The NEW Build Your Own Arcade Controls
Main => Main Forum => Topic started by: Driver-Man on September 09, 2010, 11:10:22 pm
-
1.) I have 450-in-1, it runs on x86 PC with AdvanceMAME and ArcadeOS. I did not expect this to come with any papers explaining how game ROMs are licensed by the original game maker/publisher. The question here is whether this "PCB" classify as "bootleg" in the same way as there were Donkey Kong bootlegs in the 80's?
2.) I also have popular 60-in-1 PCB, which runs on some ARM based 'Computer-On-Module', most likely with some version of MAME too. Again, there were not any papers saying anything about legality, copyright or licensing of those game ROMs.
I suppose my 60-in-1 is "bootleg" then as well, but is there such thing as 60-in-1 PCB that actually comes with some piece of paper saying the games are licensed? How does that piece of paper look like? And finally, who is this manufacturer, what is the company with ALL the necessary copyright licenses to produce PCBs with all those ROMs today? What about arcade "abandonware", what's with the games whose makers and copyright holders do not exist anymore, can anyone object if I operate or sell those games?
What is the difference in legality:
a.) Made in China: IBM PC clone - legal?
b.) Made in China: Namco Galaga clone - not legal?
3.) Ok, so you buy "actual", 20-something years old PCB, say Frogger. Do you expect it to come with a piece of paper saying something about it being "original", licensed or whatever? And if you do not have that piece of paper, how legal is then for you to put that PCB in arcade shop, or sell it on e-bay?
I do not have any information about 'how much legal' was to operate bootleg PCBs 20 years ago in arcade shops. Were there any legal lawsuits and police raids in relation to this back then? And today, is there anyone doing anything about today's bootlegs? Is there "arcade police" opening your cabinets and asking for papers, permits and licenses for your games? And my last question, is it "less legal" to operate/sell 20 year old single-game bootlegs, or today's multi-game MAME based bootlegs?
-
Technically I think all forms of bootlegs are illegal.
The risk of prosecution will vary by the amount of public exposure the cabinet receives, the authenticity of the bootleg, popularity and earnings are large factors too.
If its in your basement and played on by your friends and family I couldn't envisage a situation where a realistic risk of prosecution would arise. However if you had 100 such machines sited in popular central locations, the risk would be a lot more significant as the exposure has greatly increased, along with potential earnings - this is what attracts the real attention, money. When money is involved people get jealous - maybe another operator would tell the appropriate authorities etc..
-
Yes, ok, but first I need to know whether my JAMMA PCB is legal to start with. -- How do you know your JAMMA PCBs are legal? Did you get any papers with any of the PCBs you have? Have you ever seen any such paper, or heard of it? For example, where does it say that "Donkey Kong by Nintendo" is legal, and that "Crazy Kong by Falcon/Alca/Orca" is bootleg? Did any of the original PCBs come with some piece of paper, some proof of originality, something like 'Windows serial number sticker'?
So, is my 60-in-1 legal or not? How can I tell?
And, all those 60-in-1 PCBs in all the arcades in the world, are any of them actually legal?
-
Yes, ok, but first I need to know whether my JAMMA PCB is legal to start with. -- How do you know your JAMMA PCBs are legal? Did you get any papers with any of the PCBs you have? Have you ever seen any such paper, or heard of it? For example, where does it say that "Donkey Kong by Nintendo" is legal, and that "Crazy Kong by Falcon/Alca/Orca" is bootleg? Did any the original PCBs come with some piece of paper, some proof of originality, something like today's 'Windows serial number sticker'?
So, is my 60-in-1 legal or not? How can I tell?
And, all those 60-in-1 PCBs in all the arcades in the world, are any of them actually legal?
I dot think that any of the 60-1 boards are "legal"... why does it matter? Are you going to charge to play?
-
If you want to know about a specific PCB then you could ask about it here or maybe on KLOV.
I don't think there is any quick at-a-glance way to identify bootlegs, some are more obvious than others with very different board layouts or missing key design elements like manufacturers logos etc..
I wouldn't put any weight in any paperwork you might acquire with a board, its the board itself you need to examine and verify.
-
WhereEaglesDare,
I too do not see how any of "those" multi-game PCBs can be legal.
I do not own arcade shop.
It matters to me in all those ways I expressed via my questions, I'm curious.
Why does it matter to you why does it matter to me? It's always better to know, right?
-
If you want to know about a specific PCB then you could ask about it here or maybe on KLOV.
I don't think there is any quick at-a-glance way to identify bootlegs, some are more obvious than others with very different board layouts or missing key design elements like manufacturers logos etc..
I wouldn't put any weight in any paperwork you might acquire with a board, its the board itself you need to examine and verify.
Yeah, it's all very vague and original copyrights perhaps can not stand very well against abuse in today's circumstances, especially since they seem did not matter too much in the past.
The point is... where is the line?
Why would everyone be able to freely sell/operate 60-in-1 PCBs, and I can not my home-made 200-in-1 PC? Just because it's made in China, perhaps because emulator and ROMs are better hidden, so not many people know it's the MAME just the same? Is "arcade police" that stupid? Konami, Sega, Nintendo... do they not know, why do they do not do anything? Have they actually done anything about those '80-'90 bootlegs, ever?
...and so, who is going to object when I operate/sell my home made "200-in-1" MAME based PC? Sega? And, if I put it all on some ARM based PCB and hide all the ROMs and emulator, then that would apparently be Ok, as far as e-bay, police, sega, konami, nintendo... are concerned, anyway, right? So, what should I be worried about at the end? Who is going to sue me and for what? MAME developers for ignoring their "non-commercial use" notice?
It all sounds to me like some "scare tactics" with very little actual legal grounds, which ironically seem to have started with MAME itself. People know ROMs are illegal because MAME say so, while actual licenses expired long time ago, do not legally exist anymore, can not be applied, or apparently real copyright holders, if any, do not even care. Unless, am I mistaken?
-
Yeah, it's all very vague and original copyrights perhaps can not stand very well against abuse in today's circumstances, especially since they seem did not matter too much in the past.
The copyrights are as valid today as they ever were. I'm no expert on copyright law, but as far as I can surmise, I doubt any of us are going to live long enough to see the copyrights expire on these games. Having said that, most of the copyright owners aren't as likely to go after the infringers now because they have so much less to gain from doing so than they did back when their games were profitable. I think it did matter in the past, it's just that it's hard to stop.
Why would everyone be able to freely sell/operate 60-in-1 PCBs, and I can not my home-made 200-in-1 PC?
They freely sell 60 in 1s because no one stops them, not because it's better or more legal than selling a home made PC equivalent.
...and so, who is going to object when I operate/sell my home made "200-in-1" MAME based PC? Sega? And, if I put it all on some ARM based PCB and hide all the ROMs and emulator, then that would apparently be Ok, as far as e-bay, police, sega, konami, nintendo... are concerned, anyway, right? So, what should I be worried about at the end? Who is going to sue me and for what? MAME developers for ignoring their "non-commercial use" notice?
It all sounds to me like some "scare tactics" with very little actual legal grounds, which ironically seem to have started with MAME itself. People know ROMs are illegal because MAME say so, while actual licenses expired long time ago, do not legally exist anymore, can not be applied, or apparently real copyright holders, if any, do not even care. Unless, am I mistaken?
Since you asked, a lot of people here are going to object to you selling a homemade cab with mame and roms on it. And I'm sure the mame devs could sue you if they wanted to, and the copyright holders definitely could. It's doubtful that they actually would unless you do this on a very large, very public scale, but they would certainly have grounds to do so if they found out about it and wanted to take action.
These are not scare tactics. It's the truth. I think you would be hard-pressed to find a commercial video game that is not still under copyright. Even if the original company no longer exists, somebody owns the copyright still. Sure, some of the copyright holders don't care, but the games are definitely under copyright.
I get the feeling that you're hoping someone's going to say, "Hey, you're right! That's all abadonware, you should totally sell homemade cabs with mame and 200 games on them!" I doubt anyone here is going to say that to you.
I guess you're new here, and I welcome you to the forum. :) I'm not trying to sound negative or bring you down. Just stating some facts and kindly advising you to drop this topic as you're likely going to just upset a lot of folks here if you keep pursuing it.
-
I think individuals know they are infringing by possessing roms they don't have a legal right to, but they don't openly distribute them, publicly display them or make any kind of money from them. This seems to be the acceptable, unspoken rule regarding roms for many.
The Mame licence on the other hand is utterly respected, I think this respect is two fold: for the work done in the past and more importantly the ongoing work into the future. We all love Mame, it has a cleverly worded licence that would make it difficult to be shut down by any concerned third parties. I feel this is the reason almost everyone is vigilant about the enforcement and upkeep of the terms of Mame's licence.
Where as the majority wouldn't care at all if the 60-1 factory was shut down and sued into oblivion.
Thats my take on it, and that is where I draw the line.
-
It all sounds to me like some "scare tactics" with very little actual legal grounds, which ironically seem to have started with MAME itself. People know ROMs are illegal because MAME say so, while actual licenses expired long time ago, do not legally exist anymore, can not be applied, or apparently real copyright holders, if any, do not even care. Unless, am I mistaken?
This is a topic that has come up in various forms time and time again in every single forum I've ever been a member of. Even if that forum theoretically has nothing to do with copyrights in any fashion anyways.
You appear to be misinformed about copyrights and how it's applied. But before we go any further, I should point out that what I'm going to write applies to U.S. territories. Other countries have different copyright laws which further complicate things.
First of, the issues about copyrights did NOT start with MAME. They haven't been around long enough. MAMEDev simply recognizes the issues that surround copyrights and (apparently) make an effort to avoid getting attention from those who count. So please, refrain crediting MAMEDev with something that's been going on long before the first line of code was ever written.
AFAIK, under current law, no game license has naturally expired at all. Video games are simply too young for copyrights to expire. Here's why. As a rule of thumb, works created on or after 1978 enjoy anywhere from 70 years + life of the creator (eg if I create a game and release it) to 120 years (eg if I work for a company to create the game).
Games created before 1978 (eg Pong) fall under some wicked copyright laws that it would potentially take pages of discussion to unravel what it means. In a nutshell though, since the creators of Pong are still alive the clock hasn't even started to tick for most of these games. By my calculations, the earliest any game would have a hope of having a naturally expiring copyright would be in 2042 and that would require the author to suffer an immediate death upon burning the first data to chip.
As for whether these people care or the company collapses or whatever. That is also a discussion that could potentially take an entire dedicated forum to figure out. It's very easy for copyright holders to not even realize they own the copyright to a particular game. Happens with movies often enough Night of the Comet (http://www.fast-rewind.com/trivia_nightcomet.htm) is a prime example. Other times it could simply be an issue of cost/benefit. I have serious doubts that little old Grannie with the attic full of her dead son's copyrights would ever have the money or wherewithall to pursue some anonymous company in China selling X-in-1 boards in an online store located in Japan.
In short, X in 1 boards violate copyrights, period. Either whomever owns the rights to the game or even the MAME developers but they violate copyright. AFAIK, most (if not all) of us here know this and we accept it for what it is (whether we agree is an entirely different matter). Try not to be an jerk trying to justify something we all know to be true anyways. Show the hobby and market some respect.
-
Ok, I agree with all that, thank you all. In summary, I find it interesting people care more about MAME legal warnings than about actual copyright of the game ROMs themselves. Anyway, we all concluded 60-in-1 PCBs can not be legal, but in reality we sure see they're quite "legal".
These 48-in-1, 60-in-1 are actually quite wide spread and freely sold and played everywhere, are they not? Even blatant MAME PC based 400-in-1, 1000-in-1... boards are sold everywhere and imported/exported freely, on-line and in retail shops. This is not smuggled and sold under the counter, these are actually taxed by the government, so they are in fact legal, are they not? If you can buy it in retail shop and get an invoice for it, then who can sue you for putting in it in your arcade cabinet and charge for the play? How were you supposed to know? Government took their profit there as well, so they don't seem to care too much? Who cares? Who sues?
There is obviously some discrepancy between what people say and what actually is, so I still reserve my doubts that any of the original copyright would really stand in the court. Was there any legal action in relation to any arcade bootlegs, ever?
-
...kindly advising you to drop this topic as you're likely going to just upset a lot of folks here if you keep pursuing it.
Try not to be an jerk trying to justify something we all know to be true anyways. Show the hobby and market some respect.
Errr, ok, I hear you, but I have no idea what are you referring to. What are you two talking about, please? I see people on this forum openly saying to have thousands of ROMs, so that's not it, and at least I paid for my illegal machines, but that only makes me stupid... what else?
I kind of see where and how our view on the subject can differ, but I do not see there can be any disrespect to anyone. I'm sort of "MAME developer" myself, if that matters at all, but all the same I have nothing but respect for MAME and how it came to be, for all the people that contributed, and so on...
Interestingly though I was also responsible for couple of published Amstrad CPC games. I speak not only for myself, but many actual programmers when I say I would like my games to be played freely. I don't even know whether they are or not, it was never up to me anyway. I made those games so everyone can play it, that was my motivation and satisfaction, and I find it unfortunate that some lost copyrights stand between people and my games, that's not fair to me - the actual maker, the actual programmer, not the bloody company that would have my games buried in their ignorance. Games are meant to be played, and that's the most important thing here, not silly laws that would have them forgotten.
Where do we disagree, exactly?
-
Hey, you're right! That's all abadonware, you should totally sell homemade cabs with mame and 200 games on them! Make sure you put Ads up EVERYWHERE. eBay, Craigslist, Classifieds, street poles, everywhere.
Oh and you got to make sure you charge a ridiculous amount for what you didn't pay for.
-
All current multi-game boards are illegal. End of. The only reason they don't get pulled on ebay and places like that is because the people in charge aren't clued up enough - they're just PC's with emulation software and JAMMA connectors, but as they look like an ordinary PCB to the layman and aren't obviously programmable, the dolts regulating the sites don't delve further.
Why do you think links to them are banned here?
-
all of the X in 1 are illegal. The 60(+) in 1s because they use copyrighted ROMs and MAME, even the multiple CPS1/2s because they use roms (but no emulation) and the 120 in NeoGeo carts. I'm not entirely sure how illegal hacks are, like SF2 Rainbow, so long as its using edited data on legit boards.
As for buying , for example, a bootleg Frogger you thought was authentic. In the unlikely event you were prosecuted I dont really see you getting in much trouble (unless you some how made A LOT of money with it) especially if the board looks very legit. Sometimes I cant tell, I even had a bootleg puzzle bobble cart and a legit one side by side and other then a very small marking on the back of the PCB they looked identical
-
3.) Ok, so you buy "actual", 20-something years old PCB, say Frogger. Do you expect it to come with a piece of paper saying something about it being "original", licensed or whatever? And if you do not have that piece of paper, how legal is then for you to put that PCB in arcade shop, or sell it on e-bay?
No, there are no "certificates of authenticity".
-
All current multi-game boards are illegal. End of. The only reason they don't get pulled on ebay and places like that is because the people in charge aren't clued up enough - they're just PC's with emulation software and JAMMA connectors, but as they look like an ordinary PCB to the layman and aren't obviously programmable, the dolts regulating the sites don't delve further.
Why do you think links to them are banned here?
Correct, with one exception I believe. I think there was one multi-board (believe it's no longer being marketed but might be available after-market) that did not come with ROMs, and you had to populate it yourself with ROMs you owned.
-
All current multi-game boards are illegal. End of. The only reason they don't get pulled on ebay and places like that is because the people in charge aren't clued up enough - they're just PC's with emulation software and JAMMA connectors, but as they look like an ordinary PCB to the layman and aren't obviously programmable, the dolts regulating the sites don't delve further.
Why do you think links to them are banned here?
Correct, with one exception I believe. I think there was one multi-board (believe it's no longer being marketed but might be available after-market) that did not come with ROMs, and you had to populate it yourself with ROMs you owned.
Correct, although there is now a bootleg of that particular board. ;)
-
*attempts constructive thread-jacking*
Anyone remember the "Nintendo Seal of Quality" on the NES cartridges?
-
All current multi-game boards are illegal. End of. The only reason they don't get pulled on ebay and places like that is because the people in charge aren't clued up enough - they're just PC's with emulation software and JAMMA connectors, but as they look like an ordinary PCB to the layman and aren't obviously programmable, the dolts regulating the sites don't delve further.
Why do you think links to them are banned here?
What he said.
With the possible exception of _some_ versions of Ultracade*, and the official Namco Reunion boards (MsPacman / Pacman / Galaga) all the known multi-game boards are illegal.
Running a bootleg PCB, or a PCB with unofficially modified software (region hacked, game swapped etc.) is also Illegal.
Even running something like the Phoenix CPS2 sets might get you into trouble as they're hacked code, not approved by Capcom and allow you to run games 'out of region' (Capcom run their own at-cost repair service) You could argue it was a repair job, but Capcom would no doubt argue otherwise.
Most of the multi-games are based on MAME, even the 48/60 in 1 systems, which look to be based on an old version of MAME4ALL (the low spec hardware version)
There are a couple which are non-emulation based and run a large number of 68k based games, which aren't MAME, but are also Illegal.
The ones that run on original hardware (multi-neogeo carts, multi-cps) are also Illegal.
The majority of games produced in the 80/90s in Korea are Illegal, because they simply used hacked up code from other people's games, and likewise, stole graphics / sound. Likewise, a fair number of Italian produced games.
http://mamedev.emulab.it/haze/2008/06/19/entirely-stolen-drawings/ (http://mamedev.emulab.it/haze/2008/06/19/entirely-stolen-drawings/)
and an older (5 years!) more complete article I did about these things
http://tinyurl.com/34vfaon (http://tinyurl.com/34vfaon)
(there are many more examples, and after emulating world rally it looks like blomby car only stole graphics, not code in that case)
I'm not sure if this one is legal.. they did rewrite the game.. but I think Namco might have something to say anyway ;-)
http://mamedev.emulab.it/haze/2010/03/13/digging-home-the-point/ (http://mamedev.emulab.it/haze/2010/03/13/digging-home-the-point/)
Many gambling games have also been deemed illegal in various places due to regulation changes (which is why you see those photos of 'arcade' graveyards full of them) You're usually required to destroy them when they're decommissioned, which is why emulating them is important.
----
In summary .... If you're running anything but an original authentic board on location then yes, you're running the risk of being prosecuted if you're found out. Likewise, if you're selling them, there is always a risk.
Most of these things are still sold probably because
a) the companies have no idea which of their game PCBs are bootlegs anymore (for older single PCBs)
b) the amount of money they could hope to gain through the legal process isn't worth it (most of the people making these things are based in Asia)
*Note, Ultracade did get taken to court over all of this, probably because they were a much easier target (being US based), and were advertising their goods as being genuine and licensed when the copyright owners felt otherwise, claiming they had no contract / license with them.
Likewise if you start bootlegging the *newer* stuff that they're still trying to sell now then the legal gears start to move.
MAME emulates and documents this stuff so that you don't have to, and to make it easier to identify if what you have might not be an original product.
-
The ones that run on original hardware (multi-neogeo carts, multi-cps) are also Illegal.
There is a single exception to this that I am aware of -- the Exidy 440 Multis are licensed (well, the recent batch are ... I dunno about the original beta batch).
-
It all comes down to whether a company wants to pursue the counterfeiters or not.
Merit sucessfully tracked down a Megatouch counterfeiter in China and had the owner of the company was arrested.
(he was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison)
The same factory was making counterfeit Sega and Namco games also, but Merit was the only company to pursue them.
If it weren't for them doing their own investigating and pushing the issue, the counterfeiter would still be in business.
Any company is within their rights to pursue the issue against any vendor dealing in bootlegs.
As stated earlier, it's about profit and profile.
The Chinese company had a website & distribution network.
Gotta be pragmatic and go on with things.......
-
It all comes down to whether a company wants to pursue the counterfeiters or not.
Merit sucessfully tracked down a Megatouch counterfeiter in China and had the owner of the company was arrested.
(he was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison)
The same factory was making counterfeit Sega and Namco games also, but Merit was the only company to pursue them.
If it weren't for them doing their own investigating and pushing the issue, the counterfeiter would still be in business.
Heh, I'm surprised anybody does business with Merit anymore anyway. From what I was reading their more recent Megatouch games require the operators to buy security keys which are good for a certain number of credits and the games 'expire' after that, ie, you can't just run them, you have to keep going back to Merit to top up your 'key' as if it were some kind of Mobile phone. Sounds like a terrible business model to buy into if you're an operator.
Assuming it is the same company then it doesn't surprise me that they're one of the most active in the legal department either, because I imagine a LOT of operators are unhappy with this situation, but rather than please their customers, they'd rather take the legal route.
-
Ok, I agree with all that, thank you all. In summary, I find it interesting people care more about MAME legal warnings than about actual copyright of the game ROMs themselves. Anyway, we all concluded 60-in-1 PCBs can not be legal, but in reality we sure see they're quite "legal".
These 48-in-1, 60-in-1 are actually quite wide spread and freely sold and played everywhere, are they not? Even blatant MAME PC based 400-in-1, 1000-in-1... boards are sold everywhere and imported/exported freely, on-line and in retail shops. This is not smuggled and sold under the counter, these are actually taxed by the government, so they are in fact legal, are they not? If you can buy it in retail shop and get an invoice for it, then who can sue you for putting in it in your arcade cabinet and charge for the play? How were you supposed to know? Government took their profit there as well, so they don't seem to care too much? Who cares? Who sues?
There is obviously some discrepancy between what people say and what actually is, so I still reserve my doubts that any of the original copyright would really stand in the court. Was there any legal action in relation to any arcade bootlegs, ever?
Once again, understanding how copyright law is applied would help you here. Apparently tax laws as well.
Government entities generally don't step in on private matters between two individuals or entities. Generally speaking, government entities would step in when things become a public matter or a safety matter or whatever (I'm not clued in to all the potentials of this). This is partly why you have people throw ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- fits about government control and the extent this is allowed under various constitutions and whatnot. Quite frankly, I don't recall any copyright court case involving a government entity, it's always between two or more private entities. If you know of one, point it out.
As for the taxing of a particular product and the apparent "legalization" of that product. This is sort of things occurs all the time (looks up California and Marijuana). Not understanding how governments function is primary cause of frustration amongst private individuals. All too often, people have this misinformed belief that the government is a single entity, that laws that apply to private individuals apply equally public entities (or vice versa) and that these laws universally apply in a sensible matter. This is just how it is, it has nothing to do with right or wrong, whether I agree or disagree. I waste hours each day of my life pointing this out to people, not that it matters miuch, that's within my purview.
Truth of the matter, laws are rarely silly in the strictest sense of the word. Every law serves a purpose, it's just a matter of whether that purpose is truly applicable anymore (segregation laws anyone?). As it stands, copyright laws are not going away anytime soon and thanks to entities like Sonny Bono and Disney, these laws are only becoming more strict.
I asked you to show the hobby and market some respect in the sense that we all know the issues surrounding copyrights on ROMS and we all know what we're doing (at least we think we do). Arguing about the application of copyrights doesn't do anyone a lick of good. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and read up on copyright laws with a neutral mind. Understand that this is the way it is. Any preconceived notions you may have about copyright laws just makes you look like an ass and taints any possibility of understanding all of this.
I can't vouch for everyone here, but I don't necessarily agree with copyrights 100%, especially with the recent extensions and the constant prosecution from the MPAA/RIAA to force us to stick with an archaic business model. The difference is understanding how things are, accept that it's the reality of the situation, and if you don't like it, actively work to change that. And no, out and out violating someone's copyright is probably not the best way to go about it.
-
...kindly advising you to drop this topic as you're likely going to just upset a lot of folks here if you keep pursuing it.
Try not to be an jerk trying to justify something we all know to be true anyways. Show the hobby and market some respect.
Errr, ok, I hear you, but I have no idea what are you referring to. What are you two talking about, please? I see people on this forum openly saying to have thousands of ROMs, so that's not it, and at least I paid for my illegal machines, but that only makes me stupid... what else?
I kind of see where and how our view on the subject can differ, but I do not see there can be any disrespect to anyone. I'm sort of "MAME developer" myself, if that matters at all, but all the same I have nothing but respect for MAME and how it came to be, for all the people that contributed, and so on...
Interestingly though I was also responsible for couple of published Amstrad CPC games. I speak not only for myself, but many actual programmers when I say I would like my games to be played freely. I don't even know whether they are or not, it was never up to me anyway. I made those games so everyone can play it, that was my motivation and satisfaction, and I find it unfortunate that some lost copyrights stand between people and my games, that's not fair to me - the actual maker, the actual programmer, not the bloody company that would have my games buried in their ignorance. Games are meant to be played, and that's the most important thing here, not silly laws that would have them forgotten.
Where do we disagree, exactly?
I was just referring to talk about selling mame and roms. That's all. It's totally cool to talk about mame and roms here of course, but not selling them or where to find roms.
We disagree on what you're saying about the copyrights on these games and the legality of selling them. Saying the copyrights are no longer valid, or that it's legal to sell mame and roms you don't own, well, that's simply not true. It's not something we all have differing opinions on or anything - it's a fact and you really can't argue about it without looking silly.
Hey, you're right! That's all abadonware, you should totally sell homemade cabs with mame and 200 games on them! Make sure you put Ads up EVERYWHERE. eBay, Craigslist, Classifieds, street poles, everywhere.
Oh and you got to make sure you charge a ridiculous amount for what you didn't pay for.
Yeah, as soon as I posted that, I just knew someone would step up and prove me wrong! :lol
-
SavannahLion,
Arguing about the application of copyrights doesn't do anyone a lick of good. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and read up on copyright laws with a neutral mind. Understand that this is the way it is. Any preconceived notions you may have about copyright laws just makes you look like an ass and taints any possibility of understanding all of this.
Why so angry? I'm asking questions here, and you are telling me I should have already known the answers? You are being an ass, though your unprovoked anger makes it all interesting and I am still looking forward to figuring out what is it about this subject that makes you so nervous to keep farting like that.
You are not really saying anything specific, you just keep insulting me for no reason and repeating YOUR OPINION, insisting that your opinion is better than my opinion, without any actual proof or reference to the facts and the real world.
Q.) If you buy X-in-1 in retail shop and get an invoice for it, then can it be illegal to operate or re-sell that PCB? YES/NO
Yes, it's illegal? According to whom, according to what?
I want to do exactly what you suggested, I want to read about it, but what, where? Show me.
We know all the opinions now, and I appreciate everyone's OPINION, but opinion is just an opinion, and if I was right, if this was indeed some "scare tactics" then everyone would have this opinion just like this. But you can not prove an opinion by keep repeating it, that's how mass-hypnosis and self-convincing works to start with. I want to talk about actuality, the real world and FACTS, not about your propaganda filled, self-sustained hallucinations. I want to see citations, quotes and references, past legal actions and previous convictions, stuff that actually happened, in the real world.
Haze,
*Note, Ultracade did get taken to court over all of this, probably because they were a much easier target (being US based), and were advertising their goods as being genuine and licensed when the copyright owners felt otherwise, claiming they had no contract / license with them.
Ok, that's kind of stuff I want to know about. Not opinions, just facts. So, did the court found them guilty? Who pressed the charges? Where can I read about how it ended?
-
nitz,
I was just referring to talk about selling mame and roms. That's all. It's totally cool to talk about mame and roms here of course, but not selling them or where to find roms.
We disagree on what you're saying about the copyrights on these games and the legality of selling them.
I do not suggest anyone should break any laws or ignore any copyrights. Perhaps it is confusing that I pose my questions as examples set in real-world circumstances and from the first person point of view, but that's only to be more illustrative.
Look, I *legally* bought my JAMMA PCBs, that you all say now are actually illegal (according to something). Now, I do not want be violating any laws if I decide later to sell these PCBs, therefore I argue - if government let me buy this thing legally then I am not obligated to do any further investigation to find out whether this product is really legal or not, why would I? I am not disassembling Nvidia graphic drivers to see if they stole some technology from ATI, right? And thus I conclude, there can be no charges pressed against me in such circumstances, therefore that item is IN FACT legal to be bought, sold and operated without this "consumer" having any liability even if it turns out item was counterfeited and copyright holder does indeed try to press charges.
Saying the copyrights are no longer valid, or that it's legal to sell mame and roms you don't own, well, that's simply not true. It's not something we all have differing opinions on or anything - it's a fact and you really can't argue about it without looking silly.
Perhaps, but that would also make it that much easier for you to prove it so.
Is making IBM PC clones also illegal, but strangely allowed?
Are Amstrad CPC and/or Commodore C64 games also illegal?
Can I as actual programmer release my games to the public?
-
Driver-Man are you serious?
I want to do exactly what you suggested, I want to read about it, but what, where? Show me.
Is Google not in your favorites? At least show some capability of searching for some answers on your own.
However, if you need a starting point :dunno
You are not really saying anything specific, you just keep insulting me for no reason and repeating YOUR OPINION, insisting that your opinion is better than my opinion, without any actual proof or reference to the facts and the real world.
It's hardly opinion:
http://www.copyright.gov/ (http://www.copyright.gov/)
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/)
That is fact.
Here is Nintendo's stance (http://www.nintendo.com/corp/legal.jsp). Note that some of the information is true (ROMS), some is partially true (game copiers though it gets ugly in a hurry (http://www.pcworld.com/article/184075/nintendo_loses_major_antipiracy_lawsuit_in_france.html)) and some is probably strictly opinion (lost jobs). Interestingly, Nintendo has carefully changed their wording regarding Emulators, probably in response to Sony vs Bleem! 1999(?) however, they did have a statement saying emulators are illegal after Coleco vs Atari 1982. So I'm not sure who tripped up on that.
This is opinion (not mine) and it is false:
"It's legal to download and use ROMS for 24 hours, after which those ROMS must be deleted."
Or something along those lines. If the site cites any code, it's probably section 107 of the copyright act (Fair Use). Nowhere in the U.S. copyright that I'm aware of has any sort of clause of this nature.
Here is a nice list of interesting lawsuits:
http://www.patentarcade.com/2009/06/updated-video-game-lawsuits.html (http://www.patentarcade.com/2009/06/updated-video-game-lawsuits.html)
I suspect the list might be incomplete. There is a clarification court case defining exactly what can and can't be copied based on the durability of the media. Unfortunately, I can't, for the life of me, remember who was involved.
Please use Google for any further information or clarification.
-
None of that really applies here.
Q1.) If you buy X-in-1 in retail shop and get an invoice for it, then is it illegal to operate or re-sell that PCB? YES/NO
I'd say this has no longer to do with any copyrights, as once the item is on the market like this, and has been taxed by the government, it is the consumer rights that would protect buyer/seller/re-seller from any liability. Whether the factory can be brought to court and how that varies with state or country is not important here. -- Now, please point out what copyright notice is the one that applies here? Did we not conclude that even original PCBs came without any such proof of originality, so please tell us where do we find this relevant game copyright info, let us read what it says, ok?
Q2.) Was Ultracade found guilty? YES/NO
You are being theoretical and vague, I'm trying to be practical and specific. I think people understood I want to sell MAME and ROMs, while what I'm actually saying is that all that should be FREE, so no one would be selling it. I do not apply this to all games, especially not any new or young games, just the games that are no longer distributed and whose existence is therefore threatened to fall into oblivion and be forgotten - "abandonware".
-
None of that really applies here.
You didn't even click on that first link did you?
Q1.) If you buy X-in-1 in retail shop and get an invoice for it, then is it illegal to operate or re-sell that PCB? YES/NO
I'd say this has no longer to do with any copyrights, as once the item is on the market like this, and has been taxed by the government, it is the consumer rights that would protect buyer/seller/re-seller from any liability. Whether the factory can be brought to court and how that varies with state or country is not important here. -- Now, please point out what copyright notice is the one that applies here? Did we not conclude that even original PCBs came without any such proof of originality, so please tell us where do we find this relevant game copyright info, let us read what it says, ok?
The fact that a particular PCB came without proof of originality has no bearing on the copyright of that game. Once again, taxation on a product has no bearing on the copyright legality of that product. Tax laws don't even address that (I could be wrong and I would take great delight if someone proves otherwise). I gave you the relevant copyright info. It's not my fault you're too lazy to Google for it.
As for liability on the buyer/seller/re-seller. Here, the answer is, it depends. An example would be Lik-Sang getting nailed to the wall for various copyright and patent infringements.
Anyhow, I'm done. If there is no effort shown on your part to partake in Google's mind expanding elixir then there should be no further effort on my part to point out things you should already be searching for. Such as Ultracade's lawsuit, which has some pretty in depth articles out there. Or you can ask Mr. Foley himself. I believe he visits the forum on occasion.
-
Oh, I guess I should apologize if I come of sounding tart. But then again, I don't have to deal with you in RL, so... oh well.
-
I do not suggest anyone should break any laws or ignore any copyrights. Perhaps it is confusing that I pose my questions as examples set in real-world circumstances and from the first person point of view, but that's only to be more illustrative.
Ok, but earlier you said:
Why would everyone be able to freely sell/operate 60-in-1 PCBs, and I can not my home-made 200-in-1 PC?
and
...and so, who is going to object when I operate/sell my home made "200-in-1" MAME based PC?
I guess to be fair, you didn't actually say you intended to sell PCs loaded with mame and roms, but I hope you can see how it appeared that way.
Look, I *legally* bought my JAMMA PCBs, that you all say now are actually illegal (according to something).
I get that in some sense, you *legally* bought these if you didn't know they were illegal. I'm not gonna go googling for it, but I believe many places do have some provision in the law that will not hold you responsible for buying counterfit product if it's reasonable that you could have thought it was legit. Buying them could be a bit of a grey area. Selling and manufacturing them on the other hand is definitely illegal.
Saying the copyrights are no longer valid, or that it's legal to sell mame and roms you don't own, well, that's simply not true. It's not something we all have differing opinions on or anything - it's a fact and you really can't argue about it without looking silly.
Perhaps, but that would also make it that much easier for you to prove it so.
OH COME ON! :laugh2: This statement really made me laugh! Do I really have to prove to you that if the mame license says you can't sell it, that makes it illegal to do so, or that people selling COPYRIGHTED material THEY DO NOT OWN is illegal? It's almost like you want a link to some official government website with an official government seal that has a detailed list of every bootleg, xx in 1 board, and permutation therof that ever existed and says legal or illegal beside each one!
Checkout the links that SavannahLion posted. I didn't look at them myself because I don't feel I need to, but I'm sure the government (which seems to be one of your main concerns) website is going to give you some accurate information.
The issue is not whether you bought a board and got an invoice or whether people who have sold such boards have been convicted or not. You seem to be saying that getting an invoice + no convictions of sellers = it must be legal. There're folks out there everyday selling pot who never get caught - doesn't make it legal (in most countries anyway). Would you need us to direct you to a website that says that's illegal?
...what I'm actually saying is that all that should be FREE, so no one would be selling it.
Mame is free. And I agree with you that roms of old games should be as well (they are available for free actually, but not in the way you're suggesting I guess). IMO The copyright laws are stupid. Stuff gets protected for decades longer than it should. But feeling the laws are stupid and getting invoices and whatnot doesn't change them.
If you're still not convinced that this stuff is illegal after all everyone has said, then :dunno
-
nitz,
C'mon, I'm not really saying those laws are not there, but they do differ from place to place, and even if not they would still be open for interpretation and subject to circumstances. I am trying to understand how all that theory plays out in practice.
Yes, I say: "buying it in retail store and getting an invoice = it IS legal to operate and re-sell". Not to manufacture, as then you would certainly be aware of copyright violation, but as a simple consumer you do not need to know, hence can not be liable. Is there any argument here that opposes this logic? Beside that I mostly agree with everything everyone else said, except that I don't see see how that relates with 'selling pot' on the street. That's the opposite, there is no invoice there, while these x-in-1 are sold in retail stores and taxed, therefore "inspected and approved" by the government.
SavannahLion,
I actually Googled quite a bit, and I did read your links, well what I thought were the important or relevant bits anyway, but you can always be more specific if you wish to avoid misunderstanding. Those are actually good links and they do answer most of my questions from the opening post, thank you. I agree with all that, but now I am talking about the point of view of an unsuspected consumer, or non-informed arcade operator, or arcade cabinet builder who plays stupid along with everyone else...
Example:
- I build arcade cabinet and buy 60-in-1 PCB to complete the machine, then sell it on auction. Would that be disrespecting anyone? Would that make me an ass? Would that hurt anyone anyhow, emotionally, financially? Would I be stupid for buying something which is free for download? Would that be illegal? Is that something you would never do, why exactly?
Question:
- People Making Nintendo Emulators and Nintendo ROMs are Helping Publishers by Making Old Games Available that are No Longer Being Sold by the Copyright Owner. This Does Not Hurt Anyone and Allows Gamers to Play Old Favorites. What's the Problem?
Nintendo:
- The problem is that it's illegal.... As a copyright owner, and creator of such famous characters, only Nintendo has the right to benefit from such valuable assets.
Nintendon't, but if they would release it to the public it would not be illegal any more, arrrgh!! That's just rotten, they would rather no one plays the games if they can not get a dollar out of it. That's like wishing your cow dies just because golden fish promised all the double would happen to your neighbor. And what is worse that little matters in practice since here we are with all these x-in-1 PCBs freely sold. It's not you and me who is profiting, but some guys in China, or wherever, and it's not our fault, but government's for letting that be imported, tho they of course do take their share on the way, so.... hey, wait a second, finally I can see this similarity with drugs!
-
I am failing to see what the actual issue is here, other than Driver-Man doesn't seem to get that the law is the law and all he is saying is that it shouldn't be (gee, THAT's original).
It is NOT legal to operate or resell an illegal board, no matter where/how you obtained it. The situation is black and white and not open for interpretation nor subject to circumstances. It is pure folly to assume that because something is available for sale (which is all that the "sold in retail stores and taxed" means) that it is legal and does not infringe.
I see bootleg DVDs for sale all the time -- are they legal ? No and you would never think so if you have even an ounce of grey matter bouncing around inside that cavernous skull.
As far as selling an xx-in-1 cabinet and who that disrespects, it disrespects the various IP owners. I don't think that many folks here worry about disrespecting the companies that own the rights to the ROMs, but this is a MAME-friendly site, so I expect that most would be pissed off at the disrespect that it shows the MAMEDevs.
Again, same old stuff (where is Hoopz with his summary?) ... nothing new, except for the OP's determination in insisting that available for sale == legal.
-
i think i feel a little dumber after reading this thread.
-
None of that really applies here.
Q1.) If you buy X-in-1 in retail shop and get an invoice for it, then is it illegal to operate or re-sell that PCB? YES/NO
I'd say this has no longer to do with any copyrights, as once the item is on the market like this, and has been taxed by the government, it is the consumer rights that would protect buyer/seller/re-seller from any liability. Whether the factory can be brought to court and how that varies with state or country is not important here. -- Now, please point out what copyright notice is the one that applies here? Did we not conclude that even original PCBs came without any such proof of originality, so please tell us where do we find this relevant game copyright info, let us read what it says, ok?
It's still an illegal product, It's illegal to resell or operate. Ignorance is no defence. Being taxed by the government has nothing to do with it, how were they meant to know the exact legal status of the item, that's your responsibility, just as it is when buying any other product. If I sell and invoice you for a 'luxury powdered substance' and pay the government what they're due do think think the cops are going to be any more lenient on you when they find you reselling it on the street corner?
Q2.) Was Ultracade found guilty? YES/NO
You are being theoretical and vague, I'm trying to be practical and specific. I think people understood I want to sell MAME and ROMs, while what I'm actually saying is that all that should be FREE, so no one would be selling it. I do not apply this to all games, especially not any new or young games, just the games that are no longer distributed and whose existence is therefore threatened to fall into oblivion and be forgotten - "abandonware".
'Should be free' is your opinion, but unless the companies release them for free, or the copyrights expire, they can't be considered free. If you want to do something about that you'll have to somehow get all copyrights shortened, or conditionally made to expire once a product has 'no commercial value'. Until that happens (which it won't) it's still a legal minefield. Most of the boards you're talking about are running unlicensed copies of MAME anyway, so it would still be illegal even then. Note, these things also run Pacman / Ms Pacman / Galaga and so are in DIRECT competition with the new rereleases Namco are pushing out, that would be your biggest threat.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/24691/InDepth_Exploring_Ultracades_Alleged_Counterfeit_Arcade_Game_Racket.php (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/24691/InDepth_Exploring_Ultracades_Alleged_Counterfeit_Arcade_Game_Racket.php)
is still the latest update on Ultracade / Foley afaik.
I believe there was a previous case where they were forced to stop using unlicensed Namco property too, it's been mentioned a few times.
-
Your own personal moral justification of something doesn't change the law.
Many of the classic Nintendo, Arcade, etc. games ARE still being sold by the copyright owners via Virtual Console and XBLA Gameroom, so the "abandonware" (threw up in my mouth as I typed that) argument really doesn't fly anyway.
-
There is a double standard when dealing with x in 1's vs full blown mames with Front Ends. Just because the games can be tidly fitted onto a small PCB and installed in almost any classic cabinet, they seem "ok" but we all know they are just as illegal as running mame.
Here's another thing to consider; operators that ran "bootleg" versions of popular games in the 80's would probably just run mame in a newer more "money making" cabinet today. What's the difference to the bootleg operator? None. They were willing to break the law back then and they still are now. The term "bootleg" feels less severe than the world "illegal" as it's used to describe mame machines. But that old hacked Ms Pacman or Frogger cabinet with a "bootleg" PCB was/is just as illegal as running the game today in mame.
-
I don't see see how that relates with 'selling pot' on the street. That's the opposite, there is no invoice there, while these x-in-1 are sold in retail stores and taxed, therefore "inspected and approved" by the government.
What, your drug dealer doesn't give you an invoice? :lol
But seriously, I know my example was a bit simplistic and obvious, but I was just trying to make the point that just because someone sells something and doesn't get in trouble doesn't mean it's legal. And something being sold in a retail store and taxed does not mean it's inspected and approved by the government. Do you really think the government inspects every single thing that ever gets sold in a store?
C'mon, I'm not really saying those laws are not there, but they do differ from place to place, and even if not they would still be open for interpretation and subject to circumstances. I am trying to understand how all that theory plays out in practice.
Ok, I sort of get where you're coming from. Sometimes something can be against the law, but in real life has a net effect of not really being against the law. A good example of this is that where I live, it is actually against the law to smoke within 30 meters of the entrance of a public building. However, the cops don't enforce it unless people complain, and it seems that no one ever complains, so I see people doing this every day. Are they breaking the law? Technically yes, but a law is virtually meaningless if it's not enforced which I guess is the case most of the time when it comes to xx in 1 boards and the like. Maybe this is the point you're trying to make, and if so, I get it.
BUT
Yes, I say: "buying it in retail store and getting an invoice = it IS legal to operate and re-sell".
That's just not true in any country that recognizes copyright law (which is most if not all developed countries I would imagine). If you were to operate and re-sell one board, the chances of you getting caught and getting into trouble are slim to none. But don't kid yourself. It ain't legal.
When I first discovered emulation about 10 years ago, I really wanted to download a NES emulator and the roms so that I could enjoy all those old games again (I stupidly sold my NES and games in the mid '90s to buy some SNES games :banghead:). This was in the days before Nintendo started selling many of them again on the virtual console. So I just kind of thought to myself, "Well, Nintendo doesn't sell these anymore, so I could go on ebay and pay inflated prices for 10+ year old cartridges that might not even work properly, with Nintendo never seeing any of that money anyway, or I could just download the roms for free, so I'm just gonna do that!" But never for a second did I think that downloading the roms was legal. Whether or not they're still being sold or anyone is making money from them or anyone would get hurt blah blah blah is not relevant. If they're under copyright, it's illegal to deal in unlicensed copies of them. Morally however, it's not a problem IMO.
I am failing to see what the actual issue is here, other than Driver-Man doesn't seem to get that the law is the law and all he is saying is that it shouldn't be (gee, THAT's original).
You're absolutely right Cheffo! You summed up all of our rambling in one nice sentence. Reading that just made me realize that I should probably just walk away now. Thank you! :notworthy:
I am slowly...backing...away...from the thread now. ;)
-
It is NOT legal to operate or resell an illegal board, no matter where/how you obtained it.
It IS legal if it is taxed by the government, free to import and available in retail stores. Hello?! There are/were many products on the market that violated various copyrights, but that is nothing you are supposed to know about, and in most cases is impossible to know without disassembling or reverse engineering the thing.
You THINK it SHOULD BE illegal, perhaps you think so about alcohol too, but as long as the customs let this item pass the border and you can buy it in retail store, get invoice and pay GST, then TECHNICALLY it is LEGAL, and "technically" is all what matters in court. Where do you draw your conclusions from anyway? Can you give some other examples of illegal stuff being freely imported and sold in shops everywhere? That would be obvious contradiction, those two go together, one implies the other.
I'm not talking about whether it violates copyrights, or is bad for health, whether I like it or think how it should be, I'm simply making conclusion from what is obvious, and I'm not even saying it makes sense, it doesn't. But hey, there was once real cocaine in Coca-Cola, and that was legal for a while, or so they say.
The situation is black and white and not open for interpretation nor subject to circumstances. It is pure folly to assume that because something is available for sale (which is all that the "sold in retail stores and taxed" means) that it is legal and does not infringe.
I find it strange you express your assumptions with such certainty.. it's not that you may fool others, but if you keep like that you will actually make yourself believe in your own imagination. -- Look, the part of the reason you pay taxes is so your government will take care of you and not allow illegal items be available on the legal market. If it is available in stores and therefore taxed by the government, then it is AUTOMATICALLY legal. That's kind of the definition of what "legal" means.
LEGAL ITEM = FREE TO IMPORT, AVAILABLE IN RETAIL STORES ....hello?!?!
I see bootleg DVDs for sale all the time -- are they legal ? No and you would never think so if you have even an ounce of grey matter bouncing around inside that cavernous skull.
Where in the world do you see similarity?
Are those DVDs available in retail stores and can you get an invoice for it?
-
I'll come out and say it since no one else seems to. Driver-Man, you are immensely stupid.
You are drawing conclusions about the legality of a particular item based on the actions/laws in completely unrelated areas. Worse, you have assumptions about people at customs, the actions of the seller and a set of uninformed notions about tax and import laws. If you had bothered to read the links I gave you, the answer is in Section 1201.
I have cited several sources, more than once, showing the folly of your flawed logic and reasoning. Where are your cited sources that support your argument?
At this point I'm inclined to believe that you're simply trolling. Obviously misleading statements such as your Coca-Cola comment, your refusal to read any of the citations given, as well as your refusal to actually give any citations supporting your view point would lead me to no other conclusion.
-
It's still an illegal product, It's illegal to resell or operate. Ignorance is no defence. Being taxed by the government has nothing to do with it, how were they meant to know the exact legal status of the item, that's your responsibility, just as it is when buying any other product.
At least we are down to last question/argument, thank you everyone!
Ok, again we know all the opinions, so I will not repeat any more of mine, the question now is how do we settle this? Shall we ask someone? Maybe have a look in some dictionary, Wikipedia? What legislation could possibly hold the definite answer to this question. How do we prove this either way?
If I sell and invoice you for a 'luxury powdered substance' and pay the government what they're due do think think the cops are going to be any more lenient on you when they find you reselling it on the street corner?
That is not it. You are counterfeiting invoice there too. There is a difference between infringing copyright and being illegal. There is a list which probably can be found at the customs office web site, the list of every single item category, from toothpick to airplane, including arcade PCBs, cabinets and arcade parts, together with liquor, tobacco, heroin... it defines legality, tax rate, fines, penalties, and such... but, infringing copyright, no one can be expected to know about it. -- And, I'm not making any justification or moral whatever, just figuring out the facts... I thought we are all on the same side here, I still have no idea why some people seem to not like what I say.
'Should be free' is your opinion, but unless the companies release them for free, or the copyrights expire, they can't be considered free. If you want to do something about that you'll have to somehow get all copyrights shortened, or conditionally made to expire once a product has 'no commercial value'. Until that happens (which it won't) it's still a legal minefield. Most of the boards you're talking about are running unlicensed copies of MAME anyway, so it would still be illegal even then. Note, these things also run Pacman / Ms Pacman / Galaga and so are in DIRECT competition with the new rereleases Namco are pushing out, that would be your biggest threat.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/24691/InDepth_Exploring_Ultracades_Alleged_Counterfeit_Arcade_Game_Racket.php (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/24691/InDepth_Exploring_Ultracades_Alleged_Counterfeit_Arcade_Game_Racket.php)
is still the latest update on Ultracade / Foley afaik.
I believe there was a previous case where they were forced to stop using unlicensed Namco property too, it's been mentioned a few times.
So, Ultracade bribed government with $100,000 and went back to continue as usual. No actual copyright owner pressed charges? So, who pressed charges - gamasutra? What in the world were they trying to do? Game companies and actual copyright holders never complained to authorities about Ultracade, it was all gamasutra playing some sort of "arcade police", but at the end game companies stopped to respond to gamasutra, they seem to become bothered of gamasutra pulling public statements from them, as if companies were not really sure to actually have proper copyrights, or were utterly uninterested in the case, none of which makes sense, but that's what happened, right?
-
I'll come out and say it since no one else seems to. Driver-Man, you are immensely stupid.
You are drawing conclusions about the legality of a particular item based on the actions/laws in completely unrelated areas. Worse, you have assumptions about people at customs, the actions of the seller and a set of uninformed notions about tax and import laws. If you had bothered to read the links I gave you, the answer is in Section 1201.
I have cited several sources, more than once, showing the folly of your flawed logic and reasoning. Where are your cited sources that support your argument?
At this point I'm inclined to believe that you're simply trolling. Obviously misleading statements such as your Coca-Cola comment, your refusal to read any of the citations given, as well as your refusal to actually give any citations supporting your view point would lead me to no other conclusion.
Why insults, what is wrong with you?
You are waving hands, the answer is not in section 1201.
I have no idea how to prove either opinion, and I do not mind to stand corrected, there is nothing stupid about being wrong, but being an ass, that's just not cool... so, go away if you are happy with your current opinion, you are the one who is trolling. Although, I like your temper, I welcome you to stay so I can prove you wrong and make you blush like a little girl.
-
Whats up with this site lately? Where are these people coming from?
-
It is NOT legal to operate or resell an illegal board, no matter where/how you obtained it.
It IS legal if it is taxed by the government, free to import and available in retail stores
Where the hell do you get this from ?
I have had this discussion, live and face-to-face with actual, real, IP lawyers.
If you want to split the hair on legal vs infringing, then fine, but, unless you actually are a lawyer, stop pretending to be one.
Show me the precedent or shut the ---fudgesicle--- up.
-
Are those DVDs available in retail stores and can you get an invoice for it?
Bought one today in a retail store and got a receipt for it.
:blah:
-
I Think this might be related.
http://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=110413 (http://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=110413)
-
I'll come out and say it since no one else seems to. Driver-Man, you are immensely stupid.
You are drawing conclusions about the legality of a particular item based on the actions/laws in completely unrelated areas. Worse, you have assumptions about people at customs, the actions of the seller and a set of uninformed notions about tax and import laws. If you had bothered to read the links I gave you, the answer is in Section 1201.
I have cited several sources, more than once, showing the folly of your flawed logic and reasoning. Where are your cited sources that support your argument?
At this point I'm inclined to believe that you're simply trolling. Obviously misleading statements such as your Coca-Cola comment, your refusal to read any of the citations given, as well as your refusal to actually give any citations supporting your view point would lead me to no other conclusion.
Why insults, what is wrong with you?
You are waving hands, the answer is not in section 1201.
You're full of ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---. How about citing a source for a change? Or better yet, explaining why section 1201 is not the answer as you put it?
I have no idea how to prove either opinion
Oh that's right, you're incapable of using Google. :laugh2:
, and I do not mind to stand corrected, there is nothing stupid about being wrong, but being an ass, that's just not cool... so, go away if you are happy with your current opinion, you are the one who is trolling. Although, I like your temper, I welcome you to stay so I can prove you wrong and make you blush like a little girl.
Hey, when you create the forum, then you can "invite me to stay." Otherwise, it looks like I'm the one proving you wrong, doing a pretty decent job of it as well. Oh, and double check that avatar.
-
Show me the precedent or sh....
If it was not "illegal" than there would not be any, no one would even be pressing any charges in such cases, so that's something you might try to show me.
Would you believe me that your PC, your Macintosh, your Windows, or Linux even, your graphic card probably best example... there are hundreds of violated copyrights, in both hardware and software. And regardless of whether ATI might tomorrow sue Nvidia for billion dollars and win over copyright infringement, you as a consumer will not be held liable and will still be able to sell offending piece of hardware, without anyone giving ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- what went between Nvidia and ATI in the meantime, and no matter how many copyrights were violated there the item itself would not be dimmed illegal to buy, poses or re-sell. No?
How about citing a source for a change? Or better yet, explaining why section 1201 is not the answer as you put it?
I am not trying to dispute those laws, only finding a hole where they do not apply in given circumstances. -- When the package with my PCB arrived, it contained notice from the customs office. It said they opened the box and inspected the item, and they obviously found it to be perfectly legal since they forwarded all that to me. Should I call them back and say how they were immensely stupid? Does it not strike you as strange that would be the only item in the world that is illegal, yet taxed and available in stores?
-
It's still an illegal product, It's illegal to resell or operate. Ignorance is no defence. Being taxed by the government has nothing to do with it, how were they meant to know the exact legal status of the item, that's your responsibility, just as it is when buying any other product.
At least we are down to last question/argument, thank you everyone!
Ok, again we know all the opinions, so I will not repeat any more of mine, the question now is how do we settle this? Shall we ask someone? Maybe have a look in some dictionary, Wikipedia? What legislation could possibly hold the definite answer to this question. How do we prove this either way?
It's common sense,which you appear to be lacking. Selling an illegal product is illegal. A product which infringes on copyrights IS ILLEGAL. There exists no mechanism whereby an illegal product magically becomes legal because somebody sold it to you.
If I sell and invoice you for a 'luxury powdered substance' and pay the government what they're due do think think the cops are going to be any more lenient on you when they find you reselling it on the street corner?
That is not it. You are counterfeiting invoice there too. There is a difference between infringing copyright and being illegal. There is a list which probably can be found at the customs office web site, the list of every single item category, from toothpick to airplane, including arcade PCBs, cabinets and arcade parts, together with liquor, tobacco, heroin... it defines legality, tax rate, fines, penalties, and such... but, infringing copyright, no one can be expected to know about it. -- And, I'm not making any justification or moral whatever, just figuring out the facts... I thought we are all on the same side here, I still have no idea why some people seem to not like what I say.
There is no difference. Infringing on copyrights is illegal. I'm only counterfeiting an invoice in that I'm not supplying the full details, just as your invoice for an illegal PCB isn't really supplying full details and above board.
'Should be free' is your opinion, but unless the companies release them for free, or the copyrights expire, they can't be considered free. If you want to do something about that you'll have to somehow get all copyrights shortened, or conditionally made to expire once a product has 'no commercial value'. Until that happens (which it won't) it's still a legal minefield. Most of the boards you're talking about are running unlicensed copies of MAME anyway, so it would still be illegal even then. Note, these things also run Pacman / Ms Pacman / Galaga and so are in DIRECT competition with the new rereleases Namco are pushing out, that would be your biggest threat.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/24691/InDepth_Exploring_Ultracades_Alleged_Counterfeit_Arcade_Game_Racket.php (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/24691/InDepth_Exploring_Ultracades_Alleged_Counterfeit_Arcade_Game_Racket.php)
is still the latest update on Ultracade / Foley afaik.
I believe there was a previous case where they were forced to stop using unlicensed Namco property too, it's been mentioned a few times.
So, Ultracade bribed government with $100,000 and went back to continue as usual. No actual copyright owner pressed charges? So, who pressed charges - gamasutra? What in the world were they trying to do? Game companies and actual copyright holders never complained to authorities about Ultracade, it was all gamasutra playing some sort of "arcade police", but at the end game companies stopped to respond to gamasutra, they seem to become bothered of gamasutra pulling public statements from them, as if companies were not really sure to actually have proper copyrights, or were utterly uninterested in the case, none of which makes sense, but that's what happened, right?
Uh, did you read the article? Ultracade ended up withdrawing a whole range of their games, Foley ended up in court? It's not Gamasutra vs. Ultracade / Foley, they were just presenting the facts and doing some research of their own. I think the fact that it came down to that tells you that something wrong was being done by somebody?
You seem determined to prove here that you can legally sell / operate cabinets with xx-in-1 multi-game boards. You can't. One call to Namco's legal department, pointing them at your website / auction, and showing that said multi-game contained an illegal copy of Pacman, MsPacman and Galaga, which they themselves are trying to sell to arcades as part of their 20th / 25th Anniversary packs and you would be hearing from their lawyers. I'd love to hear your defence against them. "Sorry, I don't care if you own the rights to those games, and I know this is an unauthorized PCB imported from HK, but it's ok, I can sell it because I paid for it and the government took a cut, here is my invoice" Do you think the courts, or Namco would seriously care for your argument? Do Namco care that the government took money from the sale of an illegal copy of their game? Your defence would be laughed out of court.
(and for that matter, none of this grants you the right to use the code that *I* wrote for MAME either, there is an explicit no-commercial use clause, and again, through your mythical process of an illegal product becoming legal, I am not being compensated in any way either, I'm not even a US citizen, so quite how your government taking a cut is meant to make things better for me I don't know)
-
Would you believe me that your PC, your Macintosh, your Windows, or Linux even, your graphic card probably best example... there are hundreds of violated copyrights, in both hardware and software. And regardless of whether ATI might tomorrow sue Nvidia for billion dollars and win over copyright infringement, you as a consumer will not be held liable and will still be able to sell offending piece of hardware, without anyone giving ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- what went between Nvidia and ATI in the meantime, and ....
Once again, your inability to do the research shows through. nVidia/ATI, AMD/Intel already did sue each other for more money than most of us make in a lifetime. The difference here is that this has all been settled and fees have been paid and interestingly, permission granted in some of those cases. The comparison between the business model of these company and a video game company is a poor one. The only similarity I can recall is Ms. Pac-Man. Once again, an agreement was made between the owner of the copyright and the violator of that copyright and the damages were paid for in some fashion. No such agreement exists between the copyright holder and the X in 1 boards you seem to want to find an imaginary loophole for.
no matter how many copyrights were violated there the item itself would not be dimmed illegal to buy, poses or re-sell. No?
If you do not know the story of Tengen, then you sir, cannot be deemed a video gamer. :laugh2:
I am not trying to dispute those laws, only finding a hole where they do not apply in given circumstances. -- When the package with my PCB arrived, it contained notice from the customs office. It said they opened the box and inspected the item, and they obviously found it to be perfectly legal since they forwarded all that to me. Should I call them back and say how they were immensely stupid? Does it not strike you as strange that would be the only item in the world that is illegal, yet taxed and available in stores?
Once again, research would aid your argument and understanding how these laws function would go a long way in looking less like an idiot looking to make a buck. Here is a link to U.S. customs (https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/271/~/ipr---how-to-apply-%26-record-copyright-with-cbp) for the other people in this forum who are actually capable of doing the research.
-
This argument almost seems related to old artwork and jewlery and stuff that was stolen from Jews by the Natzis in WWII. When the original owners' families are contacted and can prove the item belonged to their family, it is returned to them and it doesn't matter if that last owner paid a zillion dollars for it, it was stolen, it's still considered stolen and the ignorant last "owner" is the one that gets the short end of the stick. x in 1's are illegal no matter how many times it's been resold or how many invoices were made for its' purchase, it's just as illegal as when it was produced new. The fact that the boards "slip into" old cabs real nice-like just makes it a lot easier to ignore their illegality and perpetuates the double standard of PCB vs full blown mame.
-
Does it not strike you as strange that would be the only item in the world that is illegal, yet taxed and available in stores?
Or like the guy who was selling marijuana seeds for years by mail order and store front, issuing receipts and paying his taxes ?
It's a good thing that paying those taxes made it legal because he would have gotten 5 years if ... oh wait a minute ...
-
or, let's give another example.
You buy a PC, you have your invoice, it's preinstalled with Windows and Office.
The copies of Windows and Office aren't legal, they've been installed from pirate copies of the discs using cloned keys, and they're infringing on Microsoft's copyrights and licensing.
Microsoft's Genuine Advantage software recognizes this, and promptly starts disabling features of your install of Windows and nagging you to buy a genuine copy, and will eventually become deactivated.
Despite 'legally purchasing' your PC, you now can't use it properly.
Microsoft DO NOT consider your illegal copy of windows to be legal, they only offer a means to upgrade it to a legal copy in exchange for your illegal copy, they are under no obligation to do this at all, and if you look carefully at the terms you MUST submit your counterfeit windows CD. Most systems sold like this don't even come with a CD, it's all pre-installed. This is a *VERY* common situation***. No high quality CD = you MUST buy another copy to be legal. Operating the system without doing so is illegal, and Microsoft make this quite clear. This is no different to operating a counterfeit / infringing 60-in-1 board on location.
Your invoice means _nothing_ for the legality of the product.
*** and is in fact the main target of the scheme, people who download Windows know all about the cracks and ways to bypass the systems, people who unknowingly thought they bought a legal product from a shop don't.
Q:
What happens to customers who have mistakenly purchased a counterfeit version of Windows?
A:
Microsoft advises users who learn that their copy of Windows is not genuine to take the following steps:
Learn more about how to recognize genuine Windows at www.microsoft.com/genuine (http://www.microsoft.com/genuine).
Return to the reseller who provided the software to seek redress.
If their reseller is unable to help, users can take advantage of Microsoft genuine Windows offers designed to help victims of counterfeit software. To learn about the genuine Windows offer, customers can read about it later in this FAQ.
Users can also purchase a genuine copy of Windows from a local reseller.
Q:
What is the genuine Windows offer?
A:
The Microsoft genuine Windows offer is designed to help customers who unknowingly purchased counterfeit versions of Windows XP by offering those who qualify a complimentary copy or electronic license key for a genuine copy of Windows XP.
Q:
What are the details of the genuine Windows offer?
A:
To help customers who unknowingly purchased a counterfeit version of Windows XP, Microsoft has created two genuine Windows offers for those who qualify:
Complimentary offer: Microsoft will make a complimentary copy of Windows XP available to customers who have been sold counterfeit Windows. Customers will be required to submit a proof of purchase, the counterfeit CD, and a counterfeit report with details of their purchase. Only high-quality counterfeit Windows will qualify for the complimentary offer.
Electronic License Key Offer: Microsoft will offer an alternative for customers who find out via the WGA validation process that they are not running genuine Windows, but do not qualify for, or choose not to take advantage of, the complimentary offer. These customers will be able to license a Windows Genuine Advantage Kit for Windows XP directly from Microsoft for a special on-line purchase price. The Windows Genuine Advantage Kit for Windows XP will include a new 25-character Product Key and a Windows Product Key Update tool that will allow customers to convert their counterfeit copy to genuine Windows XP electronically.
-
This argument almost seems related to old artwork and jewlery and stuff that was stolen from Jews by the Natzis in WWII. When the original owners' families are contacted and can prove the item belonged to their family, it is returned to them and it doesn't matter if that last owner paid a zillion dollars for it, it was stolen, it's still considered stolen and the ignorant last "owner" is the one that gets the short end of the stick.
I believe this is what has suspected to have happened to some missing paintings. They have gone into private collectors hands who make no bones about this sort of thing yet don't publicly announce they have them. The private collector in question might even be the Jewish family who the painting(s) were stolen from. My point being, Unidroit Convention limits claims on stolen cultural artifacts to fifty years. Would a painting stolen from a Jew by the Nazi's fall under that? If so, then the paintings and other works of art "permanently" disappearing may be stolen by the very families they were stolen from because they were unable to find proof of ownership.
-
Haze, hes either not going to read that or not understand it. Its like talking to genesim or a wall.
-
Its like talking to genesim or a wall.
I had the same thought.
-
"Sorry, I don't care if you own the rights to those games, and I know this is an unauthorized PCB imported from HK, but it's ok, I can sell it because I paid for it and the government took a cut, here is my invoice" Do you think the courts, or Namco would seriously care for your argument?
Yes, I'm saying the "consumer" is not liable, but victim. Namco should go after the factory or perhaps importer/distributor to find out if they were aware of copyright breach. I'm also saying that even importer and local distributor would not be liable if they can prove they were not aware of any copyright infringement. -- All you have to do is point out a case, or few, where consumer or re-seller was brought to court and found guilty, or at least brought to court and charged.
Once again, your inability to do the research shows through. nVidia/ATI, AMD/Intel already did sue each other for more money than most of us make in a lifetime. The difference here is that this has all been settled and fees have been paid and interestingly, permission granted in some of those cases. The comparison between the business model of these company and a video game company is a poor one.
...
Once again, research would aid your argument and understanding how these laws function would go a long way in looking less like an idiot looking to make a buck. Here is a link to U.S. customs for the other people in this forum who are actually capable of doing the research.
I finally see why are you so angry, you are jealous because you think I'm making money out of this, somehow.
I already told you I PAID for my PCBs, I did not make them, nor did I sell them. I also did not violate any copyrights, I'm the VICTIM, I would not know it was illegal if it was not for you. CUSTOMS OFFICE DECLARED IT LEGAL, so whom should I believe? If I wanted to make money that is the last thing I would be dealing with. I would rather take on empty COMs and re-sell them for mobile/embedded market. That would sell off thousands times faster. You are being pathetic, you hate me for all the wrong reasons.
Did you actually say anything there? You are not making any arguments really, you're still waving hands and saying all is written "somewhere else" and all is so clear yet you can not articulate any actual reasoning or interpretation here. It's all explained on the Google website, right? -- So, you agree nVidia, ATI/AMD, Intel already did sue each other, and therefore these products everyone has/had were illegal at some point in time... and it was illegal to poses, buy and sell offending hardware. Yes?
=====================
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-rambus-patent-lawsuit-ram,9502.html (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-rambus-patent-lawsuit-ram,9502.html)
- "Nvidia Found Guilty of Infringing Rambus Patents - In summer 2008, Rambus claimed that "a number of Nvidia products" with memory controllers for SDR, DDR, DDR2, DDR3, GDDR, and GDDR3 SDRAM infringe upon 17 Rambus patents, leading to the expected lawsuit.
Last Friday, the U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Nvidia violated three of five patents held by Rambus which could lead to a possible U.S. ban on the import of some Nvidia products."
So anyone who has, buys or sells this offending hardware is breaking the law and can be held accountable for trafficking or possession of illegal item? Or maybe, the government needs to issue a BAN on the particular item first?
If you do not know the story of Tengen, then you sir, cannot be deemed a video gamer.
You are failing to make an argument. All you have to do is point out a case, or few, where consumer or re-seller was brought to court and found guilty, or at least brought to court and charged.
-
Is this entire argument as simple as Driver-Man thinking that only criminal law (e.g. where charges would be laid) is the only determination of legality ?
-
I'm making it really simple for you here - all you have to do is point out a case, or few, where consumer or re-seller was brought to court and found guilty, or at least brought to court and charged.
-
So, you require CRIMINAL charges as evidence ?
-
So, you require CRIMINAL charges as evidence ?
I do think that falls under "criminal law", but I do not see what does that matter. I just want to know about facts, any court case that is related to this sure is argument. That is how you proved to me that manufacturing of these X-in-1 is illegal in US, and sometimes even prosecuted.
Is there anything specific you would like me to present? I can not think of any definite proof, or place to find one, but perhaps you can give me an idea what kind of argument will convince you to agree with me?
-
I'm making it really simple for you here - all you have to do is point out a case, or few, where consumer or re-seller was brought to court and found guilty, or at least brought to court and charged.
The Microsoft stuff I gave you should be all you need.
Microsoft take DIRECT action against their 'customers' by DISABLING the illegal product. Yes, they are the victim, and yes, in certain circumstances Microsoft will exchange the illegal product for a legal one. The fact that the customer is the victim does not change the legal status of the item. Microsoft could, if they choose, offer no exchange program, and drag all these people through the legal system, but have chosen a more customer-friendly approach. (and let the RIAA take the '90 year old disabled grandma dragged into court' headlines)
You bought some PCBs which are illegal, you got screwed, tough s**t. Namco don't offer any similar process to replace your product with a legal one (and in this case, it would come down to far more than Namco) so you're stuck with an Illegal one. Namco have no direct way of disabling these xx-in-1 boards, but if they could, they probably would.
I've given you a real-world example of where buying a product, and having an invoice for it does not make it any more legal, and in the same case, a situation where the actual rights holder of the illegal software can disable the end user's illegal copy (which by your logic, shouldn't be possible, because the software became legal the second you bought it in a store, with the PC and invoice)
-
I already told you I PAID for my PCBs, I did not make them, nor did I sell them. I also did not violate any copyrights, I'm the VICTIM, I would not know it was illegal if it was not for you.
Lets try another approach. Go to the website of where you bought the PCB from. Does it acknowledge the copyrights and declare the board licensed and say they are used with permission? Just for a comparison, here is the webpage to buy Marvel VS Capcom 2 for xbox live:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/m/marvelvscapcom2xboxlivearcade/ (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/m/marvelvscapcom2xboxlivearcade/)
see whats at the bottom? See how it says "USED WITH PERMISSION" ? That makes them liable if its not. As for you not knowing, have you ever been pulled over for speeding and told the cop "I didnt know the speed limit was only 40?" Did it work? Didn't think so, you still have to pay the fine.
-
Whats up with this site lately? Where are these people coming from?
+1 :dunno
-
You buy a PC, you have your invoice, it's preinstalled with Windows and Office.
The copies of Windows and Office aren't legal, they've been installed from pirate copies of the discs using cloned keys, and they're infringing on Microsoft's copyrights and licensing.
Despite 'legally purchasing' your PC, you now can't use it properly.
Are you saying some retail stores are selling PCs with illegal copy of Windows and giving tax invoice for it? In that case the buyer is entitled to recover damages from the store that sold it. Again buyer is not liable to be prosecuted or charged with anything, if such store exists at all. There are no damages you caused and can be responsible to recover, unless you are the one who is installing illegal copies. Also, if you bought them with intention to re-sell and knew about the violation, then you could be charged as well, but again, I want to know about actual court cases, MS can say whatever they want, that still doesn't mean it can really stand in court.
I've given you a real-world example of where buying a product...
Ok, we are discussing it now, though it would be better if we could stick with arcades, games and emulators.
I also gave you real-world examples...
1.) I have written statement from the custom office that they inspected the item. I do not remember the wording but I believe it was in fact a declaration that item is legal. That's what they were inspecting it for.
What's your response to this?
2.) U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Nvidia violated three of five patents held by Rambus which could lead to a possible U.S. ban on the import of some Nvidia products. -- So, anyone who has, buys or sells this offending hardware is breaking the law and can be held accountable for trafficking or possession of illegal item? Or maybe, the government needs to issue a BAN on the particular item first? YES/NO
What say you, please?
-
You know what, Driver-Man ... just put your machine on route. Chances are you won't have a problem unless somebody decides to report you.
I see these boards on route all the time, know they are neither legal nor licensed and have never bothered to report one.
Your lack of legal understanding and arcade acumen notwithstanding, I wouldn't expect anybody to turn you in.
FWIW, the message that you got from Customs, upon which you seem to base your entire argument (yet conveniently misplaced) most likely just said that they inspected your package, found it not to contradict the declaration and found no reason to reject it. They would be hard-pressed to say more since Customs and Excise is a federal agency and is not empowered, nor informed, to enforce laws which may well be set at the local level.
At the very least, your boards are all MAME-based and in violation of the MAME license and you have now been informed of that by one of the MAMEDevs (you know, one of the guys whose rights you want to violate). And, obviously, you have no license for the ROMS and have been informed of that by people who are far more aware of all of these products and their licensing than you are.
You can no longer claim ignorance as a defence, although it seems to be in plentiful supply around you.
:afro:
-
1.) I have written statement from the custom office that they inspected the item. I do not remember the wording but I believe it was in fact a declaration that item is legal. That's what they were inspecting it for.
What's your response to this?
You need to post a copy of declaration before asking us to render judgement. Duh!
I'll bet I have bought more of these boards than you have and have NEVER received any declaration that the product was legal or authorized for use.
-
But hey, there was once real cocaine in Coca-Cola, and that was legal for a while, or so they say.
But cocaine wasn't illegal then, was it ? It was actually commonly marketed, as was heroin.
:dizzy:
-
Once again, your inability to do the research shows through. nVidia/ATI, AMD/Intel already did sue each other for more money than most of us make in a lifetime. The difference here is that this has all been settled and fees have been paid and interestingly, permission granted in some of those cases. The comparison between the business model of these company and a video game company is a poor one.
...
Once again, research would aid your argument and understanding how these laws function would go a long way in looking less like an idiot looking to make a buck. Here is a link to U.S. customs for the other people in this forum who are actually capable of doing the research.
I finally see why are you so angry, you are jealous because you think I'm making money out of this, somehow.
Hardly angry, annoyed is more like it. Annoyed at your inability to grasp basic concepts and your inability to cite sources (which you want everyone else but you to do. However, above all is your inability to Search for answers.
I already told you I PAID for my PCBs, I did not make them, nor did I sell them. I also did not violate any copyrights, I'm the VICTIM,
As any person in any country other than the U.S. claiming to be an innocent victim does not fly. The U.S. has this weird mentality about what it means to be a victim. You are not a victim. You are just trying to justify something that should have been obvious from the get go.
I would not know it was illegal if it was not for you. CUSTOMS OFFICE DECLARED IT LEGAL, so whom should I believe? If I wanted to make money that is the last thing I would be dealing with. I would rather take on empty COMs and re-sell them for mobile/embedded market. That would sell off thousands times faster. You are being pathetic, you hate me for all the wrong reasons.
I posted the link to customs that explains how copyrights are handled you ass. Saying that a Customs official let something into this country, therfor making it legal, is an argument that absolutely does not hold water. It's asinine. It's pathetic. It's an epic FAIL. Even a minimal amount of research into how U.S. Customs works would tell you otherwise. ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---, an hour long documentary on the History Channel would enlighten anyone beyond what you think you know about customs. Since your Search-Fu is clearly broken, go to cbp.gov and start your research there. Read the links I give you for a change instead of arguing the wrong side of a point.
Did you actually say anything there? You are not making any arguments really, you're still waving hands and saying all is written "somewhere else" and all is so clear yet you can not articulate any actual reasoning or interpretation here. It's all explained on the Google website, right? -- So, you agree nVidia, ATI/AMD, Intel already did sue each other, and therefore these products everyone has/had were illegal at some point in time... and it was illegal to poses, buy and sell offending hardware. Yes?
I articulated it well enough, I also presented links. You however are the one waving your hands trying to justify something. You ---fouled up beyond all recognition--- up, accept it. You purchased the X-in-1 board, you are the one that should have known better. Then you come onto a board to somehow justify your purchase?
If you do not know the story of Tengen, then you sir, cannot be deemed a video gamer.
You are failing to make an argument. All you have to do is point out a case, or few, where consumer or re-seller was brought to court and found guilty, or at least brought to court and charged.
The immense stupidity of this statement is enough. Your ineptitude for basic search engine utilization is pretty clear at this point. I've asked you more than once for your citations. Of which I have seen none.
But hey, there was once real cocaine in Coca-Cola, and that was legal for a while, or so they say.
But cocaine wasn't illegal then, was it ? It was actually commonly marketed, as was heroin.
:dizzy:
In 1885. It was taxed but restricted by 1915 (or thereabouts) and finally a controlled substance by 19 er... 70?
How do I know this? Oh right, I did research. Pretty cool concept.
FWIW, the message that you got from Customs, upon which you seem to base your entire argument (yet conveniently misplaced) most likely just said that they inspected your package, found it not to contradict the declaration and found no reason to reject it. They would be hard-pressed to say more since Customs and Excise is a federal agency and is not empowered, nor informed, to enforce laws which may well be set at the local level.
If X is registered at the Copyright office then the owner can register with Customs for a period of five years for a fee. This registration with Customs is seperate but related from the Copyright office, eg you cannot register a copyrighted product with Customs until it's actually Copyrighted. (the meaning of the prior statement should be painfully obvious) I can't conceive of a valid situation where registering with CBP before the Copyright office might arise though. There is no question that CBP has nothing to do with local laws, it's a point of contention with the Southern border states. Or it's more of the other way around... however those Southern states want to argue it.
-
You buy a PC, you have your invoice, it's preinstalled with Windows and Office.
The copies of Windows and Office aren't legal, they've been installed from pirate copies of the discs using cloned keys, and they're infringing on Microsoft's copyrights and licensing.
Despite 'legally purchasing' your PC, you now can't use it properly.
Are you saying some retail stores are selling PCs with illegal copy of Windows and giving tax invoice for it? In that case the buyer is entitled to recover damages from the store that sold it. Again buyer is not liable to be prosecuted or charged with anything, if such store exists at all. There are no damages you caused and can be responsible to recover, unless you are the one who is installing illegal copies. Also, if you bought them with intention to re-sell and knew about the violation, then you could be charged as well, but again, I want to know about actual court cases, MS can say whatever they want, that still doesn't mean it can really stand in court.
Yes, some retail stores do this. This is why Microsoft introduced the Genuine Advantage program in the first place.
It's very clear that you have no right to use this software you illegally purchased, and no right to resell it.
This is the same as your situation. I don't believe Microsoft have lost any cases relating to WGA to date.
I've given you a real-world example of where buying a product...
Ok, we are discussing it now, though it would be better if we could stick with arcades, games and emulators.
I also gave you real-world examples...
1.) I have written statement from the custom office that they inspected the item. I do not remember the wording but I believe it was in fact a declaration that item is legal. That's what they were inspecting it for.
What's your response to this?
Ask Namco, or one of the other companies whose copyrights you happen to be infringing on, hell, ask me, you're infringing on MAME copyrights. The customs office were mistaken or misled if they made any claim that the product was legal. It isn't. As the copyright holder of some of the code you're using, I'm telling you it isn't, and anybody associated with the MAME project would be within their rights to C&D your whole operation.
If you feel that you are a victim, please take it up with whoever sold you the PCBs, and customs for misleading you into thinking they were legal. Just like with the Microsoft case, that should be your first line of action, getting a refund for your illegal product. Failing that you should contact all the companies concerned and attempt to negotiate a licensing deal with them. I can tell you for a fact that you won't be able to, therefore your the product you have purchased remains illegal and cannot be resold.
Coming here and insisting your products are legal because you're a victim makes no sense at all.
2.) U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Nvidia violated three of five patents held by Rambus which could lead to a possible U.S. ban on the import of some Nvidia products. -- So, anyone who has, buys or sells this offending hardware is breaking the law and can be held accountable for trafficking or possession of illegal item? Or maybe, the government needs to issue a BAN on the particular item first? YES/NO
What say you, please?
I believe that would be a fair thing to assume, however, further details of any settlement between Rambus and Nvidia could change that and a licensing deal, retroactively covering the products could be (and given that they needed the technology moving forward, probably was) established, any damages awarded (to Rambus, the owner of the patents / technology being infringed upon) could also cover products already on the market if it wasn't. Patent rulings are not as clear cut as copyright infringement. 99% of these PC cases you keep bringing up involve complex licensing deals. Your xx-in-1 PCBs are neither licensed from the manufacturers, or MAME, nor has there been any kind of retroactive settlement that compensates all those who have had their copyrights infringed by this illegal product. The nVidia Rambus case was between two parties and could easily be resolved. The xx-in-1 boards involve copyright infringement of the IP of a whole multitude of companies, there is practically no hope of it ever being resolved. Even if Namco won a case against them, and their use and were compensated you'd still have to deal with Konami and all the others.
It's completely different.
-
You know, it's an interesting point Driver-Man eventually got to (but dude, what took you so long to explain it logically?!?!).
What he's saying could be comparable to Tengen Tetris for the NES. They ended up making/selling a game they did not have the license for. So then they were forced to stop selling it, and I presume recall unsold stock [which was presumably destroyed].
So what then of the sold Tengen Tetris in customers' hands? I have never heard of Tengen Tetris being referred to as counterfeit, bootleg or illegal. I've only ever heard of it referred to as rare, expensive and highly collectible.
I've also never heard of public recalls due to IP disputes. Usually the end result of an IP dispute is Company X paying damages to Company Y (and then either stopping sale of the item, or paying license fees to continue).
It IS an interesting argument!
PS: Driver-Man, one thing I have to mention about the customs argument: The companies that own a particular IP must specifically request from customs that they look for and seize specific items. Customs does not make these determinations themselves, especially when we're talking about Intellectual Property. It would be too costly and impossible for an agent to know everything about every item. They have higher priorities like looking for weapons, drugs, and similar restricted items. These old game boards are just too small a "problem" to matter enough to the companies whose IP is being infringed on.
-
You know, it's an interesting point Driver-Man eventually got to (but dude, what took you so long to explain it logically?!?!).
What he's saying could be comparable to Tengen Tetris for the NES. They ended up making/selling a game they did not have the license for. So then they were forced to stop selling it, and I presume recall unsold stock [which was presumably destroyed].
So what then of the sold Tengen Tetris in customers' hands? I have never heard of Tengen Tetris being referred to as counterfeit, bootleg or illegal. I've only ever heard of it referred to as rare, expensive and highly collectible.
It's become highly collectable *because* it's counterfeit / bootleg and most were destroyed. While Nintendo are unlikely to go after you for it (it's petty cash to them these days) there is no reason to think that the ban on sales doesn't hold true today (unless the settlement agreed covered items which had already been sold, and hence *Nintendo*, the rights holder, was paid for these)
I've also never heard of public recalls due to IP disputes. Usually the end result of an IP dispute is Company X paying damages to Company Y (and then either stopping sale of the item, or paying license fees to continue).
It IS an interesting argument!
PS: Driver-Man, one thing I have to mention about the customs argument: The companies that own a particular IP must specifically request from customs that they look for and seize specific items. Customs does not make these determinations themselves, especially when we're talking about Intellectual Property. It would be too costly and impossible for an agent to know everything about every item. They have higher priorities like looking for weapons, drugs, and similar restricted items. These old game boards are just too small a "problem" to matter enough to the companies whose IP is being infringed on.
Public recalls would basically be impossible. Note that for arcade gambling games this is pretty much what happened tho, if you consider the arcade operators in this case to be the public (who were sold the PCBs) they were forced to either return them for updates to make the software legal, or destroy them. In some cases they had no return option, only the destroy option. Due to regulation changes you can't legally operate many of them anymore, even if you have an original invoice from the time at which they were sold, and could, at one point operate them legally. Doesn't matter if you're the arcade op, or you picked one up yourself, you can't operate it, it's an illegal item, the software from that PCB should have been destroyed (which is why you often find bare / stripped gambling PCBs)
Similar applies when adult entertainment laws are changed, material which may have been legal at one point becomes illegal, you're meant to destroy it. Attempting to resell it could get you into all kinds of trouble, and a mark against your person that could ruin your entire career.
No, it's not fair, and yes, again, you become the victim, but tough.
-
CUSTOMS OFFICE DECLARED IT LEGAL
i wouldn't say they deemed it legal, if you opened up a box and found a bunch of electronic components would you know if they where photocopier parts or components to a nuclear bomb?
the machine you ordered, by itself is not illegal. but without powering it up and looking at the code contained therin, which IS being sold illegally. the customs inspector cannot know this by simply looking at the pcb contained inside the box. the fact that it slipped through in the first place would be about as good as your statement would be to hold up if you ended up in court over it.
now, if there was a paper on the top of the pcb that said "this pcb contains 200 copyrighted videogames" i don't think you would have recieved it, and we wouldn't be having this discussion.
What he's saying could be comparable to Tengen Tetris for the NES. They ended up making/selling a game they did not have the license for. So then they were forced to stop selling it, and I presume recall unsold stock [which was presumably destroyed].
So what then of the sold Tengen Tetris in customers' hands? I have never heard of Tengen Tetris being referred to as counterfeit, bootleg or illegal. I've only ever heard of it referred to as rare, expensive and highly collectible.
I've also never heard of public recalls due to IP disputes. Usually the end result of an IP dispute is Company X paying damages to Company Y (and then either stopping sale of the item, or paying license fees to continue).
i would imagine that Tengen would have had to pay for those carts that "got away" and where sold. therefore while still highly rare and collectible, have had the reparations paid for their production and subsequent sale by tengen.
-
i would imagine that Tengen would have had to pay for those carts that "got away" and where sold. therefore while still highly rare and collectible, have had the reparations paid for their production and subsequent sale by tengen.
Do you not see the complexity of the issue in your answer there? If the plaintiff company has had reparations for the "damages", then is any cartridge still out there "illegal"? Should a collector who comes into possession of Tengen Tetris be stripped of it as if it were "stolen goods? Should that game be confiscated at border crossings?
DriverMan presented an interesting paradigm here (if you can disregard the naive arguments he wrapped it in). I know the likely answer is to err on the side of caution; ie: they contain infringing content, but when you buy a board, you are not copying the IP. Someone else is guilty of that action. AFAIK there's no "possessing" laws regarding infringing IP, it's always in regards to the act of copying, downloading, etc. It is not the same as stolen goods. The more I think about it from this point of view, the greyer it seems, and I or anyone else here would be foolish to try and pick an answer with any certainty.
Haze: Equating copyrighted materials to Porn or gambling laws is a bit of a stretch.
-
Haze: Equating copyrighted materials to Porn or gambling laws is a bit of a stretch.
Well, my point was just because you thought you legally owned something, doesn't mean you actually do, and doesn't mean you can resell it, even if when you bought it you thought it was all above board (or in some cases, even WAS all above board at the time)
In other words, it just further shows that the argument of the OP here is nonsense.
-
DriverMan presented an interesting paradigm here (if you can disregard the naive arguments he wrapped it in). I know the likely answer is to err on the side of caution; ie: they contain infringing content, but when you buy a board, you are not copying the IP. Someone else is guilty of that action. AFAIK there's no "possessing" laws regarding infringing IP, it's always in regards to the act of copying, downloading, etc. It is not the same as stolen goods. The more I think about it from this point of view, the greyer it seems, and I or anyone else here would be foolish to try and pick an answer with any certainty.
Sorry, I don't think there is any grey area as far as selling / operating these things is concerned.
If it were legal to sell them 'as long as you don't use them' then you'd see hundreds of websites selling pirated XBOX360, PS3 etc. games under the condition that you don't actually ever use them. These things are illegal products, you can't sell them as products, nor as a service (ie, an arcade)
Again, see the Microsoft case. If it were legal to possess and use the software which is infringing on their IP then they would have no right at all to disable it and force you to buy a legal version to continue using it. People would be suing Microsoft and winning, and companies could get away with buying hundreds of dodgy copies, and never pay a thing to Microsoft because they weren't doing the copying merely possessing and using the software. It doesn't make sense, and there are heavy fines in place for this kind of behavior.
It's easier to target corporations than individuals, but if you're caught selling this stuff, or operating it on location then don't expect Namco etc. to take it lightly, because as I said, you're competing directly against them in their market using counterfeit versions of their products.
-
You're probably right, but the MS example is a poor one. They rely on their "End User License Agreement" to set the terms. See what I mean? It's greyer than we think when it comes to the actual end-user. Otherwise EULAs would not be necessary.
Anyways, I'm gonna opt out of this thread before I start to sound foolish.
-
You're probably right, but the MS example is a poor one. They rely on their "End User License Agreement" to set the terms. See what I mean? It's greyer than we think when it comes to the actual end-user. Otherwise EULAs would not be necessary.
Anyways, I'm gonna opt out of this thread before I start to sound foolish.
At the end of the day it's not all that different tho, the EULA, the Mame license, they all state terms and conditions of use and sale. Failing that it simply comes down to copyright, and it's a clear-cut infringement.
-
So, you agree nVidia, ATI/AMD, Intel already did sue each other, and therefore these products everyone has/had were illegal at some point in time... and it was illegal to poses, buy and sell offending hardware. Yes?
I articulated it well enough, I also presented links. You however are the one waving your hands trying to justify something. You ---fouled up beyond all recognition--- up, accept it. You purchased the X-in-1 board, you are the one that should have known better. Then you come onto a board to somehow justify your purchase?
My angry friend, can you not answer these question:
Q1) You agree nVidia, ATI/AMD, Intel already did sue each other, and therefore these products everyone has/had were illegal at some point in time... and it is/was illegal to possess, buy and sell this hardware? YES/NO
Q2.) U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Nvidia violated three of five patents held by Rambus which could lead to a possible U.S. ban on the import of some Nvidia products. -- So, anyone who has, buys or sells this offending hardware is breaking the law and can be held accountable for trafficking or possession of illegal item? Or maybe, the government needs to issue a BAN on the particular item first? YES/NO
Tax laws don't even address that (I could be wrong and I would take great delight if someone proves otherwise). I gave you the relevant copyright info. It's not my fault you're too lazy to Google for it.
As for liability on the buyer/seller/re-seller. Here, the answer is, it depends. An example would be Lik-Sang getting nailed to the wall for various copyright and patent infringements.
You went from being uncertain and "I could be wrong" to calling me stupid in a matter of couple posts. You silly human, when did you have that revelation, what convinced you, what possessed you? Anyway, does that liability *depend* or not? What does it depend on?
Can you make your mind, what say you?
Yes, some retail stores do this. This is why Microsoft introduced the Genuine Advantage program in the first place.
I don't think so.
But again, whoever bought that is not breaking any laws, nor is liable to recover any damages.
So, you have no singe court case to support your opinion, why so certain then?
I believe that would be a fair thing to assume, however, further details of any settlement between Rambus and Nvidia could change that and a licensing deal, retroactively covering the products could be (and given that they needed the technology moving forward, probably was) established, any damages awarded (to Rambus, the owner of the patents / technology being infringed upon) could also cover products already on the market if it wasn't. Patent rulings are not as clear cut as copyright infringement. 99% of these PC cases you keep bringing up involve complex licensing deals. Your xx-in-1 PCBs are neither licensed from the manufacturers, or MAME, nor has there been any kind of retroactive settlement that compensates all those who have had their copyrights infringed by this illegal product. The nVidia Rambus case was between two parties and could easily be resolved. The xx-in-1 boards involve copyright infringement of the IP of a whole multitude of companies, there is practically no hope of it ever being resolved. Even if Namco won a case against them, and their use and were compensated you'd still have to deal with Konami and all the others.
You did not answer the question, please...
U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Nvidia violated three of five patents held by Rambus which could lead to a possible U.S. ban on the import of some Nvidia products. -- So, anyone who has, buys or sells this offending hardware is breaking the law and can be held accountable for trafficking or possession of illegal item? Or maybe, the government needs to issue a BAN on the particular item first? YES/NO
-
Dude, you're getting way past the point of annoying.
As the copyright holder of part of the product you are wanting to sell / operate I am telling you, beyond any reasonable doubt, you have no permission to do so. The MAME license does not grant ANY commercial use, no amount of reselling, or tax changes that. As I've said, if you wish for further legal advice on the issue please email Namco's lawyers and ask them directly, you will get exactly the same response. The priorities for the MAME developers do not include having a crack team of paid lawyers, so if you don't believe me, then please contact professionals who are directly involved with one of the rights holders for the copyrights you are directly infringing.
End of story. Please destroy your illegal product(s), or license them properly. If you have nothing to hide, and believe you are correct, then do as I say above, and post the response here. I don't believe you will bother, because you don't want to actually hear the answer you'll get.
Saint, can you please check that this isn't just another username for a certain other argumentative user, and if so, just outright ban them for their absolute moronic attitude and inability to comprehend simple facts regarding the legality of the product they are attempting to sell. This is clear-cut as the sun rising and the sun setting. I should not have to waste my time here explaining that somebody has no permission to sell my code / product without my permission at some point in the process, permission that has never been granted.
I do not study law because I do not wish to have to deal with morons like this attempting to justify their pathetic actions despite clearly being in the wrong. Anybody with more than a peanut for a brain can see that this is just plain common sense, and doesn't need legal papers digging up just to show that. I have better things to do with my time and this place is becoming a breeding place for such types. This kind of bull really puts off potential developers.
You can't sell MAME, or any MAME based product. Period.
-
/me responds to a summons.
Driver-Man does not appear to be any other user in disguise for what that's worth. Interestingly however, and either I missed it or I wonder why he didn't raise it earlier, Driver-Man is not posting from North America and is presumably not familiar with and/or referring to American or Canadian laws.
I don't think this site is becoming a hot bed of such issues, though perhaps I'm not seeing the forest for the trees. This question comes up every few months, and has for many years. Typically either the questioner is genuinely ignorant of copyright law and the MAME license and after a brief education understands and moves on to something else, or the questioner has come in with a preconceived notion about what they *want* to be right and are determined not to be confused by facts. Either way, after a few posts I wouldn't bother responding anymore.
By the way, I really like the perspective you (Haze) give as a (former?) coder/contributor to MAME, and appreciate the time you spend answering MAME related questions. Don't let Internet foolishness get you down :)
-
/me responds to a summons.
Driver-Man does not appear to be any other user in disguise for what that's worth. Interestingly however, and either I missed it or I wonder why he didn't raise it earlier, Driver-Man is not posting from North America and is presumably not familiar with and/or referring to American or Canadian laws.
Ok, thank you for checking. The demanding tone for specific answers, and ignorance over every other fact and shard of evidence they are presented with seems strangely familiar.
I don't think this site is becoming a hot bed of such issues, though perhaps I'm not seeing the forest for the trees. This question comes up every few months, and has for many years. Typically either the questioner is genuinely ignorant of copyright law and the MAME license and after a brief education understands and moves on to something else, or the questioner has come in with a preconceived notion about what they *want* to be right and are determined not to be confused by facts. Either way, after a few posts I wouldn't bother responding anymore.
By the way, I really like the perspective you (Haze) give as a (former?) coder/contributor to MAME, and appreciate the time you spend answering MAME related questions. Don't let Internet foolishness get you down :)
I still contribute to the project, there is still probably more of my code in the actual drivers than the vast majority of other developers. I just don't think that this subject even needs further debate. The position of the development team is very clear, and expressed in the license. No series of actions or chain of sales changes that. I can understand some people unknowingly operating these things without realizing, but quite frankly trying to argue that you have the legal right to use and sell a product which has never been legal is just stupid, and I won't be making any further posts on the matter.
It annoys me because we try hard to ensure that MAME can't be used as a piracy engine in direct competition with new arcade releases. These xx-in-1 PCBs go directly against this and are employing MAME in a way which hurts the industry directly, with no permission at all from the development team and in explicit violation of the license agreement.
-
My angry friend, can you not answer these question:
Q1) You agree nVidia, ATI/AMD, Intel already did sue each other, and therefore these products everyone has/had were illegal at some point in time... and it is/was illegal to possess, buy and sell this hardware? YES/NO
Q2.) U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Nvidia violated three of five patents held by Rambus which could lead to a possible U.S. ban on the import of some Nvidia products. -- So, anyone who has, buys or sells this offending hardware is breaking the law and can be held accountable for trafficking or possession of illegal item? Or maybe, the government needs to issue a BAN on the particular item first? YES/NO
Q1) No
Q2) No
Stop asking and since you wont listen to anything anyone types anyway, you can go ahead and find out why on your own.
*unsubscribes*
-
End of story. Please destroy your illegal product(s), or license them properly.
As soon as you flush down the toilet your Nvidia card with memory controllers for SDR, DDR, DDR2, DDR3, GDDR, and GDDR3 SDRAM, and delete all the game ROMs from your hard drive. -- You refused to answer the question, again, and you do not have any court case to support your claims. I'm laughing.
Has MAME been registered with "copyright office" or whatever office?
Are you sure MAME is legal to start with? Did you read Section 1201'?
I'll bet I have bought more of these boards than you have and have NEVER received any declaration that the product was legal or authorized for use.
I'll bet you thought you were on "good side", together with everyone else.
Sorry, now go and destroy your illegal product(s), or license them properly!
You know, it's an interesting point Driver-Man eventually got to (but dude, what took you so long to explain it logically?!?!).
Thanks, your involvement was truly heroic. Let me just ditto this: - they contain infringing content, but when you buy a board, you are not copying the IP. Someone else is guilty of that action.
-
I'll bet I have bought more of these boards than you have and have NEVER received any declaration that the product was legal or authorized for use.
I'll bet you thought you were on "good side", together with everyone else.
Sorry, now go and destroy your illegal product(s), or license them properly!
Actually, that was kinda the point ... I'm NOT on the good side.
-
I'm with you CheffoJeffo, and thank you for not insulting me.
Buying this 60-in-1, it's like paying a "friend" to setup MAME for you, only you get it on nice compact "Computer-On-Module". And if you look at the price of that hardware it is clear that whatever emulator and ROMs included, they actually come for free. -- In other words, if you wanted to buy such "Single-Board-Computer" as 60-in-1 PCB, then you would not be able to get it much cheaper than what the cost of 60-in-1 already is, plus you would then need to cross-compile MAME for another platform and do all the setup, roll-backs, and what not so it can run smoothly/correctly on that very week platform.
I really do not see why would any MAME developer disprove purchase of such nice, compact piece of hardware. Would it be better if I now, after I bought it, go and download MAME for free, would that make it better? This just doesn't make sense.
======================
http://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=13339 (http://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=13339)
davidrfoley: - "Actually, you have your facts wrong. If you read the threads, including comments by Aaron Giles, I contacted the MAME team many times in an effort to stop people from selling commercial machines with MAME installed, advertising them with the MAME name, and competing against UltraCade machines. We paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in license fees to companies such as Capcom, Taito, Jaleco, and Midway for the rights to publish the games. When the MAME team refused to respond, we took a completely legal action to file a trademark to use the MAME name and stop the unlicensed competition. Once the MAME team contacted me, I, as I had always offered, worked with them to secure the registration and put a stop to the commercial use that going unchecked...."
Is Foley a good guy or bad guy?
He sounds a lot like Haze, or does he?
-
I really do not see why would any MAME developer disprove purchase of such nice, compact piece of hardware. Would it be better if I now, after I bought it, go and download MAME for free, would that make it better? This just doesn't make sense.
You don't have to understand their reasoning to understand that you are using a product that is not authorized by them and violates their license. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Those hardware products use MAME. Those hardware products are using MAME without a license from the MAME developers to do so, and in direct violation of the terms of the MAME license.
Come up with any personal moral justification you want, but there's no question it's an unauthorized use of their code.
-
Ok, yes, let me rephrase.
I sure agree MAME is entitled to take a share of profit from, say, Ultracade sales, and I suppose they indeed got some money from Foley, since he also seem to have helped register MAME (logo/name?) with copyright office, or so he says.
However, I also believe that if "MAME team" voted whether they wanted to stop production and import of 60-in-1 PCBs, then majority would not mind, but some might even take pride or satisfaction their work ended up in little board which can make people happy. I do not think anyone would vote for the ban really.
And I do not think it's anyone's concern whether ROMs are licensed or not, that's between copyright owners and the factory. Perhaps factory genuinely believes to have all the necessary rights to copy those games, and perhaps they do, who are we to judge? If copyright owners wanted they could easily report offending X-in-1 PCBs to customs office and make it illegal for real. -- MAME could just as easily report these PCBs to customs office, but to me that would be strange, just as strange as if they decided to charge for downloads.
P.S.
I'm not making any PCBs, nor am I selling any. I'm just playing. There is no disrespect to MAME if I pay instead of download it for free. There is also no point in boycotting these PCBs as that would place you in unfair market, while MAME team if wanted only need to speak to the customs office and all the offending PCBs using MAME would be declared illegal and banned for import, maybe even banned from the market and stores... or so it would seem, in theory.
-
QUESTION:
if we paid a licencing fee to the developers/owners of these ROMs upon purchase of the xxx in one board, would that then make it legal?
ANSWER:
I would certainly hope so.
STATEMENT:
I believe there is no system in place whereby a consumer such as Driver-Man can go to pay reparations for such a product to make the ROM's contained in it legal. If there was, i'm sure people would do it.... wouldn't we?
-
Ok, yes, let me rephrase.
I sure agree MAME is entitled to take a share of profit from, say, Ultracade sales, and I suppose they indeed got some money from Foley, since he also seem to have helped register MAME (logo/name?) with copyright office, or so he says.
MAME developers don't want money for MAME.
However, I also believe that if "MAME team" voted whether they wanted to stop production and import of 60-in-1 PCBs, then majority would not mind, but some might even take pride or satisfaction their work ended up in little board which can make people happy. I do not think anyone would vote for the ban really.
The written MAME license says the opposite. You are speculating. The document is in black and white, there's no room for ambiguity. There's no uncertainty. The MAME license says "Thou shalt not."
I'm not making any PCBs, nor am I selling any. I'm just playing. There is no disrespect to MAME if I pay instead of download it for free. There is also no point in boycotting these PCBs as that would place you in unfair market, while MAME team if wanted only need to speak to the customs office and all the offending PCBs using MAME would be declared illegal and banned for import, maybe even banned from the market and stores... or so it would seem, in theory.
You are completely missing the concepts of:
- burden of proof
- international law
- MAMEdev folks are volunteers who do this for love of the work. They are not paid. They do not have a company behind them with resources and legal teams to tackle issues such as this.
-
QUESTION:
if we paid a licencing fee to the developers/owners of these ROMs upon purchase of the xxx in one board, would that then make it legal?
ANSWER:
I would certainly hope so.
STATEMENT:
I believe there is no system in place whereby a consumer such as Driver-Man can go to pay reparations for such a product to make the ROM's contained in it legal. If there was, i'm sure people would do it.... wouldn't we?
There used to be a company called StarROMs that had the legal license to sell certain Atari ROMs. I bought every license they could sell me.
It's not directly pertinent to the discussion however. The copyright holders *aren't* selling the right to use the ROMs in these boards, hence there is no right to sell these boards with the ROMs.
-
It's not directly pertinent to the discussion however. The copyright holders *aren't* selling the right to use the ROMs in these boards, hence there is no right to sell these boards with the ROMs.
agreed, but if there was a scapegoat for legally obtaining the games that would have to be it. these companys have ripped off the IP of the company and selling it for profit.*
* - i can't imagine that the cost of production of the board/computer is much more than what the sale cost is. they are essentially giving the ROMs away with the purchase of the board/computer.
not that i'm supporting them or their ways, just saying, there is more to it than that.
if i might ask, how much where they charging for a licence for a game?
-
oops
-
It's not directly pertinent to the discussion however. The copyright holders *aren't* selling the right to use the ROMs in these boards, hence there is no right to sell these boards with the ROMs.
agreed, but if there was a scapegoat for legally obtaining the games that would have to be it. these companys have ripped off the IP of the company and selling it for profit.*
* - i can't imagine that the cost of production of the board/computer is much more than what the sale cost is. they are essentially giving the ROMs away with the purchase of the board/computer.
not that i'm supporting them or their ways, just saying, there is more to it than that.
if i might ask, how much where they charging for a licence for a game?
It worked out to like a couple of bucks per ROM on average.
-
* - i can't imagine that the cost of production of the board/computer is much more than what the sale cost is. they are essentially giving the ROMs away with the purchase of the board/computer.
Irrelevant. Does that mean its ok for me to sell pirated movies so long as I only charge people for the cost of blank DVD-Rs?
-
* - i can't imagine that the cost of production of the board/computer is much more than what the sale cost is. they are essentially giving the ROMs away with the purchase of the board/computer.
Irrelevant. Does that mean its ok for me to sell pirated movies so long as I only charge people for the cost of blank DVD-Rs?
I'm not going there. I'm just saying they aren't profiting off the ROM's themselves or the computer/board itself but the combination of the two. The profit off the ROM's is implied, not actual.
again, i'm not supporting it. Just explaining my statement.
-
It worked out to like a couple of bucks per ROM on average.
that's not bad at all, and i would pay that for a 60 in one to have it legal. does that then give me the right to put it in my apartment laundromat and make money off it?
-
It worked out to like a couple of bucks per ROM on average.
that's not bad at all, and i would pay that for a 60 in one to have it legal. does that then give me the right to put it in my apartment laundromat and make money off it?
No.
1. They're not available any more StarROMs is out of business.
2. They were licensed for personal use only.
3. MAME does not allow commercial use even if you had the rights to the ROMs.
4. Even if you have an emulator that did and you had the commercial rights to use the ROMs, you still have to get the appropriate business licenses from your local government.
-
I'm with you CheffoJeffo, and thank you for not insulting me.
To be clear, you are NOT with me.
I have bought these boards knowing full well that the games were not licensed (as is the case with all of the multikits that I have purchased with the exception of the Exidy 440 kit) and that the use of MAME in them was explicitly illegal. I have made the choice to live with that.
I do not sell these boards. I do not tell others where to buy them (it seems that people are happy to pay double the price from their "local" retailers and then claim ignorance and taxation!).
I have no illusions as to what my rights are with respect to those boards.
I will not suggest how the MAMEDevs should respond to the fact that I have xx-in-1 boards in my home arcade. That would be the height of both arrogance and stupidity, particularly given how they have already spoken on the topic (and, I might add, come up completely at odds with your notional representations).
I am grateful to the folks (e.g. MAMEDevs) who have put in the time and effort so that I may benefit. If there were an alternative beyond donating to ROM dumping (e.g. say, donating to MAMEDev explicitly when I buy a derivative product), which I have already done, then I would do so. If you have not, then you should be asking yourself why you haven't.
I have drawn my line in the sand as to where I am morally comfortable and have made arrangements (as best I can) to support those who have contributed to my enjoyment of the hobby
What have you done ?
Thought so.
-
/me responds to a summons.
I didn't do it this time ... really ... it wasn't me ...
:dunno
-
It is like a Merry Go Round and around and around and around. Boring :banghead:
-
It is like a Merry Go Round and around and around and around. Boring :banghead:
I believe I proved my main point. So, I guess we all agree.
Perhaps the best summary of this argument can be put like this:
- Are any of the Ultracade machines owned by people (who got tax invoice for their purchase) illegal?
At least they seem not to violate MAME license if they indeed had an agreement... so illegal or legal, what say you?
-
It worked out to like a couple of bucks per ROM on average.
that's not bad at all, and i would pay that for a 60 in one to have it legal. does that then give me the right to put it in my apartment laundromat and make money off it?
No.
1. They're not available any more StarROMs is out of business.
2. They were licensed for personal use only.
3. MAME does not allow commercial use even if you had the rights to the ROMs.
4. Even if you have an emulator that did and you had the commercial rights to use the ROMs, you still have to get the appropriate business licenses from your local government.
it's a shame really. but now since starROMs is gone, what happens with the licence? is it now void?
how about a way to "MAME" without the "MAME"? I have several non-working arcade boards. theoretically i have bought and paid for the original - which has since ceased operation. if there was a way to emulate the CPU using some sort of software (not MAME since the developers forbid it so) couldn't i place that machine on our route? i would be simply replacing broken hardware with a modern equivalent.
would the MAMEdevs ever consider producing maybe "one ROM only" commercial use version of their software for such a use? or is this just opening up a pandoras box of trouble??? i mean you would have to supply some kind of proof of ownership...or an AMMA serial number or something and register the software. once it's linked to a particular ROM it needn't be changed right?
-
MAME developers don't want money for MAME.
Is that a fact or speculation? That's what I was saying, although Haze seem to want some, why would he otherwise want 60-in-1 PCBs destroyed?
It's contradiction within another contradiction. Does Rambus want you to destroy your Nvidia cards? No, their work was sold, that's actually a good thing. It's only that someone else sold it for them and is being "late" to pay copyright fees. All they have to do now is get their money from Nvidia.
As far as Nvidia is concerned it's just technicality, kind of like being late to pay the power bill, but no owner of offending Nvidia video card is breaking any laws here. This is not like "blood diamonds", buying this is not helping crime, everything is cool here, no one lost anything, only some of the money still needs to find its way back to home, like Lassie.
To be clear, you are NOT with me.
I have bought these boards knowing full well that the games were not licensed and that the use of MAME in them was explicitly illegal. I have made the choice to live with that.
You have made the choice? Is that some kind of justification? It sounds as if it is you who is making sacrifice here, huh. -- Please point the difference between you and me, and if you can explain why your friends tolerate you what they do not approve to me?
I have drawn my line in the sand as to where I am morally comfortable and have made arrangements (as best I can) to support those who have contributed to my enjoyment of the hobby
What have you done ?
Is that not exactly what everyone hates me for? This is just ridiculous, what was everyone's point then attacking me with all the "trying to justify" and "black and white" ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---? -- What I have done? I've come here to tell you not to feel guilty for alleged "crimes" you have nothing to do with. But you never did care for any of the "nagging screens" anyway, so it's all the same for you, dear hypocrite.
-
Irrelevant. Does that mean its ok for me to sell pirated movies so long as I only charge people for the cost of blank DVD-Rs?
The main argument does not translate to whether is it Ok to sell pirated movies, but whether would be legal to buy them. Then comes the question whether would it be legal to sell once you learned it's all pirated. -- There is a huge difference however, you can not buy pirated DVD is stores everywhere and get tax invoice for it. They are actually declared as "illegal", and once you realize your DVD violates copyright you are, as a consumer, entitled to recover damages from the shop that sold it.
-
MAME developers don't want money for MAME.
Is that a fact or speculation? That's what I was saying, although Haze seem to want some, why would he otherwise want 60-in-1 PCBs destroyed?
It's fact, moron ... how many people need to tell you the same thing for you to believe them ? You have been trying to tell people that "I think" when the rest of us have been saying "I know" and you have been chastising people for it.
Aaron, Haze et al have been very clear and you are the only one who seems to think that they are not.
To be clear, you are NOT with me.
I have bought these boards knowing full well that the games were not licensed and that the use of MAME in them was explicitly illegal. I have made the choice to live with that.
You have made the choice? Is that some kind of justification? It sounds as if it is you who is making sacrifice here, huh. -- Please point the difference between you and me, and if you can explain why your friends tolerate you what they do not approve to me?
Uh, moron, THAT is the definition of justification.
The difference between you and me is that I accept what the boards are and represent and don't try to scurry around and hide behind some silly justification like being taxed.
Oh, and I donate.
It is what is it is and I'm not being a little whiny girl about it.
I have drawn my line in the sand as to where I am morally comfortable and have made arrangements (as best I can) to support those who have contributed to my enjoyment of the hobby
What have you done ?
Is that not exactly what everyone hates me for? This is just ridiculous, what was everyone's point then attacking me with all the "trying to justify" and "black and white" ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---? -- What I have done? I've come here to tell you not to feel guilty for alleged "crimes" you have nothing to do with. But you never did care for any of the "nagging screens" anyway, so it's all the same for you, dear hypocrite.
Again, moron, NOBODY asked you to tell us not to feel guilty.
YOU asked if the boards were ILLEGAL.
WE told you YES.
YOU told use that we were WRONG.
YOU are a MORON.
I don't care what you think and will continue to play my games as I always have, regardless of whether or not you think that I am right or wrong ... I actually know the law and ... I have chosen what to care about. There is nothing hypocritical about it. Show me one spot where I have said "this is wrong". Can't, can you ? That is because we have been talking about what is LEGAL, which actually IS black and white in this case. The mere fact that you can't seem to understand what the Ultracade copyright case is about (HINT: it ain't got much to do with MAME) is indicator enough that you are talking out of your ass.
THAT is why people attack you ... you are ignorant and spouting nonsense.
Get the ---fudgesicle--- off of my lawn!
-
It's fact, moron ... how many people need to tell you the same thing for you to believe them ?
"Moron", more readily describes a person who believes something is fact just becasue many people say so.
Homer Simpson:
- " ...and all they ask in return is a little bit of blind fate."
The difference between you and me is that I accept what the boards are and represent and don't try to scurry around and hide behind some silly justification like being taxed.
I'm hiding from whom or what?
Whatever that means I'm sure it's a big deal for you. I feel your anger, so sorry to have upset you. If it helps, I'm not hiding, obviously, and there's nothing for me to justify, I'm not violating any copyrights.
THAT is why people attack you ... you are ignorant and spouting nonsense.
Ignorant? Did you expect your insults would convince me? I'm after facts, evidence, not your self-sustained hallucinations. Do you have a single court case to support your claims? I have, and this is what you're keep ignoring:
1.) U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Nvidia violated three of five patents held by Rambus which could lead to a possible U.S. ban on the import of some Nvidia products. -- Are those Nvidia cards illegal? YES/NO
2.) Ultracade Technologies had been handed a 35-count felony indictment by the United States District Court. -- Are any of the Ultracade machines owned by people (who got tax invoice for their purchase) illegal? YES/NO
-
todays abandonware could be tomorrows cash cow. how many years did many arcade classics sit unissued until xbox live was created and nintendo started licensing their classics for cell phones? there is no way to imagine what technology the future will bring or how these games could create revenue for their owners in the future. one poster earlier remarked that he downloaded a NES emulator because the games were unavailable new, well he had no way of knowing that some day those games would be making big money for nintendo again. simply put, not enough time has passed to label any video game as abandonware.
as for why people building MAME cabs themselves for free is better than giving their money to a chinese bootlegger, the answer should be obvious.
- Are any of the Ultracade machines owned by people (who got tax invoice for their purchase) illegal?
i would say if it is found in court that they did not have the right to produce them, then it would definitely be illegal to sell or operate them.
another analogy i find applicable is selling an ipod preloaded with songs, it is illegal.
-
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4204934/ITC-ruling-could-bar-Nvidia-chips (http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4204934/ITC-ruling-could-bar-Nvidia-chips)
Nvidia Corp. said a ruling issued Monday (July 26) by the U.S. International Trade Commission finding that some of its products violate patents held by Rambus Inc. would have "no impact" on customers.
http://cpedia.com/wiki?q=Global+VR&guess_ambig=Play+Mechanix+Global+VR+#headline_9 (http://cpedia.com/wiki?q=Global+VR&guess_ambig=Play+Mechanix+Global+VR+#headline_9)
None of these so-called illegal "Multicade" machines come anywhere close to matching the AUTHENTIC ARCADE EXPERIENCE afforded by purchasing true commercial-quality video game machines from the only two fully licensed and legal manufacturers of these games at this time, Chicago Gaming (Arcade Legends) and Global VR (Global Arcade Classics). [10.5]
-
It's fact, moron ... how many people need to tell you the same thing for you to believe them ?
"Moron", more readily describes a person who believes something is fact just becasue many people say so.
Homer Simpson:
- " ...and all they ask in return is a little bit of blind fate."
It's in the damned MAME license, which everybody in this thread has referred you to.
It is in black and white and we have all told you so.
You refuse to even read this stuff and rely entirely on your knowledge of video card judgements, which is, frankly, scary in a locked-in-the-attic for your formative years kinda way.
-
Ignorant? Did you expect your insults would convince me?
Well, facts sure haven't convinced you (despite your claims to the contrary), so insults were at least worth a shot. :dunno
-
It is illegal to buy stolen goods. Doubly so now that you know it is.
Tax sticker means nothing. The US Feds make sales tax off of the sale of medical marijuana, even though Federally that sale is illegal.
The XXX n 1 cards contain stolen Intellectual property, both in ROM form and sometimes in the code to emulate the arcade machines, MAME. You've been told that. Now you know it is illegal.
Can we lock this thread now? It's been the same go around for the last dozen or so posts.
-
Get your last (polite, please, even if you think the other person doesn't deserve polite) licks in folks. This thread's heading for a locking...
-
IBTL!
I havent done that in years.
Ummmm, helluva thread. Can I start one where I ask a question and dispute the facts with opinion and scream how I was taxed? pls?
welcome back Genesim (or his clone)
BTW ITS THE CODE!
-
welcome back Genesim (or his clone)
BTW ITS THE CODE!
:laugh2:
LCD rulez!!!!!!
-
BTW, I still think we need one dedicated section for all legal questions. This is actually popping up more and more and it almost always ends the same way.
Just call it IANAL and let the masses argue about stuff there. ;)
-
As much as was 'discussed' here I almost wonder if a lock/sticky would be useful... kind of like how they used to stick the heads of the executed on pikes outside the city walls.
-
well, to sum this up:
illegal 100%
if you are fine with that. then fine play it, enjoy it. I wouldn't recommend selling it.
-
So, the "best" solution is to destroy my 60-in-1 board and buy some Ultracade/GlobalVR unit?
Uh, almost forgot, is there any actual evidence to confirm there is indeed MAME on that 60-in-1 PCB?
well, to sum this up:
illegal 100%
To make some item "illegal" in relation to copyright infringement you first need to register with copyright office, then prove your case in court, and finally issue a ban on import of the particular item via customs office. Until then it is only "allegedly infringing", and no police or whatever authority you try to complain to will be able or willing to do anything about it.
cotmm68030, thanks for those two.
I'd say that's check and mate, but if that is not convincing enough, then I have said it all.
-
I actually asked the same thing about the 60-in-1 some years ago and, yes there is. The info was posted here (and elsehwere), so should be easy enough to find ... if you wanted to search.
Stop pretending that you are a victim -- you have a board that is not legally licensed.
Use it or don't use it -- the choice is yours.
Make it.
-
BTW, I still think we need one dedicated section for all legal questions. This is actually popping up more and more and it almost always ends the same way.
Like a WIKI?
The best place for threads like this is in P&R
-
So, the "best" solution is to destroy my 60-in-1 board and buy some Ultracade/GlobalVR unit?
Uh, almost forgot, is there any actual evidence to confirm there is indeed MAME on that 60-in-1 PCB?
well, to sum this up:
illegal 100%
To make some item "illegal" in relation to copyright infringement you first need to register with copyright office, then prove your case in court, and finally issue a ban on import of the particular item via customs office. Until then it is only "allegedly infringing", and no police or whatever authority you try to complain to will be able or willing to do anything about it.
cotmm68030, thanks for those two.
I'd say that's check and mate, but if that is not convincing enough, then I have said it all.
Sometimes, when a lone voice speaks against the masses though the masses are all against him, that lone man is the voice of wisdom and reason and truth.
But not today.
You're just wrong.
Everyone's telling you you're wrong. Enjoy your reality.
-
BTW, I still think we need one dedicated section for all legal questions. This is actually popping up more and more and it almost always ends the same way.
Like a WIKI?
The best place for threads like this is in P&R
WTF is a Wiki????
Move these to PnR. Fine with me! :D
-
BTW, I still think we need one dedicated section for all legal questions. This is actually popping up more and more and it almost always ends the same way.
Like a WIKI?
The best place for threads like this is in P&R
WTF is a Wiki????
:whap
Move these to PnR. Fine with me! :D
But then I can't see them ... oh, wait a minute ... :applaud:
-
Uh, almost forgot, is there any actual evidence to confirm there is indeed MAME on that 60-in-1 PCB?
if I show you a link will you click it? heh
-
Uh, almost forgot, is there any actual evidence to confirm there is indeed MAME on that 60-in-1 PCB?
if I show you a link will you click it? heh
:whap :whap :whap
:nlp
-
Uh, almost forgot, is there any actual evidence to confirm there is indeed MAME on that 60-in-1 PCB?
if I show you a link will you click it? heh
:whap :whap :whap
:nlp
I didn't do it this time ... really ... it wasn't me ...
:dunno
-
To start with I thought this was just another noob naivity question. The more I read it the more I start to suspect the questions were being asked cos the o.p. Wants to do something with these boards they shouldn't. Saint backed up my first brief response and he knows best. Accept it dude, if you chose to do something dodgy on your head be it - you'll get no backup from us.
And saint, Drop this ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- to hell.
-
driver, please click this link
http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=68206.0 (http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=68206.0) :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp :nlp
now click it again and actually read it this time. Done? kk, now you know the 60 in 1 uses MAME and uses MAME without a license (the MAME dev HAZE already informed you MAME cant be used commercially at all) which means the board isn't legal, taxation or not. Quick fun fact, I googled "60 in 1 MAME" and found that thread.
-
Since Driver-Thingie managed to see the post before I took it down, I've returned it to its original without any further editing as I had desired to do.
I'm only reasonably nice because I respect Saint, not you, Driver-thingie. I will not, however, mince words.
Note:
Rambus v. nVidia is a potential ban, it is still pending further review from the patent office. Second, it is a patent dispute, a similar but unrelated animal and unrelated to this discussion about copyrights.
Pending patent cases are inapplicable to copyright issues. Nintendo v. Tengen is a copyright case, this is the example I gave. Rambus v. nVidia is a patent case, that is the example you gave. The Tengen story is a prime example of how not to violate copyright.
Speaking of Rambus, I did a little research and discovered what I had suspected. I present this information for the benefit of our other members. In a nutshell, Rambus is seen as a fraudulent company. Rambus was a member of JEDEC which helps ensure companies license critical underlying technologies for a reasonable fee. Rambus is disputed to have crafted their patents to capture SDRAM and DDR technologies that were being openly discussed by JEDEC members at the time. Simply put, it's possible that Rambus simply saw where the market was heading and created patents to capture the market.
What both Driver and his friend have failed to point out is the following. Rambus has had 49 (from the article linked to) patent claims against nVidia invalidated last year alone and stands to lose the last three still standing. Probably due to the JEDEC discussions and proof of prior work. What is also failed here is that Driver's question is thus:
1.) U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Nvidia violated three of five patents held by Rambus which could lead to a possible U.S. ban on the import of some Nvidia products. -- Are those Nvidia cards illegal? YES/NO
This question does nothing to consider the role of the patent office rulings as well as Rambus' forced patent licensing to nVidia. Yes, forced. If nVidia is required to license those technologies, they're doing it under their own terms, not Rambus'. :hissy
A point cotmm68030 that seems to support Driver's statement is actually taken out of context. You will need to read the article in its entirety to fully comprehend that sentence.
This is exactly the reason why I, and others on this forum, have told people like you, Driver, to do the research. Examples like this can easily take up entire threads in their dissemination alone. Once again, the outcome of the nVidia v. Rambus issue is irrelevant as this is a copyright discussion not a patent discussion.
You have consistently failed requests to cite sources to support your claims. I, on the other hand have either given you direct links to government sites governing the laws in question or have instructed you to Google several sources on your own. In fact, your entire argument is now reduced to the same two "sources" you cite yet did not read or fully researched.
Your argument that MAME is illegal per 1201 is incorrect. You have not considered sub section f or g as it would apply to MAME. Nor have you made any determination of the applicability of any other copyright section in this matter. In fact, MAME is protected under the court outcomes of Coleco v. Atari and again under Bleem! v. Sony. Both copyright cases I've have referenced in previous posts. In a nutshell, MAME, by itself, is not illegal.
-
It is illegal to buy stolen goods.
Copyright infringement is not theft, conversion, or fraud; illegally-made copies are not stolen goods. [Dowling v. United States (1985)] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_copyright_case_law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_copyright_case_law)
driver, please click this link
saint: 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.
FrizzleFried: 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.
Hawk Daddy: In my opinion, the 48 in 1 and 60 in 1 boards, are ok as long as they do not run MAME
==============================
Wrong link apparently. But don't you think MAME should make some more official statement about it before you ask me to destroy my PCBs?
Nintendo v. Tengen
Finally we have found some common grounds, but the conclusion was that Tengen Tetris is NOT considered "bootleg", "pirated" nor "illegal".
Once again, the outcome of the nVidia v. Rambus issue is irrelevant as this is a copyright discussion not a patent discussion.
I believe it is very relevant, it all classifies under "Intellectual Property Law", have alike scope and application and is similarly handled in courts. The point from both these cases, Nintendo v. Tengen and nVidia v. Rambus, is that customers never even needed to worry about anything. -- Customers (end-user) are not supposed to disassemble their hardware to see if there was any IP infringing going on, and they were not required to follow news and read forums to know whether they have suddenly become criminals.
You have consistently failed requests to cite sources to support your claims. I, on the other hand have either given you direct links to government sites governing the laws in question or have instructed you to Google several sources on your own. In fact, your entire argument is now reduced to the same two "sources" you cite yet did not read or fully researched.
I'm not saying "you are wrong", simply that nothing there says you are right.
It is clear DOWNLOADING and SELLING is illegal. BUYING? Well that is far less clear, it is simply not addressed for the scenario where it is not immediately apparent the item violates any IP, and especially when it is taxed and available in shops everywhere.
Yes, you could make a conclusion that BUYING pirated DVD on the street is illegal, but for something to be "illegal" and "available in stores", that is contradiction to start with.
*** I got your post while it was still there, it was pretty good, and friendly.
-
It is illegal to buy stolen goods.
Copyright infringement is not theft, conversion, or fraud; illegally-made copies are not stolen goods. [Dowling v. United States (1985)] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_copyright_case_law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_copyright_case_law)
"deliberate unlawful copying is no less an unlawful taking of property than garden-variety theft." - MGM v. Grokster (US Supreme Court)
"Generally such indicia is held to indicate a substantial theft of copyright property; but, taking all the evidence together, I am satisfied that the items selected as tests constitute the bulk of all the items taken, and that they are of small moment in comparison with the whole." Dun v. Lumbermen's Credit Ass'n (US Supreme Court) (Case involved one company copying information from a reference book published by another company containing information like lists of merchants and manufacturers)
"A CATV that builds an antenna to pick up telecasts in Area B and then transmits it by cable to Area A is reproducing the copyrighted work, not pursuant to a license from the owner of the copyright, but by theft." - Teleprompter Corp. v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. (US Supreme Court)
"Defendants maintain that, because they are persons of ordinary means, high penalties necessarily are an abuse of discretion. Yet the statute does not require judges to set penalties according to wealth, and we held in BMG Music that serious penalties for the theft of intellectual property are not confined to the wealthy." - Directv, Inc. v. Barczewski (7th Circuit Court of Appeals)
http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=105787.msg1121163#msg1121163 (http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=105787.msg1121163#msg1121163)
-
Thank you again cotmm68030. It's interesting to see how "knowingly" and "deliberately" complicate the situation further.
==============
I have good news. I have found evidence Amstard (and ZX Spectrum) roms and ALL THE GAMES and everything are "legal abandonware".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonware (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonware) - "Companies do sometimes voluntarily relinquish copyright on software, putting it into the public domain, or re-license it as free software or as freeware. id Software is an early proponent of this practice... Other examples include Amstrad, which supports emulation and free distribution of CPC and ZX Spectrum hardware ROMs and software..."
Did I get that right, does that really mean what I think? If so, where can we find some official statement about it?
I tried to search Amstrad.com, but no luck.
-
Zzzzz
-
FWIW, I had been looking for a case that I remembered of where a vendor had cabinets seized because the vendor used xx-in-1 boards ... which they had purchased, been invoiced for and paid tax on. >:D
I found the details this morning in one of Ken Layton's posts over on KLOV (http://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=110413).
From Replay magazine:
FEDS SEIZE ALLEGED CLASSIC VIDEOGAME COPIES
(Posted November 6, 2009 -- 3PM)
A load of recently confiscated games were reportedly illegal classic video titles, according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Department. As reported earlier by RePlay, federal customs officials seized 168 coin-op videogames at the Los Angeles seaport on Oct. 23, 2009.
“The shipment had a total domestic value of $138,000 and a manufacturer’s suggested retail price of $672,000,” federal officials declared in a release to the media. “CBP officers seized the videogame machines on October 23 after confirming the videogames were not legally authorized. The shipment had arrived inside a sea container from China.”
The machines in question contained several copyrighted videogames, which are registered with the U.S. Copyright Office and recorded with CBP. The videogames found on the coin-operated machines were Frogger, Scramble, Time Pilot, Ms. Pac-Man, Super Pac-Man, Donkey Kong Jr., Donkey Kong 3 and Donkey Kong. CBP seized the items when the importer was unable to provide authorization from the owners.
CBP has designated intellectual property rights enforcement a priority trade issue, devoting considerable resources and personnel to property rights enforcement. CBP’s strategic approach is multi-layered and includes seizing fake goods at our borders, pushing the border outward through audits of infringing importers, cooperation with our international trading partners and collaborating with industry and other government agencies to enhance these efforts.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the unified border agency within the Department of Homeland Security charged with the management, control and protection of our nation’s borders at and between the official ports of entry. CBP is charged with keeping terrorists and terrorist weapons out of the country while enforcing hundreds of U.S. laws.
-
1UP HIGH SCORE
984290 984290
***************************************
* CONGRATULATIONS! THE WINNER IS YOU! *
***************************************
G A M E O V E R
FAR OUT PLAYERS
1 CheffoJeffo 984290
2 FruityFrank 58010
3 CrushRoller 57430
4 ManicMiner 2470
5 AAAAA 120
INSERT COIN
CREDIT 00
-
CheffoJeffo,
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ZYPOTtKfbKAU8M:http://pictures.funnyforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/a_winner_is_you_1024.jpg)
Very good, I applaud you once more. -- Could you also dig up, somehow, a follow up on that? I wonder what were the charges and if the importers said: "we did not know", and also if there were any international proceedings held for exporters.
-
It was the right link you assclown, holy ---fudgesicle--- do you have selective reading! Did you miss this post?
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.
AND
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.
-
Malenko,
You are the weakest link, good bye.
-
1UP HIGH SCORE
984290 984290
***************************************
* CONGRATULATIONS! THE WINNER IS YOU! *
***************************************
G A M E O V E R
FAR OUT PLAYERS
1 CheffoJeffo 984290
2 FruityFrank 58010
3 CrushRoller 57430
4 ManicMiner 2470
5 AAAAA 120
INSERT COIN
CREDIT 00
Say it with me ... "Cheffo's right!"
Attaboy!
-
Malenko,
You are the weakest link, good bye.
I disagree, someone provides you with the info you've been begging for and in return you want them to find follow up info for you? Is your gooogles broken?
Very good, I applaud you once more. -- Could you also dig up, somehow, a follow up on that? I wonder what were the charges and if the importers said: "we did not know", and also if there were any international proceedings held for exporters.
Its epic I told you to go back and re-read the link and you didnt. you just picked out what seemed to put you in the right and ignored everything else.
Also,
http://www.nesplayer.com/features/lawsuits/tengen.htm (http://www.nesplayer.com/features/lawsuits/tengen.htm)
-
(http://thewildhunt.org/images/stories/dg.jpg)
-
Driver-Man,
Running any type of "bootleg" board for profit just invites the copyright holders to come in and take everything you own. The multigame arcade cabinets are easily spotted and reported to either the FBI and/or the copyright holders. So if anyone gets mad at you (or your staff) for anything, expect them to report you. The copyright holder(s) will sue you and have the court freeze your assets (can't take use your bank account(s) or sell your stuff) until the trial is over. When you can't produce a licensing agreement with the copyright holder(s), the court will give them all your stuff. As this is going on, they will have made sure that the FBI starts investigating you and then you will face federal charges. Since you were clearly doing this for profit, the federal court will most likely give you a very hefty fine and at least some prison time to remind you that doing that is wrong.
Considering what you can and most likely would lose by running multigame boards for profit, it isn't worth the few dollars a day they would bring in. Be smart and stick to single game boards.
-
The multigame arcade cabinets are easily spotted and reported to either the FBI and/or the copyright holders.
"Multigame" does not imply "bootleg" or "illegal". Ultracade Technologies had been handed a 35-count felony indictment by the United States District Court. -- Are any of the Ultracade machines owned by people (who got tax invoice for their purchase) illegal?
So if anyone gets mad at you (or your staff) for anything, expect them to report you.
I said I only bought these PCBs to play, and that is the main argument - whether is it illegal to BUY them, only then comes the question if it would be illegal to SELL them once you've been told it is, or it might be, a bootleg.
The copyright holder(s) will sue you and have the court freeze your assets (can't take use your bank account(s) or sell your stuff) until the trial is over.
Bogeyman will get you and eat your teeth.
I'm CUSTOMER, I BOUGHT it, I did NOT MAKE it, ok?
What's more, copyright holders did not press any charges against Ultracade, did they? And no one pressed any charges against anyone in this case where federal customs officials seized 168 coin-op videogames at the Los Angeles seaport. Also, no copyright holder pressed any charges against any CUSTOMER/CONSUMER/BUYER, no matter how many IP were infringed in any one single item in the world, ever.
When you can't produce a licensing agreement with the copyright holder(s), the court will give them all your stuff.
Earlier we established there would be no licensing agreement even if those were genuine Pac-Man or whatever boards. Just like when you buy Nvidia card you do not get any Rambus licensing agreement. Which raises the question how did they establish these boards are not properly copyrighted in the first place.
As this is going on, they will have made sure that the FBI starts investigating you and then you will face federal charges.
Would I face federal charges if I BUY Ultracade machines?
Would I face federal charges if I OPERATE Ultracade machines?
Since you were clearly doing this for profit, the federal court will most likely give you a very hefty fine and at least some prison time to remind you that doing that is wrong.
As I said in about every third post, I only bought these PCBs to play.
Should anyone go to prison for buying Tengen Tetris, Nvidia or Ultracade?
Malenko,
Haze found no proof, someone's opinion is not acceptable source even if it was Nicola himself, especially without any actual evidence presented. On the other hand I'm pretty sure 60-in-1 works with MY version of "MAME", which is not derived from MAME.
=======================
Anyway, what is the issue with MAME demanding non-commercial use? Everyone obviously is very emotional about it, as if there was some actual reason, need or necessity for that to be so.
Just like with legalization of drugs or prostitution, has no one thought that making MAME license free for commercial use would actually be beneficial to whatever goals and purposes MAME is pursuing? At least they would have better chance to be credited, and how cool would it be to see MAME credits on legal machine in real arcades?
That would also make a fair market for everyone, plus healthy competition, so all you cabinet builders could compete with Chinese or Ultracade if you were allowed to sell MAME units (no game ROMs). Everyone wins, so what is so important and worth fighting for about "non-commercial use only"? Is there any reason for it, any at all? -- If MAME could reach settlement with factory of 60-in-1, what would they want?
-
Nintendo v. Tengen
Finally we have found some common grounds, but the conclusion was that Tengen Tetris is NOT considered "bootleg", "pirated" nor "illegal".
Once again, I have never said Tetris was a bootleg or pirated, you inferred that fact on your own. Tengen v Nintendo is a cut and dry case of a copyright violation, yet Tetris (ie, the ROM) is not at issue here. Never was. In fact, if the Atari lawyers didn't ---fudgesicle--- up by taking the copyright and letting the engineers do their thing the outcome would have been reversed. If you had read about the case, you would have known that.
Once again, the outcome of the nVidia v. Rambus issue is irrelevant as this is a copyright discussion not a patent discussion.
I believe it is very relevant, it all classifies under "Intellectual Property Law", have alike scope and application and is similarly handled in courts.
Yes they are under IP, but no, they are not handled similarly in courts. 9th Circuit Court stated in Sony v. Connectix that if Sony wanted to prevent copying of their copyrighted materials for the purposes of reverse engineering, then Sony should have patented it. Furthermore, there are many examples in court where the scope of either (and Trademark) are handled differently because of their application. In short, if copyrights and patents were so similar and alike in their scope and application then you would not see companies apply for both Patents and Copyrights on the same end consumer products. Sometimes a dizzying number of patents and copyrights may apply to a particular product.
There is a particular reason why there are entirely separate agencies that handle copyrights and patents.
The point from both these cases, Nintendo v. Tengen and nVidia v. Rambus, is that customers never even needed to worry about anything. -- Customers (end-user) are not supposed to disassemble their hardware to see if there was any IP infringing going on, and they were not required to follow news and read forums to know whether they have suddenly become criminals.
The people that you claim to not know the product they buy (from nVidia or Atari) is banned is a far cry from someone like you who buys a X in 1 board and tries to apply the same.
You have consistently failed requests to cite sources to support your claims. I, on the other hand have either given you direct links to government sites governing the laws in question or have instructed you to Google several sources on your own. In fact, your entire argument is now reduced to the same two "sources" you cite yet did not read or fully researched.
I'm not saying "you are wrong", simply that nothing there says you are right.
It is clear DOWNLOADING and SELLING is illegal. BUYING? Well that is far less clear, it is simply not addressed for the scenario where it is not immediately apparent the item violates any IP, and especially when it is taxed and available in shops everywhere.
Yes, you could make a conclusion that BUYING pirated DVD on the street is illegal, but for something to be "illegal" and "available in stores", that is contradiction to start with.
It's stupid to hang your entire "legal" argument off of paying taxes. California wants to tax marijuana and it allows "medical" marijuana, marijuana is still illegal under federal laws. U.S. federal laws trump state laws. Yet California is still going forward with the ballot measure. :dizzy: It may be a contradiction to you, makes sense to me. :cheers:
From the get go, you've been trying to shoehorn one law in an attempt to trump another. I can freely go to a dozen retailers in my area and buy any number of merchandise I know perfectly well violates copyrights and maybe a patent or two. I'll also get taxed for it. I'll even get an itemized receipt. Still doesn't legalize what I buy. And what about when I don't pay taxes for that product? ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---, if paying taxes legalizes an illegal product, you can bet the U.S. would have the highest tax income in the world. No U.S. government agency would ever have a budget problem, every citizen would happily pay their taxes. :laugh2:
The mistake here is that you're misappropriating some strange concept that a retailer must be legal in every aspect, even going so far as to represent one government or another in its taxing. Holy ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---, even Wal*Mart broke a few laws to make the sale.
Taxing a product does not make that product legal, period. End of discussion. That's how it is, take it or leave it.
=======
Oh for ---smurfs--- sake.... there's more?
As this is going on, they will have made sure that the FBI starts investigating you and then you will face federal charges.
Would I face federal charges if I BUY Ultracade machines?
You can, but there are usually mitigating factors to consider.
Would I face federal charges if I OPERATE Ultracade machines?
Not enough mitigating factors to make that determination.
Anyway, what is the issue with MAME demanding non-commercial use?
I've linked this once before, I'm not going to bother again. MAME will not.
Besides using Bleem! and Coleco as effective shields, they are also likely using the Reverse Engineering clause in the copyright law to protect their interests. Allowing MAME to be used in a for-profit matter as you describe would shift the legal status of MAME. While Bleem! and Coleco only had to go against one company each, there is no telling what would happen if you get enough irritated copyright holders, some with much deeper pockets than MAME, to go on the attack. Get this through your head, MAMEDev will not risk the future of the project to make a few dollars.
edit: fixed typos and bad markup
-
-redacted-
-
Once again, I have never said Tetris was a bootleg or pirated, you inferred that fact on your own. Tengen v Nintendo is a cut and dry case of a copyright violation, yet Tetris (ie, the ROM) is not at issue here. Never was. In fact, if the Atari lawyers didn't ---fudgesicle--- up by taking the copyright and letting the engineers do their thing the outcome would have been reversed. If you had read about the case, you would have known that.
- Tengen Tetris infringes copyright
- 60-in-1 board infringes copyright
- 60-in-1 board IS bootleg/pirated
- Tengen Tetris is NOT bootleg/pirated
Where is the logic that makes these two start the same and then end up completely different? What do you mean Tetris/ROM is not an issue, what is?
The people that you claim to not know the product they buy (from nVidia or Atari) is banned is a far cry from someone like you who buys a X in 1 board and tries to apply the same.
How far? Where is the line, where is the difference?
I can freely go to a dozen retailers in my area and buy any number of merchandise I know perfectly well violates copyrights and maybe a patent or two. I'll also get taxed for it. I'll even get an itemized receipt. Still doesn't legalize what I buy.
Can you name one such merchandise? -- Buy it, go to the police and report it, you will be entitled to get your money back, not charged with a crime.
Q. Would I face federal charges if I OPERATE Ultracade machines?
A. Not enough mitigating factors to make that determination.
Mitigating factors, like what?
Ultracade got a 35-count felony indictment, that is not enough?
60-in-1 was never involved in any court case, how is that enough?
-
Malenko,
Haze found no proof, someone's opinion is not acceptable source even if it was Nicola himself, especially without any actual evidence presented. On the other hand I'm pretty sure 60-in-1 works with MY version of "MAME", which is not derived from MAME.
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.
-
mame.cfg files, mame.dk readme, MAME romset names, disclaimer strings disabled but not deleted etc.
Malenko,
Sorry, that is good proof indeed.
Now it only needs to be made "official", placed somewhere on MAME website.
I suppose I'm bit blind after all. Thank you for your persistence.
Besides using Bleem! and Coleco as effective shields, they are also likely using the Reverse Engineering clause in the copyright law to protect their interests. Allowing MAME to be used in a for-profit matter as you describe would shift the legal status of MAME. While Bleem! and Coleco only had to go against one company each, there is no telling what would happen if you get enough irritated copyright holders, some with much deeper pockets than MAME, to go on the attack. Get this through your head, MAMEDev will not risk the future of the project to make a few dollars.
Ok, that makes sense and explains why people might get upset about it, but I slightly disagree anyway. I think MAME is very far away for ever getting in any trouble, as long as they themselves are not getting any money directly, donations are fine.
-
I think that part of the reason why this thread drags and beats the same old glue-factory-bound-carcass is the simple matter that Driver-Man disagrees with the law and has his own ideas as to how the law works, which is fine, except that he keeps insisting that everybody else is wrong, including the MAMEDevs who are the only people here who have any say about MAME and how it is to be used.
Statements like "Buy it, go to the police and report it, you will be entitled to get your money back, not charged with a crime." sound sensible, but are not the way things work.
True, no cop is going to arrest you for turning in a pirate arcade board (DUH!), but you aren't going to get your money back either. Or, if are you getting that money back, I haven't heard of the jurisdiction where that is possible. In this realm, caveat emptor is most often the way of things. I'm reasonably certain that Driver-Man has never tried what he suggests and is certainly not a lawyer, so how would he know ?
We have seen a grand total of ZERO evidence of his "taxation == legal" argument. We haven't seen a copy of the text used in the customs inspection that he claims makes his 60-in-1 board legal. He hasn't even revealed what jurisdiction he lives in! He makes assumptions, applies some logic and tells us the result as if it were fact ... sure sounds like genesim.
We know, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the 48-in-1 and 60-in-1 boards are MAME-based. We also know, with absolute certainty, that these boards are not sold as licensed copies of the games in question (which Driver-Man seems to conveniently ignore). They are not legal. Can you get arrested for owning them ? I doubt it, so long as you aren't reselling them or using them for profit.
Driver-Man, it is important for you to realize that MAMEDevs don't need *your* blessing to do what they want to do with MAME. Hell, it's pretty clear that at least one of them thinks you are completely ignorant and doesn't value your opinion in the least!
MAME is THEIR product, not YOURS.
It really is that simple.
FWIW, you haven't done enough research yet into our friend Mr Foley, who people here can tell you that I don't get along with, but he did have an attractive vision for an "iRoms"-like service where arcade ROMS could be legally licensed for home users. That is something that he wanted that I was certainly behind 100%.
-
Now it only needs to be made "official", placed somewhere on MAME website.
Why? There's no benefit to the MAME project or MAME developers in doing so that I can see.
as long as they themselves are not getting any money directly, donations are fine.
These are contradictory. Donations are money received, no matter how one splits hairs.
-
Why? There's no benefit to the MAME project or MAME developers in doing so that I can see.
Until then it's not reasonable to expect anyone would know, believe, or care about it.
================
FEDS SEIZE ALLEGED CLASSIC VIDEOGAME COPIES... A load of recently confiscated games were reportedly illegal classic video titles, according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Department.
We established there would be no licensing agreements even if those were genuine boards. Just like when you buy Nvidia card you do not get any Rambus licensing agreement.
Nintendo had to take Tengen to court for anyone to even question whether Tenegen Teteris might be "illegal".
So, how in the world did they ever establish those were not properly copyrighted and where is their legal justification to seize them without any court ever ruling in relation to this item or company that makes it?
What if two weeks later customs office released all the units to the importer with an apology?
-
I hear Mr. Foley is looking for a lodger. Why don't you apply. Should get on like an arcade on fire.
-
Why? There's no benefit to the MAME project or MAME developers in doing so that I can see.
Until then it's not reasonable to expect anyone would know, believe, or care about it.
Besides reading the MAME license? Or listening to an actual MAME developer?
:dunno
-
Why? There's no benefit to the MAME project or MAME developers in doing so that I can see.
Until then it's not reasonable to expect anyone would know, believe, or care about it.
If they are like you, they wont click a link and if they do, they wont read it anyway?
-
So, how in the world did they ever establish those were not properly copyrighted and where is their legal justification to seize them without any court ever ruling in relation to this item or company that makes it?
http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=105734.msg1120538#msg1120538 (http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=105734.msg1120538#msg1120538)
-
driverman's either the dumbest guy on earth or an epic troll.
-
Ignorance would probably go a long way to a first time offender, Although I deal mostly with just boards, [I have thousands of them]
I would be hard pressed to even know it was bootleged until it was to late to realisticly to anything about it. Non of them came with any
kind of certificate.
-
Ignorance might mitigate punishment, but not guilt, for any particular offense. There were two threads running throughout this topic though:
1. Is it illegal? (Answer: Clearly, yes, semantics and rationale aside).
2. Will you get in trouble? (Answer: Who knows. Depends on circumstances and the whim of the authorities).
There seems to be some confusion between points 1 and 2 above, be it through ignorance, stubbornness, or outright trolling -- who knows :)
--- saint
-
What"s not being said here however is.. ACTA, [anti counterfeiting trade agreement] Think forward boys!
-
What"s not being said here however is.. ACTA, [anti counterfeiting trade agreement] Think forward boys!
Why? It's still in negotiations.
-
Has MAME been registered with "copyright office" or whatever office?
Are you sure MAME is legal to start with? Did you read Section 1201'?
To hopefully put this in a way you can understand, imagine MAME is the guy, and you are the girl.
(http://4gifs.com/gallery/d/166345-3/Leapfrog_prank.gif?)
-
What"s not being said here however is.. ACTA, [anti counterfeiting trade agreement] Think forward boys!
Welcome to the dark side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti_Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti_Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement)
Because it is in effect a treaty, ACTA would overcome many court precedents defining consumer rights as to "fair use" and would either change or remove limitations on the application of intellectual property laws.
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) has published "Speak out against ACTA", stating that the ACTA threatens free software by creating a culture "in which the freedom that is required to produce free software is seen as dangerous and threatening rather than creative, innovative, and exciting."
--end quote
Agree, it's "backwards" for many here to push against their own interests and condemn the very thing they depend on.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_liability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_liability)
Secondary liability, or indirect infringement, arises when a party materially contributes to, facilitates, induces or is otherwise responsible for directly infringing acts carried out by another party.
The US has statutorily codified secondary liability rules for trademarks and patents; however, for matters relating to copyright, this has solely been a product of case law developments. In other words, courts - rather than Congress - have been the primary developers of theories and policies concerning secondary liability.
We have three court cases here.
COURT RULING: Nintendo v. Tengen, Tengen Tetris infringing copyright but NOT ILLEGAL
COURT RULING: Rambus v. Nvidia, Nvidia cards infringing patents but NOT ILLEGAL
FELONY INDICTMENT: ??? v. Ultracade, Multigames allegedly infringing copyright but are NOT ILLEGAL?
And now, 60-in-1, the only case that has not been involved in any court proceedings everyone knows IS ILLEGAL??!?!
Lalelilulelo....
By the way, I cracked my 450-in-1 last night so I can add more games. It's very tedious to add ROMs as it uses whole image of a name instead of fonts, plus the names are encrypted, but it's easy to crack it - it's just alphabet jump table that has constant and predefined one-to-one relation with itself. If anyone wants to know more and if that is ok with the forum rules, feel free to ask.
--------------------------
Vicarious liability
- The landmark case on vicarious liability for sales of counterfeit recordings is Shapiro, Bernstein and Co. v. H.L. Green Co.[2] In Shapiro, the court was faced with a copyright infringement suit against the owner of a chain of department stores where a concessionaire was selling counterfeit recordings. The Shapiro court ultimately imposed liability, even though the defendant was unaware of the infringement, reasoning that the store proprietor had the power to cease the conduct of the concessionaire, and because the proprietor obtained direct financial benefit from the infringement.
Contributory liability
- Contributory liability or contributory infringement has been widely defined as a form of liability on the part of someone who is not directly infringing but nevertheless is making contributions to the infringing acts of others. Material contributions to the act (or enabling thereof), as well as knowledge of the act itself, are key elements of contributory liability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_liability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_liability)
-
We have three court cases here.
COURT RULING: Nintendo v. Tengen, Tengen Tetris infringing copyright but NOT ILLEGAL
COURT RULING: Rambus v. Nvidia, Nvidia cards infringing patents but NOT ILLEGAL
FELONY INDICTMENT: ??? v. Ultracade, Multigames allegedly infringing copyright but are NOT ILLEGAL?
And now, 60-in-1, the only case that has not been involved in any court proceedings everyone knows IS ILLEGAL??!?!
This is what I have been trying to understand in your argument.
Copyright infringmenet infringement is illegal (forbidden by the law).
Depending on the nature and value of the infringement, it may also be criminal (you can go to jail).
-
Driver dude, these boards are definitely legal as sanctioned by the zakkistani/taffrican alliance world government of everything and everyone.
You now have permission (on subscription of licence) to use these boards up to and not exceeding 73 cents(canadian) per credit on location in every single country in the alliance, and thats all the ones that matter so knock yourself out. please pm me your address as you will need the banking details for the subscription of your licence, at $5 it may seem expensive, but don't forget, anyone who may try to talk sense to you in the future, can be silenced immediately by the certificate.
Oh and in case you need to know, LCD's are way more arcade authentic looking than CRT's.
-
Seriously, please end this. A couple of threads lately have made this place a less desriable place to visit then previously. There doesn't seem to be a real debate going on, just one guy trying to stir meadow muffin and alot of others rising to the bait. In the long term I don't think threads like this are to the benefit of the forum and the fact that this one won't die a natural death is sapping my desire to visit.
-
Seriously, please end this. A couple of threads lately have made this place a less desriable place to visit then previously. There doesn't seem to be a real debate going on, just one guy trying to stir meadow muffin and alot of others rising to the bait. In the long term I don't think threads like this are to the benefit of the forum and the fact that this one won't die a natural death is sapping my desire to visit.
I agree. Every single one of the arguments Driver has had has been disproved in some manner by the other members of this board. Driver continues to ignore these responses, cherry pick the responses out of context, or introduce some other argument that supports his invalid opinion on the matter with no more strength than a single strand of spider web.
Look at Driver's most recent response regarding Secondary Liability for instance.
-
This thread definitely brings down the good feeling that the board usually has.
-
Yep, think this has run its course :)