Discussion: Ultracade and the Mame Trademark

[quarterback]

Edited to remove my sarcastic response to a post I find erroneous, off-base, misguided and a poor attempt to make me feel sorry for someone who is attempting to take something that isn't his and trying to put people out of business with threats of legal action so he himself can make more money

This is ridiculous.

[vader]

I guess since you are feeling Mr. Foley's pain, your are going to delete MAME and all of your " legal roms " that you rightfully aquired  and instead purchase one of his machines so he can afford to feed the employees.  IMO, the MAME machine are not hurting his business for the exact reasons you stated, he sells commercial ventures....bars, pool halls, etc...as the proprietor of those businesses would be insane to put a machine with roms he didn't pay for.  I have no problem with Mr. Foley making a buck and protecting his business, he just approaced it all the wrong way, shouldn't he have contacted the MAME dev's first and discussed the TM issue and I don't mean the half-hearted attempts he's made....

Just my opinion......don't mean to jump on anyone here, but this stuff is getting old.....

Tim

[1UP]

Foley is not targeting those who download roms for their own use.

[APFelon]

I think you need to look at this MAME trademark thing again, and think what it would be like if Capcom or Namco wanted to get back into the classic arcade business.  Mr. Foley would seem to be small potatoes, in that regard.

Capcom and Namco wouldn't be foolish enough to try and trademark the MAME name and logo. Nintendo has aggressively attacked emulation since the early days of MAME through UltraHLE, and look where that got them. Sony tried to squish Bleem, and... well...

Sadly, I think you are totally missing the point. It isn't about Mr. Ultracades Smartypants protecting his investment. It's about attempting to steal the MAME name and logo illegally, trying to shake down vendors for "royalties", having totally legal machine sales pulled from EBay  and justifying his borderline illegal (not really borderline, his behavior WAS illegal)  behavior by claiming that he was trying to protect the IP of his licensed software and then deciding to play the victim (all the while whoring that stupid iRoms idea). If the issue wasn't so serious, I would call it nothing more than pathetic.

I think you had better get a better grasp on the situation before you use your fourth post EVER on this forum to make a fool out of yourself. Seriously, man. Read up on it.

He has proven himself to be a really, really oily character, and woe to anyone who spends their cash on him or any of his ventures.

APf

[1UP]

Good for him?

[Tommy Boy]

Hey Lloyd --

My annual salary review is Monday.  If the boss screws me on my bonus should I head down to the Jaguar dealership next door and steal an XJ-8 off the lot?  Would that make up for it?  I'd have a point, by your logic, to take what wasn't mine.  I guess that would show balls 

Why is it so hard for Foley and his shills to understand that the rightful owners of the MAME intellectual property (including the TM) are the MAME devs.  Nicola and company have absolutely NOTHING to do ROM distribution -- legal or otherwise -- NOTHING!!

So hear this...stealing the MAME trademark has NOTHING to do with Foley's argument and he's only hurting the MAME devs who are innocent bystanders in all of this.

Honestly, this shouldn't be a hard concept to grasp...

[quarterback]

Good for him?

[SirPoonga]

Has anyone actually seen any type of user-agreement in an old cabinet?  What ARE the rules regarding those old boards?  Meaning at the time, when say PacMan was released, an op buys the game with the boards and off he goes.  Was there ever any  documentation from Namco/Midway saying, you get this cabinet, this board, no repro etc etc?

This is a gray area.  Until proven in court no one will really know.  There's arguments that having the pcb but a backup on your PC is not legal. 

[Crazy Cooter]

Has anyone actually seen any type of user-agreement in an old cabinet?

[1UP]

Having a backup would probably not get you sued, that's the important thing.

[1UP]

Looks like Foley may have stolen more than the MAME name...

http://sediment.semifat.net/entry/2003/05/04-192910.html

I can see it now...Ultracade launches its iROMS^TM sevice, and gets served by Apple:

"Dear Mr. Foley,
 
You are in violation of our trademark on the lowercase letter "i^TM".

[sasuke_kun12]

Petition anyone?

[mahuti]

Generally it's considered OK to make a backup with the intention that it is only to be used to replace the original software in its original format in the case of corruption or loss. It is generally suggested that the use of that backup on another platform is not legal. Nintendo SPECIFICALLY states that you do not have that right with their dvd and cartridge media, however. Their stance is generally pretty hostile to emulation.

Basically point by point, Nintendo bashes every thing about emulation in no uncertain terms.

http://www.nintendo.com/corp/legal.jsp#download_rom

[1UP]

Basically point by point, Nintendo bashes every thing about emulation in no uncertain terms.

http://www.nintendo.com/corp/legal.jsp#download_rom

WOW.   

[SOAPboy]

Basically point by point, Nintendo bashes every thing about emulation in no uncertain terms.

http://www.nintendo.com/corp/legal.jsp#download_rom

WOW.

[SpamMe]

..Snip-
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I did not get into the Mame scene to get free games.  I did it because I wanted to play the ORIGINAL games, which are harder and harder to find in arcades these days.

I think you're probably in the majority, as far as the people here go. Most people do not build $200-1000 cabinets just to play a few games for free (the exception being, perhaps, the few people who show up once in a while to ask if <recently released arcade game> has been emulated yet).

[daywane]

why is it just Mame?
there are other arcade emulators. Why is the @$$hole bringing MAME into the spotlight?
( not that I wish him to drag any others down)
I must have missed this in the posts. How come he can sell them? he might have the boards but is he passing the boards along with his arcades.
he should run out soon.
As far as the EBay comments he made . How does he know if the Roms are on there. I did not have any on the one I sold. Maybe I can sue him.
They were NOT on the hard drive or in the PC or shipped with the arcade.
I just told them were to get them , same place I got mine
 

[lloydcom]

I had this in a new thread, but was stopped because "there was a thread already regarding it" so I'll repost it here.

[Fat_Trucker]

Have you actually bothered to read the issues debated in this thread?.

Its not a protection issue. The reason so many have been incensed is generally twofold.

Firstly that someone with no connection to MAME would try to trademark it purely for their own financial gain and to prevent anyone from competing with them.

Secondly because prior to all of this blowing up, that same person contacted people providing MAME related services (artwork services to enthusiasts) claiming that he owned the trademark and trying to extort royalties, establishing that the attempt to trademark was a clear attempt to exploit that trademark commercially.

Since it has become public knowledge a great deal of backpedalling has been done that doesn't seem to be consistent with the actions that were taken.

People can empathise with someone trying to stamp out illegal practice to protect a legitimate business. What people cannot empathise with is someone identifying a business opportunity and attempting to steal someone elses IP and further use that IP to claim royalties from legitimate vendors and strangle any competition.

Subsequently there has been a great deal of negative attention and claims have been made that the attempt to TM MAME was a benign action designed to prevent illegal practice. That same person has now announced they intend to launch an iRoms service catering to people who only a couple of weeks ago were accused of using an 'illegal' emulator.

It was further stated there was no interest in using the MAME logo or TM in any commercial capacity and yet they are preparing to go live with iRoms which provides legitimate roms for use with MAME.

Its a shame that the attempt was made in this way. If Mr Foley had simply tried to launch legitimate support services (like iRoms) he would have recieved widespread support from the MAME community. You will find most of the people who operate here would not only support actions to close down illegal vendors but would welcome the opportunity to download roms legally with open arms. We are not gamers trying to beat the system or get a free ride. We are enthusiasts preserving properties that without projects like MAME would be irrevocably lost in their original format.

Its important to be clear here that Mr Foley only elected to make contact with MAME devs and adopted this inclusive attitude, after people started to complain that he was claiming ownership of the mark and trying to use it to claim royalties from other vendors.

If you feel this is simply propagandist hype then by all means contact emdkay, scott at MameMarquees and other vendors who are not involved directly or indirectly in the trade or promotion of illegal roms, for clarification of what took place directly after Mr Foley filed for the MAME TM.

[Fat_Trucker]

Sorry for the double post.

They were NOT on the hard drive or in the PC or shipped with the arcade.
I just told them were to get them , same place I got mine

This is all part of the same issue. Even if someone is not selling a machine with illegal content, they are still using the potential for using that illegal content to promote and sell it. In this context the argument for removing adverts makes perfect sense as it does pervert an individuals ability to compete using legitimate licenced products.

After all, would you buy a product that comes loaded with x number of licenced games or a cheaper product that comes with no games but the vendor states they will show you where to get thousands of illegal games for free?.

My issue is with the (apparent) original purpose behind the attempt to TM the mame name and logo for simple financial gain and to take complete control of the whole marketplace in general.

I can understand the ability to trademark the stylistic MAME logo, but surely the abbreviation of the actual words Multiple Arcade Machine Emulator simply relates to its function (like DVD or TV). I didn't think you could trademark that sort of thing anyway.

[mahuti]

OH, and Nintendo doesn't leave room for making backups. When you buy one of their products, there is a note in the manual or on another piece of paper saying that their media won't go bad, and you don't have the right to back the software up. I'm sure somewhere else on the site it mentions that, but I've read it a number of times after buying GBA carts.

[APFelon]

  Have you actually bothered to read the issues debated in this thread?

These points were made clearly on this thread:

http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,32687.0.html

But he is either being hard headed or willfully ignorant.  Either way, he is trolling at this point.

APf

[Crazy Cooter]

http://www.hyperware.com/

Another of Foley's "businesses".  Do a whois lookup and you'll see.  Anyone ever see the inside of an Arcade Legends or Ultracade?  I wonder...

lloydcom:
I just trademarked "lloydcom ^TM".  So don't use it anymore.  Get the picture?  None of us here support people selling roms on ebay, and none of us here support Foley accusing his competitors of doing so.  He is taking away their business with bogus accusations, so I don't give a rats ass about what happens to him.  His employees should all quit and start their own legitimate company.

[RetroJames]

All I have changed the title of the thread as follows:

Re-Edit by 1hookedspacecadet: As the thread was started by me, I would prefer to keep the title as a general heading rather than a call to arms.  We do not know all of the relevant facts yet and I would rather see how this plays out before appearing to call for a boycott.  Thanks.

Discussion: Ultracade and the Mame Trademark

[DrewKaree]

We have one small problem to this whole Mr. Foley issue who is attempting to trademark MAME. 

Clearly you haven't read this thread, or as was stated, are being willfully ignorant and are now just trolling (although your disclaimer that you aren't affiliated with ul-tra-kade (don't wanna get sued for using his trademarked name ) seems a bit fishy after reading your letter)

with families that have mouths to feed and bills to pay

Your point is irrelevant.  It has NOTHING to do with the discussion, and isn't even relevant enough to warrant consideration within the discussion.  Again, had you read the comments and thread, you'd have known that, or are simply being willfully ignorant and are now just trolling.

He is trying to make a point here, which we are all sadly missing.  MAME roms are not free.  They never were (except those who donated) and we have individuals who are selling arcade cabs with the MAME theme of playing them all.

And in making your point, you again demonstrate your willful ignorance and inability to distinguish between the argument at hand, and what's actually happening. 

Mame roms are not free
Individuals are selling cabs with the mame theme.

Those two things have nothing to do with this discussion, EXCEPT to extort money from companies who have nothing to do with roms (emdkay), AND to unfairly shut down auctions of the competition who have nothing to do with roms (Dream Arcades)

The point YOU are sadly missing (although I suspect it's your CHOOSING to miss it) is that this entire fiasco has nothing to do with MAME, and everything to do with Mr Foley attempting to get himself as much publicity as possible, and in the process, as much money in as many ways as possible.

I also think at the end of all this ROM question of legality, we will see Mr. Foley folding up operation of his business, which is a shame.  When was it wrong to play by the rules and sell legal product?  When did that happen?

When did the "rules" state you can trademark something that you had absolutely NOTHING to do with, and has been out there for years?  When did THAT happen? 

While you are entitled to your opinion, choosing to ignore the main points of this debate have done nothing to help your case, and will have painted you, in the eyes of many, as obtuse, thereby making it easier to dismiss your strange opinion and inability to distinguish the crux of the matter.

Trademarking MAME has absolutely nothing to do with his business - and YOU know it!

[Gunstar Hero]

If MAME were a "NEW" invention, fine... but...

MAME predates Ultracade.

How can poor poor Mr. Ultracade have to take these drastic measures to "defend himself and his income" from something that had existed before he even founded his business?

 

[APFelon]

Your point is irrelevant.  It has NOTHING to do with the discussion, and isn't even relevant enough to warrant consideration within the discussion.  Again, had you read the comments and thread, you'd have known that, or are simply being willfully ignorant and are now just trolling.

And in making your point, you again demonstrate your willful ignorance and inability to distinguish between the argument at hand, and what's actually happening.

It looks as though I have created a talking point. LOL

APf

[DrewKaree]

Indeed, APF, you have.  I'm just surprised at you.  I found it SO useful and descriptive, I took the time to do the following:

"being hard headed or willfully ignorant.  Either way, he is trolling at this point."^TM

Attempts to circumvent my trademark by selective choosing of the words therein will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and with the backing of ul-tra-kade and its proprietors, unless they lose so much business from this endeavor that they can't afford a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of. 

   Oh....cease-and-desist, yada yada yada and whatnot 

[SirPoonga]

After all, would you buy a product that comes loaded with x number of licenced games or a cheaper product that comes with no games but the vendor states they will show you where to get thousands of illegal games for free?.

NOOOOO.  Many ebay sellers are smart.  They will tell you were to get LEGAL roms and other games that could be played with arcade controls.

[Fat_Trucker]

Yup. Was just trying to make the point that 'technically' its legal but in real terms it does damage the potential for legitimate vendors to compete.

I just think a more responsible attitude to the way things are advertised now will leave less manouvering room for other people like Mr Foley to try to take the moral high ground and attack the hobby in future.

At the end of the day I'm not saying people shouldn't sell the product, just perhaps that products should be described a little more creatively without alluding to the availability of unlicensed software.

After all, if this situation was already the case, Mr Foley wouldn't have been able to provide any justification for having competitors pulled from ebay and likely would have failed in efforts to get their products removed.

[1UP]

Heh, didn't see this before...

Looks like Foley has had his share of trouble from copyright holders in the past.

http://www.ultracade.com/flashsite.html

Go to the news link and read the top story.

He obviously has been stung quite recently by selling machines with ROMs pulled from Namco boards.

[saint]

Without weighing in on one side or another ... this statement below, as I understand it, is incorrect. eBay does not investigate claims as I've been told. If someone fills out the paperwork to claim ownership of a copyright, eBay takes them at face value and will pull any challenged auctions, regardless of actual merit.

--- saint

After all, if this situation was already the case, Mr Foley wouldn't have been able to provide any justification for having competitors pulled from ebay and likely would have failed in efforts to get their products removed.

[Fat_Trucker]

You may well be correct. I just think there's little point in overtly offering people like Foley a stick to beat the scene over the head with.

With just a little care in the way auctions are worded, hopefully it would remove what little credibility people like Foley accredit themselves with when they try to pull this sort of caper. And could help to divert any unwelcome attention in future.

(Off topic, just ordered a copy of your book from Amazon, hopefully will minimise the possibility of my blowing myself through the wall when I'm wiring my first cab up shortly  )

[Crazy Cooter]

Since when did we get a softspot for --missioncontrol-- Foley?

[Fat_Trucker]

No disagreement here, i've maintained throughout the thread that his attempt at backpedalling to justify his actions after he tried to hijack MAME for himself and extort money from people was deploreable.

I understand the situation as far as ebay is concerned. The point I was trying (obviously unsuccessfully) to make wasn't offering a concession for Foley or his actions.

Simply that there is a fair amount of ambiguous (sp?) language used in the sale of some items and sometimes items do skirt dangerously close to the fringes of legitimacy.

Without anyone having to change anything they are selling I think it would make sense if by simply changing the angle of some of the sales pitches it should remove any possibility that someone might be able to try to justify these sort of actions in future.

I know it might not stop ebay from pulling them, but it would certainly remove any possibility that someone like Foley could release any more bleeding heart statements after the fact about how they were simply protecting a legitimate interest from dubious practices.

[Crazy Cooter]

We just need to watch what is said so someone just stepping into the situation is clear on where the community stands.  Foley took the --missioncontrol-- approach and is now trying to back off just enough to seem like he's "ok".  He's even going so far as to change his "release letters" about his position.  We need to stand up and put him out of business before he does that to the other retailers.  If we don't, we'll be cutting our own throats.  That dude is a crook and whatever happens to his business or his employees is his fault, not ours.

Boycott Ultrcade and Arcade Legends!

"Looks like Foley has had his share of trouble from copyright holders in the past."
Foley never had permission from those guys to sell their roms or use their art on his machines & advertisements.  Sounds familiar huh?  THAT is the type of guy this is.  "boo hoo, now who can I steal from?"
He is shutting down auctions now for cabs that are capable of playing ROMs, when a few months ago, his machines came with them included.  How anyone can consider him as being legit is beyond me.

[SirPoonga]

I merged the everything else thread replies with this one.  It may be a bit confusing to read through the last couple of pages.

[saint]

If you have an issue with moderation, you write to me.  I don't care what your issue is or what subject you're unhappy about -- tulips, petunias, trackballs, what president is in office, the color of the sky, or the definition of the word "blue." ...  it doesn't matter.

The moderators on this private forum volunteer to assist me in running this site. This site is moderated as deemed necessary to maintain the good will and the arcade controls community oriented nature of this web site. Anything that is detrimental to that is subject to moderation. If you can not abide by that then you are at the wrong web site.

--- saint

I had this in a new thread, but was stopped because "there was a thread already regarding it" so I'll repost it here.  If this gets stopped, then I know who to write to.
======================================================== 

[lloydcom]

Did you read my previous post?

[KevSteele]

None of these comments are in dispute guys.

Almost every one of those comments is in dispute. I can only assume you're deliberately trolling now, because you're so far off the mark that even your "facts" are wrong, let alone your opinions.

It is not illegal or even against the MAME license agreement to use MAME to play games. It's been stated that the main purpose of MAME is to reproduce the games' hardware, and that being able to play the games is a happy side-effect, but that does not mean that the MAME developers are against anyone playing games via MAME.

Building hardware to play MAME games does not impact the MAME development process, nor does it hurt the MAME cause. In fact, many of the MAME hardware and cab makers are the ones who have donated the money to obtain new boards to dump. MAME has never needed "protection" from MAME hardware makers.

Where do you come up with some of this stuff?

Mr. Foley has stated a "motivation" for his actions, but he has steadfastly refused to reveal what legal right he had to appropriate the MAME logo, developed by someone else (and automatically assigned copyright protections under US law). Why not? Because he had no rights to that image.

Kevin