Main > Main Forum
MAMEdev is Pulling Auctions!
RayB:
*sigh* ...
Here are some bottom lines, relating to a number of arguments in this thread.
1. Stop citing Bleem as a precedent. Bleem existing before the DMCA was enacted. The DMCA has changed the playing field.
2. The argument that MAMEdev's "shotgun" approach to auctions is acceptable because they don't have time to go through all auctions is nonsense. Think of the amount of time and extra crap they are now going through to sort out the LEGITIMATE people who got "busted"? Let's face it, they took a lazy approach and now have to waste more time than they otherwise would have.
2B. The ONLY auctions that should be pulled are all-in-1 cabs that violate the use of their software, ROM sales, etc. Screw TM arguments. TM arguments are strictly a result of FOLEY pulling the puppet strings. I have NO doubt here about this. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if the MAMEdevs made their agreement with Foley without even consulting a lawyer. They are probably following some ridiculous agreement with Foley (rather than having fought it), and now look at the mess...
3. Comparisons to Ford, are to a degree accurate. Do you all not think that auto companies at some point in time didn't want everyone to only buy their car parts? Of course. But most of us weren't even born yet when those battles too place, so we don't remember such a time. I'd have to look up some supporting facts here, but I'm pretty sure i remember reading that car manufactures at one time wanted to control parts sales so only their parts were "legal". That of course didn't pan out, and now we have the right to after-market parts.
Same thing here to a degree. If someone wants to sell parts that work with MAME, that is their right.
Chris:
--- Quote from: RayB on June 07, 2005, 10:48:27 am ---2B. The ONLY auctions that should be pulled are all-in-1 cabs that violate the use of their software.
--- End quote ---
And MAME DVD auctions. Definately those.
Tiger-Heli:
--- Quote from: KenToad on June 07, 2005, 10:44:48 am ---Yup, Tiger-Heli, I think we're in agreement. I also thought it was DF that had withdrawn his application for the TM. What I and what I think we all might be wondering is: Why did he withdraw his application instead of just playing it out? It couldn't have been the flaming he was getting on his own forum from BYOAC members.
--- End quote ---
Foley may be sharper than we give him credit for, or he may have gotten lucky. And there may or may not have been some "back-room deals"
As I was hinting earlier. DF probably didn't think he could actually trademark MAME, it was probably a bluff - But if he says he is applying to trademark it and that such and such sale is in violation of the trademark and his attorney will be contacting the seller, some sellers are just going to cave and take his word for it.
And if MAME trademarks it and starts trying to restrict auctions, that works in his favor also, although he may or may not have foreseen this.
Crazy Cooter:
Foley had to back out of the TM thing. He knowingly filed a false claim (a criminal offense).
I posted in the other thread too but I was wondering:
How does it work with ebay as far as pulling auctions automagically? The Mamedevs aren't looking at them, I doubt ebay is looking at them, so it must be automated. That's probably why the Mamedevs said to put "X" in your auctions. Nothing more, nothing less. That way it would pass the filter. If you want to put more, ask.
Consider two examples on ebay:
1- A cabinet kit that can run MAME.
2- A cabinet running MAME.
The kit says "compatible with MAME". If they want to say more, they can ask and possibly receive "permission" to do so (most likely putting their ebay account past the filter).
The MAME cabinet can't accurately describe what it is without hitting the filter. They wouldn't get permission either (obviously).
So far it looks like they have been working with those that have had auctions pulled that shouldn't have. They really only had two options:
a) Automate it.
b) Police it each and everyday... by hand... nonstop.
"a" is waaaaay less time intensive and gets them back to what they want to do.
RayB... it's ebay, a private auction site. They can remove auctions as easily and with every right that Saint can ban a user here. They can and often do supercede basic laws and freedom of speech and often don't make sense. ;) That's ebay. If it were a regular store, they would have never lasted a month with the policies they have.
BLEEM! is still a precedent. What will happen when (not if) it gets revisited is beyond me. But for now it still stands even with the DMCA. Where they clash is the realm of expensive lawyers. Personally, I don't want to see it all go back into the courts. I'd give emulators (as a whole) about a 50/50 chance.
monkeybomb:
--- Quote from: Crazy Cooter on June 07, 2005, 02:07:36 pm ---Foley had to back out of the TM thing. He knowingly filed a false claim (a criminal offense).
--- End quote ---
Didn't he also falsely claim to be the owner and send cease and desist letters. I think he even tried to get money from one of the marquee printers, as the holder of the trademark.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version