UltraCade wins AMOA 2005 Innovation Award

[Edgedamage]

As much as i don't like DF's actions we should keep something in mind. Microsoft in the 90's would threaten retailers by saying "if you don't give our products such and such floor space we will pull our products from your retail chain" We say DF claims rights to things he does not own. But early versions of windows was biased on some code from apple. Which they said was their own.  But posting about the AMOA award here is the same as getting a group of kids sent to detention and then walking past the door and giving them the finger. But as we all know press bad or good is still press. It gets you noticed.

[ChadTower]

Microsoft in the 90's would threaten retailers by saying "if you don't give our products such and such floor space we will pull our products from your retail chain"

That's just part of the distribution contract.  All manufacturers with enough clout do that.  When I worked at Kodak we specifically made Staples, CompUSA, BestBuy, etc agree to have our digital products on specific positions on the shelves as well as a separate, prominent demo display directly on the main aisle.  It's not illegal, it's a negotiating leverage point.

[Edgedamage]

But it could be seen as bullying. Like DF is seen as bullying.

[ChadTower]

Gee, business is tough.  Maybe we should all make a living outside of the business world.

[SirPoonga]

Guys, what good is it to write inflamatory hypothetical comments like these? It's not that hard to write an emulator. (No, I haven't written one, but I've worked with someone who has. Just check out www.RetroFX.com). There are core CPU emulators available for license out there already (Z80, 65XX, 68XXX, etc) so all a coder needs to do is build on that, figure out video mapping, etc.

Sirponga:
Regarding $200 as the price point for hardware and roms. Are you talking about using a 486? Let's be realistic. If you're marketing a new item, with warranty and tech support on it, you're going to use TODAY'S available hardware, even if it's overkill.

I am talking about today's hardware.  You can get an econo-pc from a retailer, which will be like a 1Ghz machine, for less than $150.  Remember, that would be without monitor because most likely your cabinet will have a monitor.  Then you can find the midway and atari games for cheap at best buy.  Now, it won't be a national known name likeDell, something more like a local retailer.

Are you sure ultracade had auctions shut down in this way?  Have we looked into the internal implementation of VERO?  Is it possible, and I believe it is, that you send your paperwork in to Ebay and they Ebay is responsible for much of the shutdowns?  If they are responsible for choosing auctions that they believe in violation of your VERO rights, could they shut down auctions that are ambiguous, or only border on being in violation?  It is very plausible that Ebay chooses to err on the side of caution and shuts down anything that looks like it is in violation.  That would certainly be in line with Ebay's history of making corporate rights higher than user rights.

OK, I see your point and I am sure that happens to.  Like the joystick incident I was watching was probably due to that.
However the emails that have been quoted in the huge thread, like DreamArcade's. signed Ultracade.

But I realize the answer isn't going to make a difference, people already have their opinion of ultracade.

So, onto current times... 

[ChadTower]

OK, I see your point and I am sure that happens to.

[RayB]

This whole thing ties strongly into why I can't stand much of the MAME userbase.

[ChadTower]

Exactly, and if they all would STFU, they might realize all that would happen is that development and distribution would go underground.

[quarterback]

Are you sure ultracade had auctions shut down in this way?

[ChadTower]

So, you're saying Ebay would allow Foley to have auctions pulled based on a trademark that he did not own?  Wouldn't a reasonably implemented VERO require proof of trademark ownership before it would begin pulling items?

[Edgedamage]

Gee, business is tough.  Maybe we should all make a living outside of the business world.

Wow you took that wrong. I meant why attack DF when every other business does the same. Also who cares if all the rom sites disappear everyone here probally has all the roms they will ever need. As for marquees anyone building a cab makes there own just go to Kinko's. So again who cares if marquee sites are shut down.

[SirPoonga]

Here's the real issue no one will admit to: It's the fear that MAME gets shut down, and access to ROMs gets completely wiped out. That's their stake in it. They want their free arcade games. (I'm not defending them; I just think this is the crux of why everyone gets so hot under the collar about it.)

No, that's not it.  That issue has already been taken care of.  Mame is not going to be shut down as the trademark issue is already over.  It's been proven in court emulation is legal..

The issue is if ultracade is going to post information about their products here, which I assume is in hopes of selling the products here, then we need to know due to the past if the company can be trusted.
Otherwise what's the point of posting PR information here?

[davidrfoley]

All MAME auctions that have been shut down were illegal in one way or another.  They met one of the following criteria:

- advertising unlicensed games that ship with the cabinet (copyright and tm violation)
- advertising using screen shots of unlicensed games (copyright violation)
- advertising showing cabinet artwork with unlicnesed characters or game logos (copyright and tm violation)
- advertising ability to run unlicensed games (violation of mame license agreement)
- advertising shipment with full version of mame (violation of mame license agreement)

No legitimate auctions were shut down.

[ChadTower]

- advertising ability to run unlicensed games (violation of mame license agreement)
- advertising shipment with full version of mame (violation of mame license agreement)

Could you explain why Ultracade has the right to shut down auctions in violation of the MAME license agreement?

[markrvp]

The question the people on this thread would like answered Mr. Foley is which of the above criterian applied to the emdkay auctions?

[davidrfoley]

we shut down hundreds of auctions a week.  Show me the auction and we can tell you what it violated.

[Stingray]

we shut down hundreds of auctions a week.

What a swell fella.

-S

[SirPoonga]

The question the people on this thread would like answered Mr. Foley is which of the above criterian applied to the emdkay auctions?

If emdkay used a license character that's fine for shutting those down.  But he also had marquees that only said mame, and at the time mame was not trademarked so it didn't fall under any of those criteria.
And DreamArcade had licensed games from StarRoms.

And with all those criteria you don't need to try and trademark mame in order do that.

[davidrfoley]

Stingray, try and understand IP rights.   Suppose you wrote a song, and pressed it on a CD and sold the CD.  Then, you found someone who had copied your CD, and was selling bootlegs of it on eBay.  You'd probably feel as though they were stealing from you. 

People that do not own, and do not license video games, video game characters, or video game names, and then sell products based on them are stealing. 

UltraCade Technologies has either purchased or licensed the right to use the games and characters, and we have the right to stop those that don't, in fact, in many of our contracts we are required to stop those that don't.

If you look at many of the MAME cabinet sellers, or graphics reproduction sellers, they use characters such as Mr. DO!, Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, and others on the graphics treatments.  None of these graphics are licensed, and therefore the product is illegal. 

[davidrfoley]

until very recently, Dream Arcades was using unlicensed characters on their cabinets.

[Stingray]

Stingray, try and understand IP rights.   Suppose you wrote a song, and pressed it on a CD and sold the CD.  Then, you found someone who had copied your CD, and was selling bootlegs of it on eBay.  You'd probably feel as though they were stealing from you.

I understand IP rights. Please don't patronise me. I'm totally on the side of the legitimate owners of IP being compensated for their work. I'm sure a search of these forums will back up this claim.  Your analogy is all wrong anyway. You didn't develop MAME, you didn't design the logo. You did see that there was a chance to steal those things, but you didn't get away with it. Preach to me about IP rights indeed!

-S

[davidrfoley]

Stingray, nothing on eBay was selling simply MAME, all of the auctions were selling products using MAME AND other items.  No one sells the emulator by itself, they sell products based on the emulator.  Many of those people violate our IP rights, and we put a stop to it.

[Thenasty]

You didn't develop MAME, you didn't design the logo. You did see that there was a chance to steal those things, but you didn't get away with it. Preach to me about IP rights indeed!

-S

Once a Snake will always be a Snake.

[Stingray]

Stingray, nothing on eBay was selling simply MAME, all of the auctions were selling products using MAME AND other items.  No one sells the emulator by itself, they sell products based on the emulator.  Many of those people violate our IP rights, and we put a stop to it.

And how does this make it your resposibility to register the trademark in your own name, even after by your own admission, you tried many times to email the MAME team on the subject and they clearly expressed no interest in playing your game. Sure the TM is in the hands of the correct people now, but that's only because you instigated the entire mess. Left to their own devices, the MAME team would probebly never have registered the trademark. Make all the claims you like about how you were just protecting MAME, nobody is buying that story and you had no reason to fool around with someone elses IP.

-S

[davidrfoley]

stolen property is stolen property.

[davidrfoley]

Had someone else come along, and filed a TM on MAME, the MAME team would no longer own it.  Had I wished to keep the TM, I could have said nothing and the USPTO would have issued the TM without a single person knowing about it.

[emdkay]

Had someone else come along, and filed a TM on MAME, the MAME team would no longer own it.  Had I wished to keep the TM, I could have said nothing and the USPTO would have issued the TM without a single person knowing about it.

But you did say nothing.  You tried to steal the Mame TM, but somebody blew the whistle on you.  That's how you failed. 

It's laughable that you try to speak of IP rights when you are guilty of attempted IP theft - such a hypocrite.

I'm also waiting for that email dialoge between us that you stated has been out of context, with messages missing.  Or, just choose to selectively not respond to that and continue to admit guilt.

[ChadTower]

And how does this make it your resposibility to register the trademark in your own name, even after by your own admission, you tried many times to email the MAME team on the subject and they clearly expressed no interest in playing your game. Sure the TM is in the hands of the correct people now, but that's only because you instigated the entire mess. Left to their own devices, the MAME team would probebly never have registered the trademark. Make all the claims you like about how you were just protecting MAME, nobody is buying that story and you had no reason to fool around with someone elses IP.

It appears to have been an unforunately, but necessarily, circuitous method of putting a stop to competitors by forcing the MAME team to enforce their own IP.

[ferrarimanf355]

Okay, everybody calm down and take a deep breath. To the BYOAC community, I once again reiterate that everyone makes mistakes, and that the best people learn from them. After all, that which does not kill me can only make me stronger, right?

Mr. Foley, I can see where you're going here, and I understand your motives, but I urge you to be honest and forthright with everybody here, so you can build up your trust. Once you do that, everything else will fall into place, and everybody's a winner. After all, honesty is the best policy, right?

[davidrfoley]

Ferrari I agree and have tried to say let's move on.

As for "blowing the whistle" that simply did not happen.   I blew the whistle myself.  As I have tried to state, if I was looking to own the TM, I would right now, as I would not have mentioned a thing until it was issued at which point it would be mine.  Instead, as others have pointed out, I made mention of the TM so that the MAME team could properly protect it.  I even went as far as to offer to pay for the legal fees to ensure that it was in Nicola's name.  I'm sorry if people don't like the tactics we used, but we were left with no alternative.  We had a choice of sitting back and watching others take MAME, toss it into a cabinet, take unlicensed games, and characters and make money doing what we were doing, but without paying the royalties to the rights owners. 

What everyone fails to understand is that this has nothing to do with MAME itself.  MAME is simply a vehicle which has allowed people who didn't have the technical resources, to quickly and cheaply make products that compete with our products.  Its sort of analogous to the MP3 music problems.  The RIAA didn't go after the makers of MP3 players such as WinAMP, they went after those that copied the music without paying for it.  There is no RIAA for video games, and therefore we are left to defend our rights ourselves.  We will use whatever legal means are available to us.

What I don't understand is how people in this forum can be so quick to defend others who are profiting from MAME, and accuse us of wrong doing when we try to stop others who are running illegal business selling items based on someone Else's work.  Everyone seems to criticize us for trying to defend our rights, and back individuals and companies who do the EXACT thing that we are being crucified for.  How is it that companies that download MAME, download characters, download games, put them into a package and sell them should be defended?  They didn't create any of the work.  They didn't pay the owners for the works.  They simply turn them around and sell them, and somehow they are defended here on this forum as though they are doing something right.

[ChadTower]

Now, the one reasonable question I have about your strategy to protect yourself from unlicensed competition...

...if the MAME team felt no need to establish a trademark, or to protect their IP, was it right to force them against their will?  It clearly was in your best interest, but was it in theirs?

[davidrfoley]

Chad, I would have to say yes, because if I had not done it someone else could have and then they would have lost the TM rights.  I've also helped them to strongly establish the legitimate distribution of MAME based product, and they are now clearly seperated from those that pirate games.  I'm sure it can be argued, but I believe it was in thier own best interest. 

Just because my commercial interest was served doesn't mean that theirs couldnt' be as well, there is such a thing as win win.

[Grasshopper]

Had someone else come along, and filed a TM on MAME, the MAME team would no longer own it.  Had I wished to keep the TM, I could have said nothing and the USPTO would have issued the TM without a single person knowing about it.

Maybe, but as soon as you tried to prosecute someone for infringing your TM rights you'd be laughed out of court. I mean it's laughably easy to prove that the MAME logo has already been in use for many years and that your company has no genuine connection with the trademark. In any case many of the organisations making reference to MAME in their literature (but not I might add necessarily selling anything illegal) are based outside the US and therefore not subject to US trademark laws.

Mr Foley, one thing that I find curious about this whole affair is how you managed to get the mamedevs to co-operate with you. I mean if I was involved in a public domain project and a commercial organisation came along and said we've taken the liberty of enforcing your TM for you so we can use it to protect our commercial interests I'd tell them to swivel. I can only conclude that the mamedevs were either threatened with legal sanctions or paid off. Would you care to enlighten us as to what really happened?

[SirPoonga]

I'm sorry if people don't like the tactics we used, but we were left with no alternative. We had a choice of sitting back and watching others take MAME, toss it into a cabinet, take unlicensed games, and characters and make money doing what we were doing, but without paying the royalties to the rights owners.

Then answer this one question.  Why did you need to try to trademark mame to do this?  Do you not have proof that games were unlicensed?  Because the mame name is not needed to shutdown an auction with unlicensed games and characters.  If someone had an auction with Mr. DO! on it couldn't you just use your trademark to shut it down instead of trying to trademark mame?

What I don't understand is how people in this forum can be so quick to defend others who are profiting from MAME

No one is defending that, the people here are against selling illegal games and you keep trying to make that the issue by bringing it up.  If someone is trying to defend emdkay or DreamArcades it is probably because they didn't know the auctions also included unlicenced characters.  If emdkay put Mr. DO! on a marquee and sold it when the character is your property that's fine.  Otherwise the only remote hint of defending that is wondering why something that only said mame was shut down as that did happen.    If that was the fault of Vero being over zealous and you only requested ones that had your licenses then you were not at fault.  But you didn't need to try and trademark mame for that.
The issue is not of you shutting down illegal auctions, we are all fine with that.  We promote using legal games on your arcade cabinet.  The issue is why did you need the mame name in order to shut down something with unlicensed games or characters?

What everyone fails to understand is that this has nothing to do with MAME itself.

No, we realize you didn't want to take the software, you just wanted the name.

I made mention of the TM so that the MAME team could properly protect it

This is incorrect as you tried to trademark mame for yourself, not just mention it.  This means you tried to take the name so you could enforce it.

If you wanted to make a point to mame that they need to deal with their software license you should have just tried for the trademark (if a threat to try for the trademark didn't work) and then hand it over to mame once they got worried.  You didn't need to use the name as an excuse to shut those illegal auctions down since it wasn't mame making the auctions illegal, it was unlicensed games and characters.

So people are upset because you crossed the line and went overboard with it when you didn't need to.

[SirPoonga]

Now, the one reasonable question I have about your strategy to protect yourself from unlicensed competition...

...if the MAME team felt no need to establish a trademark, or to protect their IP, was it right to force them against their will?  It clearly was in your best interest, but was it in theirs?

BTW, I am happy with comments like this we have turned what could have been a flamefest back to a rational discussion on the topic.  trust me, my finger has been on the send to post hell button.

[ferrarimanf355]

Ferrari I agree and have tried to say let's move on.

Thank you.

[ChadTower]

This is incorrect as you tried to trademark mame for yourself, not just mention it.

[SirPoonga]

This is incorrect as you tried to trademark mame for yourself, not just mention it.  This means you tried to take the name so you could enforce it.

What he did was force the MAME team into a limited time use it or lose it scenario.  He forced their hand by applying, and if they still would not enforce their trademark, he was going to take it and try to enforce it himself.

So are we saying Ultrace applied for the trademark and gave nicola the chance to take the trademark.  But refused so he started using the name to get more attention?

[SirPoonga]

Had someone else come along, and filed a TM on MAME, the MAME team would no longer own it.  Had I wished to keep the TM, I could have said nothing and the USPTO would have issued the TM without a single person knowing about it.

Maybe, but as soon as you tried to prosecute someone for infringing your TM rights you'd be laughed out of court. I mean it's laughably easy to prove that the MAME logo has already been in use for many years and that your company has no genuine connection with the trademark.

Actually, it could happen.
Say someone tried to trademark mame but didn't do anything, just applied and let it go through the process hoping no one is searching the trademark office for mame.  It would have become registered.  Then that person could have started doing stuff with the name.  I doubt the mame team has the funding or legal resources to defend against it after that point.

[SirPoonga]

BTW, SirPoonga, SHHHHHHH.  More comments about my keeping things out of Post Hell and you'll ruin my rep.   

I noticed you pulled ahead of me in post count, must be all the bacon talk.