More StarRoms copyright mumbo-jumbo

[bigmoe]

Of course there are a few problems with the whole "Mame software is 100 percent legitimate" theory.

A very good point.  I don't think it would be difficult for the industry to convince the "average" juror that the software itself was designed to infringe copyright.  The RIAA already has that message out quite well with P2P software, in some cases duping otherwise intelligent judges (hooray for the recent Canada ruling...guns don't kill people, people kill people!  Or some such).

Number one problem, it supports bootleg games. Those were never legal, they weren't legal nor legitimate 20 years ago, nor are they now.

Very true.  I'm not sure it's legally pertinent, though, since the fact that MAME supports bootlegs MAY be simply due to the fact that it supports the original.  I'm not familiar enough with the MAME code to comment on that.  Unless the industry could show that the MAME devs deliberately supported a bootleg, this may be a nonissue, and even if it was, only in a suit against said MAME devs, rather than against Stanley MameUser.

Number two problem. In many cases there is simply no way the Mame devs had a legitimate copy of the rom to write the driver for in the first place. Bradley Trainer and a few other Mame supported titles literally exist as only one or two machines/boardsets that are not, and never were owned by the Mame devs (I believe this to be the case for MOST of the games actually, not just the protos).

You're right, quite problematic.  If the MAME devs did not have the actual ROMS as they were working on them, they would be susceptible to the same copyright infringement proceedings Stanley is.  If they had them, but sold them afterwards, that could cloud things...so long as they don't NOW have a copy of the ROM without owning the original.

Of course I also believe there is a direct but silent link between the Mame devs and the release of the ROM on the internet itself, at least in some cases.

Probably true, but can it be proven in court?  Very scary.  If so: likely game over.

b

[Santoro]

Of course there are a few problems with the whole "Mame software is 100 percent legitimate" theory.

Number one problem, it supports bootleg games. Those were never legal, they weren't legal nor legitimate 20 years ago, nor are they now.

I disagree.  A PC can do all sorts of illegal things.  Windows media player can play various types of illegal porn, I imagine.  That doesn't make WMP illegitimate,  it is the content that is illegitimate.

Number two problem. In many cases there is simply no way the Mame devs had a legitimate copy of the rom to write the driver for in the first place. Bradley Trainer and a few other Mame supported titles literally exist as only one or two machines/boardsets that are not, and never were owned by the Mame devs (I believe this to be the case for MOST of the games actually, not just the protos).

I wasn't aware of these facts and it sounds like a fair statement.  But I think that just because Mame has drivers for those games, there is no material harm done to the companies unless someone posesses and the content (ROMs.)

I still feel that because Mame has significant legitimate uses (~50 games available at StarRoms for example) Mame itself is at least 80% legitimate.

[Tilzs]

I still feel that because Mame has significant legitimate uses (~50 games available at StarRoms for example) Mame itself is at least 80% legitimate.

But are you useing it that way

[Tiger-Heli]

Bigmoe seems to have a good handle on the answer's so I'll stick to questions here.

A very good point.  I don't think it would be difficult for the industry to convince the "average" juror that the software itself was designed to infringe copyright.

Agreed, I think technically, the software is only reproducing certain hardware (processors, etc.) which is legal.  But you could probably convince a judge that since no software which runs on that hardware was public domain, emulating the hardware was an infringement issue.

Sortof like when they wanted to make it illegal to make and sell any device which allowed you to copy protected music CD's and then someone found out you could do this with a Sharpie marker - which might have made Sharpie's illegal . . .

Very true.  I'm not sure it's legally pertinent, though, since the fact that MAME supports bootlegs MAY be simply due to the fact that it supports the original.  I'm not familiar enough with the MAME code to comment on that.  Unless the industry could show that the MAME devs deliberately supported a bootleg, this may be a nonissue, and even if it was, only in a suit against said MAME devs, rather than against Stanley MameUser.

Agreed, the bootlegs of PacMan infringe on Namco's () copyright, but MAME already supports PacMan, so Namco would be able to make the case there.  Now if MAME supported only the bootlegs and not the original. . . ?

You're right, quite problematic.  If the MAME devs did not have the actual ROMS as they were working on them, they would be susceptible to the same copyright infringement proceedings Stanley is.  If they had them, but sold them afterwards, that could cloud things...so long as they don't NOW have a copy of the ROM without owning the original.

I think they buy (or borrow) the boards, dump the roms, and work from the dumps - I thought there was a clause that said it was legal to have the roms for educational or research purposes (such as developing a MAME driver).  Am I wrong?

Probably true, but can it be proven in court?  Very scary.  If so: likely game over.

Hadn't thought of the legal ramifications of that one - Agreed, scary!!!

[Tiger-Heli]

I disagree.  A PC can do all sorts of illegal things.  Windows media player can play various types of illegal porn, I imagine.  That doesn't make WMP illegitimate,  it is the content that is illegitimate.

Well, a roach clip (weed) doesn't do anything illegal without the content, but I still can get busted for having one in a lot of states.  (Not speaking from experience).

I wasn't aware of these facts and it sounds like a fair statement.  But I think that just because Mame has drivers for those games, there is no material harm done to the companies unless someone posesses and the content (ROMs.)

Yes and no. . . MAME is not very useful without the content, and the content would not be very useful without MAME.  OTOH if the arcade companies wanted to go after someone, it's probably easier to sue 30 or so MAME devs than 1,000's of illegal ROM possessors.

I still feel that because Mame has significant legitimate uses (~50 games available at StarRoms for example) Mame itself is at least 80% legitimate.

Nice rationalization - The 50 Roms at StarRoms are probably okay for MAME to emulate the hardware for (at least now, after the fact).  The other approximately 4700 possibly aren't.  When I took math, that makes MAME slightly over 1% legitimate, not that I'm complaining.

[RacerX]

I disagree.  A PC can do all sorts of illegal things.  Windows media player can play various types of illegal porn, I imagine.  That doesn't make WMP illegitimate,  it is the content that is illegitimate.

Well, a roach clip (weed) doesn't do anything illegal without the content, but I still can get busted for having one in a lot of states.  (Not speaking from experience).

That's because there is no legitimate use for a roach clip.  Its only purpose is to do something illegal.  The same can't be said about Windows Media Player or MAME.

[Tailgunner]

Well, a roach clip (weed) doesn't do anything illegal without the content, but I still can get busted for having one in a lot of states.  (Not speaking from experience).

That's because there is no legitimate use for a roach clip.  Its only purpose is to do something illegal.  The same can't be said about Windows Media Player or MAME.

Excepting a few "stealth" roachclips, the majority are either alligator clips or hemostats (aka locking forceps). Alligator clips are electrical tools, typically used with a meter. Hemostats are surgical tools that have a wide range of uses outside of an operating room.  A LEO finding either one in a tray full of stems and seeds can rightly assume it's being used as drug paraphernalia, but that doesn't mean there aren't legitimate uses for them.

[SirPeale]

My father actually has a roach clip, although he's never smoked weed a day in his life.  It's in the shape of a motorcycle (made out of spun wire) which is really, totally cool.  I never knew what it was until he told me.

[Santoro]

Nice rationalization - The 50 Roms at StarRoms are probably okay for MAME to emulate the hardware for (at least now, after the fact).  The other approximately 4700 possibly aren't.  When I took math, that makes MAME slightly over 1% legitimate, not that I'm complaining.

This isn't a mathematical calculation, but a legal discussion.  If Mame has legitimate uses, it is legally legitimate, just like WMP.  That was my original point.  

The 80% comment was only to attempt to demonstrate that I recognize that there are also some illegitimate uses.  I take it back because it muddied my point.  

The roach clip example is a bad one IMHO because while you could argue that your stinky roach clip was for some legitimate use, a reasonable jury might not believe it.  On the other hand, it would be pretty easy to point a jury to Staroms and ebay and demonstrate that there is a real, active communty of legal ROM users.

(no offense to Peale's dad - I have no doubt that there are folks out there who actually do collect Roach clips for other uses.  I just think that if it ever wound up in court it might be harder to defend than Mame.)

[SirPeale]

Yes and no. . . MAME is not very useful without the content, and the content would not be very useful without MAME.  OTOH if the arcade companies wanted to go after someone, it's probably easier to sue 30 or so MAME devs than 1,000's of illegal ROM possessors.

Actually, you're wrong about that.  MAME source has been instrumental in a lot of techs getting machines working again, since they can see the souce to find exactly what make a part of a game tick.

...The 50 Roms at StarRoms are probably okay for MAME to emulate the hardware for (at least now, after the fact).  The other approximately 4700 possibly aren't.  When I took math, that makes MAME slightly over 1% legitimate, not that I'm complaining.

MAME is legitimate no matter what.  Emulators aren't illegal, but most ripped ROM images are.