clear facts.

While I think that many, if not most, people here would prefer not to support those who would steal the work of the MAMEDevs, I would also like to be fair to those who have laboured to provide multigame functionality completely independently (to my knowledge) of the MAME community.

EDIT: For grammar ... and, yes, I probably missed some ... 

[Haze]

Ok, I did write a longer reply, but something crashed and I lost it.

Conversion kits such as Clay's MW kit run on the original game hardware, with an additional PCB containing extra menu code, bankswitching etc.  these are clearly NOT emulation based, although their legality can be questioned.  I've taken a look at some of these for misfitMAME in the past, although not had time to finish them.

The Custom Mutligame PCBs from China, Hong Kong, Korea are are almost ALL emulation based.  Even if the hardware is NOT PC based.  (think about it, how else are you going to run games which were designed for many DIFFERENT platforms on a single platform without having to rewrite the entire games, which would take forever)

I've been sent partial dumps of several of these from fried boards.  They contain tell-tale signs of being MAME, for example mame.cfg files, mame.dk readme, MAME romset names, disclaimer strings disabled but not deleted etc.

It comes down to a simple question.  If you're making a multi-game PCB and don't care about licensing any of the games, why would you license the emulator?  A number of official licensed konami packs on the PS2 are clearly MAME based too, and not even they bothered to license it.  They have 2 options  A) develop their own emulator, which costs time and money, or B) do the same as they did for the games and just use somethng that already exists, unlicensed.

The choice for them is simple.

Old versions of MAME run fine on old hardware, you could easily run most of the z80 games in a very old build on a 100-150Mhz system.  Compiling for a 100-150Mhz PowerPC, ARM, or SH4 CPU is no problem at all, and has already been done for the various ports (GP2X, Digital Camera, Dreamcast etc.)

If you've studied the korean arcade industry at all you'd see that the majority of their products are unlicensed hacks of existing games, it's exactly the same with these multi-game PCBs.

I haven't seen ALL of them obviously, but I can tell you that all the ones I have seen have been MAME, or at the very least very heavily based off MAME.  I've heard of a couple running retrocade, but those would probably be PC based ones because retrocade wasn't open source.

Again, I'll stress, if its a conversion of an original game PCB, with the original CPU and original graphics chips then it's not going to be MAME.

If it's a custom PCB with 'modern' hardware running a wide range of games then it's going to be emulation in one form or another, and that form, in all cases I've seen, has been MAME, including some of the ones which only run a limited number of games, which is usually because the hardware is only powerful enough to run them / the MAME version on which the PCB is based didn't really support anything newer.  (Take a look at the old Digital Camera ports etc. and see which games ran well on them, you'll find the selection is very similar to those PCBs)

I'm sure we'll have fun trying to emulate these one day, we don't approve of them, but we're meant to document history, and these are now sadly part of history.  It will be interesting to try and identify which mame version each is based on, and if any of them were actually original.

[Kaytrim]

CheffoJeffo, I am not referring to the multiWiliams or the MultiPac boards that you are talking about.  I am referring to the boards that started this discussion and the fact that Haze said that they are infringing on the MAME license.

I regards to your question elsewhere I would leave the Wiki the way it is unless the multiWiliams and/or MultiPac boards are found to be infringing on licenses.

Kaytrim


(Haze just said it better)

[CheffoJeffo]

Haze -- thanks again.

That answers my question (not the answer I wanted to hear, but what can you do?) about the board I was looking at and I think draws an important distinction for the other class of multi-boards (because nobody was going to take my belief as definitive when they seem the term multigame).

EDIT: I had more specific questions, but no need to muddy up this thread with them since the point has been made.

Thanks and thanks.

[CheffoJeffo]

CheffoJeffo, I am not referring to the multiWiliams or the MultiPac boards that you are talking about.  I am referring to the boards that started this discussion and the fact that Haze said that they are infringing on the MAME license.

Cool -- I just thought that we should be REALLY clear because simple lebelling can be deceptivie (e.g. the 96-in-1 board and at least one MW board that is emulator-based) because this comes up and we never seem to have solid answers, which I'm sure ends up frustrating MAMEDevs as confusion can appear to be support for infringers, when it is, in fact confusion.

There are some other (e.g. not the 48-in-1, etc) multigame boards that are emulation-based that I am interested in, but since they are not realistic solutions for the hobbyist yet, I'll sit on those questions for a while.

Cheers.

[Dav]

Yeah, the guy who made the 96 in 1 is pretty easy to find.  And if he could run MAME code on a Z80 he wouldn't be coding VB in a sweatshop.

Regarding the emulation board that Clay makes that comes w/o roms.  Clay says it does not  use MAME.  I don't know that anyone has looked at it to verify that is true, but that is the claim that is made.  I'd like to see some one take a look at it, but personally I guess I have to believe him until I find out otherwise.

[Haze]

Well, the only way to get an answer for a specific multi-game PCB would be to have that specific multi-game dumped and analysed, however, given previous experience and anlysis of dumps, and the shady nature of these PCBs in general it makes sense to say they're MAME based unless proven otherwise.

What can we do?  Nothing, we can't hunt down manufacturers of PCBs in Hong Kong etc.  we have a hard enough time stopping people using the MAME name to sell illegal DVD collections etc. over here.  All we can do is spread the word that these things are not genuine, and based on all our previous findings are more than likely MAME based.

I don't know why anybody would be surprised by this, maybe because MAME is such a system hog now people can't remember when it ran well on hardware that could only be considered antique these days.

It kinda makes me laugh that people instantly point the finger at things like Ultracade and say 'it's mame based' yet are more willing to give a completely faceless, unknown chinese manufacturer selling completely unlicensed roms the benefit of the doubt over their emulation software.

[Haze]

If you're only emulating a single platform then its fairly reasonable to assume somebody could do it without MAME, you might only need one CPU core, one sound core, and graphics emulation for one game.  It's possible.  (although just look how many of the current alternate emulators are actually using the MAME cores these days anyway, Nebula, Final Burn Alpha, Raine etc. are all heavily dependant on MAME)

Once you start to get 48 games on completely different platforms then you have to start to ask questions.

At the end of the day it's going to come down to cost and development time, the manufacturers of the boards don't give a damn about the legality of them.

[CheffoJeffo]

It kinda makes me laugh that people instantly point the finger at things like Ultracade and say 'it's mame based' yet are more willing to give a completely faceless, unknown chinese manufacturer selling completely unlicensed roms the benefit of the doubt over their emulation software.

[FrizzleFried]

I am wondering what the Programmable JAMMA board that arcadeshop.com sells uses for emulation...

[Haze]

Is that just the PC motherboard with JAMMA connectors that was posted about recently?  That was clearly an attempt to cash in on emulation cabinets..

[CheffoJeffo]

Is that just the PC motherboard with JAMMA connectors that was posted about recently?  That was clearly an attempt to cash in on emulation cabinets..

I think that Frizz is talking about the same boards that I am interested in (for a MW).

My understanding was that Clay makes them, they are not MAME-based and Steve has the exclusive for distribution.

[Level42]

I think the question should be: would you actually stop the manufacturers of these boards by not discussing them ?

Keep dreaming guys !

[Kaytrim]

I think the question should be: would you actually stop the manufacturers of these boards by not discussing them ?

Keep dreaming guys !

The issue is not us putting them out of business.  We are just trying to take the high road and support what the MAME devs are doing.