Main > Main Forum

cant seem to grasp why mame is 'illegal' for commercial use

Pages: << < (28/29) > >>

SophT:


--- Quote from: Blanka on February 02, 2010, 02:04:45 am ---I Thought MAME IS ALREADY used for commercial operations. I believe Taito Legends for example is nothing but MAME. The game owners will say FY to the mamedevs probably, as they cannot organise to file lawsuits against them.

On the other hand. Think of this scenario: Steve JOBS want's MAME on his iPad store (iPad is auto-rotating 4:3 screen: made for classics!). He pays the mame-org a sum of cash, they think of a nice formula to divide it over members (Nicola getting millionaire and letting go his weird Trademark), and he arranges Taito, Capcom and co send in technicians to better mame even further. Mame goes full GNU open source and the deal is that Apple makes ROMS available for commercial use without DRM in their iPad store, so each Mamer can obtain legal titles. I think it will give more people access in a decent way to our great game heritage. In the end Jobs is only interested in 30% of each ROM sold, whether it is DRM'ed or not, music, app or crap. Does not matter.

--- End quote ---

Well, IANAL, but after reading through this entire thread I would like to object to the assertion that the iPad was "made for classics!".  That's pure speculation, and I would dare say near "fan-boy", and I would like it stricken from the thread.  Furthermore the poster alleges that Apple would sell legally licensed roms through its iTunes store without DRM- an assertion that has no precedent.  In fact let the records show that iTunes originally sold only DRM music, and continues to sell DRM tv and movies, and has plans for DRM books shortly.

In conclusion, Apple, Jobs, and the iPad can suck it (within the scope of a MAME port to the iPad, it doesn't even have buttons, hardly ideal!) :P

:soapbox:

just trying to lighten the mood...

J.Max:


--- Quote ---This was before DMCA, so again, if Sega jumped up and bit a developer who [hypothetically] created a free emulator of the Megadrive/Genesis, would fair use still hold water today?
--- End quote ---

Good question...I don't know the answer.  I would GUESS that since most emulators don't include BIOS files (including MAME) that it would still hold up, DMCA or no DMCA. 



SavannahLion:

Just to bring to attention. A recent change in the landscape of IP issues. I'm not going to bother interpreting what this means for everyone. Since only about half the people are really only listening/reading/understanding what's being said, everyone else seems to have an opinion loosely based on preconceived notions.

In any case, a task force was recently assembled by major IP players which notably excludes any consumer advocate groups. While the task force is comprised almost entirely of the video and music entertainment sectors, what happens with this group can potentially reach beyond its defined scope and affect other industries (namely gaming).

What I find interesting about the task force is it was assembled with the explicit intention to "tackle international piracy." Given that some countries (eg Canada) resist pressures to skew IP rights, this might lead to some interesting pressures and political gambits.

http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/2010/02/justice-creates-ip-task-force.php

Haze:


--- Quote from: ark_ader on February 19, 2010, 02:43:18 pm ---Can someone find me a commercial PSX emulator?

Question is, if Connectix had more cash would they have been able to defeat the DMCA, instead of pulling the product off the shelf?

--- End quote ---

Bleem and Connectix VGS were the two commercial PSX emulators.

In the case of Bleem (the Dreamcast version that ran a single game I think) I remember people working in the local games store saying that Sony were putting a lot of pressure on them to not sell it*.  Trying to compete against dirty tactics and lawsuits is hard, no matter how frivolous they are.

To the best of my knowledge there are no other commercial PSX emulators, there is no demand for them, and no real money to be made.  2 commercial emulators is more than most systems have!

* Just as Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo etc. do these days, insisting games are only available on the actual release date, even if the store has them long before.  Break their 'rules', and find yourself with no release day copies to sell at all.  (How is this legal?)


SavannahLion:


--- Quote from: Haze on February 20, 2010, 10:10:26 am ---* Just as Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo etc. do these days, insisting games are only available on the actual release date, even if the store has them long before.  Break their 'rules', and find yourself with no release day copies to sell at all.  (How is this legal?)
--- End quote ---

It's been yonkers since I had to deal with it, but it's actually not restricted to just video games. Movies and music have the same potential restrictions. I do know that stores that presale their restricted merchandise before release can and do get pinged with fines. I bought the DVD release of Star Wars IV,V,VI months before their scheduled release. It dawned me two days later that I could go back, buy up every one of their stock and sell it on eBay for a pretty penny. Went back and the store already pulled them off the shelves and stuck them back in the store room (I could see them through the door). I heard later from one of the employees they ended up getting "fined" for each one they sold before the release date.

Point being, people have told me it's written into law somewhere, but no one has ever been able to cite the code. I suspect it has more to do with contractual obligations rather than any specific law.  Only laws I know of restricting the sale of games in this manner exists in Japan.

Pages: << < (28/29) > >>

Go to full version