Main > Main Forum
MAME machine legalities
SavannahLion:
--- Quote from: RayB on September 12, 2007, 05:31:11 pm ---I don't know how emulation skirts patent issues. But I hope all this information settles the argument.
--- End quote ---
I can probably answer that... or at least I can try to offer in a few clues.
A patent specifically prevents a person (moi for instance) from copying a particular invention and selling it. It also prevents a person from making, using or importing said invention.
The key point here is copying. A proper software emulator isn't technically a copy of (in our discussion) an arcade PCB, it's probably more accurately described as a derivative work (if at all). This point was proven and protected with Atari vs Coleco when Atari sued Coleco for patent violations on their emulator.
If you read most patent languages, you'll notice that they're intentionally broad in scope for this exact reason. The patent author often tries to capture as wide as possible of an idea to facilitate enforcement while still being as specific as possible to satisfy the requirements of the patent office. The problem is that patents are intended to cover physical ideas, computer hardware for instance. Copyrights are used to protect, "works of art," or in our context, software. The laws governing both are different.
To put it succinctly, you can't succesfully sue a person for creating an emulator that emulates physical hardware.
Zebidee:
Wow! Conrgats over the last few posts RayB, GG, SL - you guys have pretty comprehensively laid out the major US legal issues! Good research there too. Looks like PJ actually generated some worthwhile discussion here after all! ;)
Hawk Daddy:
Just get the legal multi game productions. Namco has the mario brothers, dk, the ms pacman, galaga, and I'm sure that are a couple others, just fill it up with those types, and then also put in some racing like need for speed, or daytona is always a favorite.
Hawk
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version