LoopHole

[ultrastyle]

Something just occured to me.
I own one of those joystick that plugs into the TV games that has 5 games on it. Pac-man, Rally-x, Galaxian, Dig-dug, and Bosconian. I just read in a forum that some company plans to come out with a bunch more of these. Now is it just me or is the rom on my PC a backup of said games? Purchasing these handhelds may lead to having a fairly healthy stack of legal backups, at the very least for classics. Finally, a loophole for the average american to enjoy!
  Chris

[pmc]

I don't know man. Sounds alot like saying that since I bought a Ms. Pacman cartridge for my Sega Genesis in 1990 I may now be legal to own an Internet downloaded ROM that I use with MAME. I don't think there's any legal relationship between the two excepting a common copyright holder and a related code geneology.

I own several games for multiple platforms and had to pay for each of them separately. They are different products.

That's my initial thought anyway. I'm certainly no lawyer.

[ultrastyle]

But in this case, you are getting the exact copy of the ROM, not a port to a platform. My ROM on my PC is the same as the ROM on the handheld.

[Brad Lee]

Have you decompiled the code on the handheld games and checked that it's the exact code as the mame rom? I'm not sure, but I doubt that these handhelds are just tiny versions of mame running the same code, loading the same roms, etc. My geuss is that it's a near total rewrite of the game, heavily optimized for whatever chips are in the handheld.

[Magnet_Eye]

I thought I read that the games on those aren't the originals, but reproductions.

 

[Howard_Casto]

You are correct magnet.... regardless you are only entitled to make a "backup copy" of a piece of software if the eula agreement doesn't prohibit it.  On 99.99% of the products out there, by opening the package you wave that right.

I'm not sure where you guys got the idea that a "free use" copy is legal, but it hasn't been since the 70's.  Now they won't prosecute you, but it's still not technically a legal right.  

Some agreements give you the right though.  StarRoms, for example, they explicitly allow backups as long as only one copy is active (at least that's what I got out of it).  

[bigmoe]

You are correct magnet.... regardless you are only entitled to make a "backup copy" of a piece of software if the eula agreement doesn't prohibit it.  On 99.99% of the products out there, by opening the package you wave that right.

Actually, I believe the right to make a backup archival copy is protected by law and can't actually be waived by an eula (even though they try).  The eula can state it, but that doesn't mean it can be enforced.

Said law is one of the pillars of some of the bizarre legal argument(s) that SCO is making against IBM and the attack on the GPL (they are using a floor protected by law as a ceiling....you would think Bowies is smarter than this).

That said, I doubt MAME use qualifies as "archival".  And you would have get sued and then subpoena the manufacturers to really find out if the code is similar enough to qualify as a copy.

I do agree with the end result of the other posters.  Buying one of these might mitigate the damages argument in a civil suit, but does nothing to address the legalities of a criminal case (which could result in fines or imprisonment).

b

[ultrastyle]

well I thought I'd take it to Jakks and here is the response I got:

They are ports of the arcade roms

Anthony Maldonado
Consumer Relations
Jakks Pacific, Inc.


 

[bigmoe]

well I thought I'd take it to Jakks and here is the response I got:

They are ports of the arcade roms

Anthony Maldonado
Consumer Relations
Jakks Pacific, Inc.

That was a very good idea on your part, and very interesting.

I'm just not sure what his reponse means...?  It seems like there is more than one way to read it.

b