Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment Your Rights Online

IDSA Forces Arcade Game Manual Archive Offline 215

AtariKee writes "The IDSA and the DMCA has struck again, this time forcing the maintainer of Stormaster.com, a coin-operated video game manual and tech information archive, to shut down. Stormaster has been an invaluable resource for collectors of classic coin-operated video games for years, and this loss further demonstrates the idiocy that is the DMCA. I can understand ROM images to some extent, but 25 year old coin-op operator/tech manuals? The full text of the IDSA's letter can be read on Stormaster's site." Previous Slashdot posts about IDSA (Interactive Digital Software Association) show that this is typical of the organization.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IDSA Forces Arcade Game Manual Archive Offline

Comments Filter:
  • The best part... (Score:-1, Interesting)

    by Realistic_Dragon ( 655151 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:23PM (#6268660) Homepage
    He violated the EULA on the letter (which I assume is copyrighted) by posting it to his website... the relevant part is:

    Note: The information transmitted in this Notice is intended only for the
    person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or
    privileged material. Any review, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination
    or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by
    persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.

    Perhaps they will send him another cease and desist letter to get the numbers they report to their clients up?

    Big fat dirty lawyer bonus check approaching! Ye haw!
  • Re:read carefully (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tha_mink ( 518151 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:26PM (#6268678)
    *you* should heed your own advice.

    Well, I notice that the IDSA letter does not demand that those 25 year old manuals be taken down, or that the site be shut down -- the letter refers only to a list of 7 "game products" (which are presumably ROM images).

    Sounds to me like you should have read the next paragraph.

    The unauthorized copies of such game product[s] appearing on, or made available through, such site are listed and/or identified on such Internet site by their titles, variations thereof or depictions of associated artwork (any such game titles, copies, listings and/or other depictions of, or references to, any contents of such game product, are hereinafter referred to as "Infringing Material").
  • Is anyone surprised? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by McAddress ( 673660 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:31PM (#6268708)
    So far this law has been used to prosecute sewing pattern pirates. Now it is being used to go after videogame websites. If Orrin Hatch has his way, the RIAA will be able to destroy your computer. More and more it looks like Richard Stallman [openschooling.org] might not have been that far off.
  • Hmmm... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Tyrdium ( 670229 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:33PM (#6268715) Homepage
    IDSA has a good faith belief that the Internet site found at http://www.stormaster.com/ infringes the rights of one or more IDSA members by offering for download one or more unauthorized copies of one or more game products protected by copyright, including, but not limited to:

    It looks like what he's being accused of is having warez on his site, not manuals. Of course, if the manuals also included schematics for some reason (repairs?), then by having the schematics up on his site he would be allowing someone to reproduce the game. I'm not sure what was in the manuals, since I never got a chance to see them...

  • Overseas (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:33PM (#6268717)
    Why not just give the site content to somebody living in a country where "freedom" still means something.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:35PM (#6268731)
    I'd like to see some specific references to this. Clearly, sites like InternalMemos.com [internalmemos.com] have no problem reproducing and disseminating internal correspondence within a private company. I wonder whether copyright law prohibits public postings of private emails. On one hand I'd say no, because we've all seen memos, cease and desist letters, and leaked emails posted tons of places. But what if an email should contain something like a poem? Wouldn't that be protected by copyright law? Wouldn't the letter in itself, as a unique form of expression, be protected? Is there a difference in copyright ownership between a letter sent by a lawyer vs. an internal memo at a privately owned company vs. a letter sent by me to grandma?

    Just curious.
  • by sllim ( 95682 ) <achance.earthlink@net> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:38PM (#6268746)
    I wonder if this is the real problem.
    I think Tron 2.0 is the name of the new movie coming out, and probably the name of the crappy video game tie in as well.

    You think he grabbed some images of the game and posted them to his website?

    I wonder if he hadn't done that if they would have left him alone.

    Hmmmm....
  • by HardcoreGamer ( 672845 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:38PM (#6268747)

    If the site originally hosted tech manuals for the games and not the actual game ROMs themselves, it doesn't appear that the site would have to be taken down. The letter appears to refer only to the software, not information about the software.

    Then again, this could be the operative phrase:

    any such game titles, copies, listings and/or other depictions of, or references to, any contents of such game product, are hereinafter referred to as "Infringing Material"

    If the IDSA was smart they would sponsor the site instead of trying to shut it down. There are a couple of concepts known as good faith and goodwill. It would behoove them to start practising both.

  • Re:Hmmm... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by forwhomthebelltrolls ( 670539 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:42PM (#6268776)
    Looking in the google cache [google.com], it appears as though the manuals where scanned images.
  • archived (Score:2, Interesting)

    by oohp ( 657224 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:47PM (#6268814) Homepage
    There is still an archive [archive.org] from the 4th of July 2002 at the Wayback Machine. Mirror it and make a Freesite on Freenet.
  • Re:Motivation? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by qorkfiend ( 550713 ) <qorkfiend@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @04:48PM (#6268824)
    It's probably more along the lines of a deterrent, much like the criminal justice system. They can't catch everyone, and they know it. So, they choose a few of the more obvious "lawbreakers" to make an example of, in hopes of getting everyone else to think "uh oh, they could come after me next, time to get rid of my MP3s/ROMs/etc."

    Aside from the glaring flaws in our legal system, the deterrent idea doesn't seem to work too terribly well, and I doubt it will work very well in the digital arena, either. I certainly know I'm not close to halting some of my illicit practices.
  • by gilesjuk ( 604902 ) <<giles.jones> <at> <zen.co.uk>> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:14PM (#6268953)
    It might have been fairer for the DMCA to have had a cutoff point, like minus 10 years from the introduction of the act.

    There are plenty of Commodore and Sinclair ROMs, manuals and diagrams on the net. They're available to keep such old gear working for future generations to see. What next, ban the distribution of classic car manuals and sue people for producing reproduction parts?
  • Yes, it's probibited (Score:3, Interesting)

    by localroger ( 258128 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:16PM (#6268965) Homepage
    But Pud never let a little thing like that deter him. It's a civil tort so it's only as illegal as the sender's willingness to sue you. I suspect FuckedCompany is counting on the companies involved to not want to stir up a shitstorm with him.
  • by Dimensio ( 311070 ) <darkstar@LISPiglou.com minus language> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:37PM (#6269101)
    Remember annoy.com (or something similar to that), where they were issued with an injunction and a gag order that prohibited them from even consulting with an attorney? It seems that large companies can prevent individuals from consulting with a laywer if they know the right legalese and enough corrupt judges.
  • Re:Is it just me? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Naikrovek ( 667 ) <jjohnson.psg@com> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:41PM (#6269125)
    that's how you get precedents. you weasel your ass into places that people can't give you your just deserves, then claim that "if i was wrong they would have stopped me."

    hopefully someone somewhere is cooking up some ideas of revenge using these same rules.
  • Yes (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mindstrm ( 20013 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:31PM (#6269453)
    But then you have to go through the trouble of writing letters to your isp, and responding to the lawyers, etc, or possibly end up in court.

    He's probably taking it down because it's a pain in the ass to deal with, and he really doesn't care.

    This, btw, is one of the things about the DMCA that erally sucks; rather than forcing the complainer to get a proper court order to down the site, where they would have to show some evidence of harm, etc, they can just send out letters and force everyone into defence.

  • by some1somewhere ( 642060 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:31PM (#6269457)
    Is this a case where offshore web hosting might be a good idea?

    Come to think of it, for any content even slightly "controversial" (or heck, the way the DMCA is being used, that might mean all content), would hosting it completely offshore on offshore servers actually help anyything?

    Does the DMCA apply overseas?

  • Re:read carefully (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hpavc ( 129350 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:45PM (#6269513)
    The depictions and references to 'game titles' and 'listings' is goofy. Do you think that they mean PacMan logo art here?

    Seems like they could attack ebay and anyone that doesnt use personal photos of stuff could be in violation.
  • by NewbieProgrammerMan ( 558327 ) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @09:18PM (#6270297)
    A few years ago I read an article suggesting that a dark age of sorts could come about because we are storing so much information in electronic form only. IIRC, their premise was that information might not get rolled forward onto new media when its original storage medium becomes obsolete.

    Originally, I thought this was just a little farfetched, but I worry a little about trends I see. Some companies now seem to desire the ability to turn a profit on any innovation for all eternity by maintaining everlasting copyrights, patents and IP rights. Maybe this will be one of the driving forces that causes the loss of knowledge about old technology and "unimportant" information.

    I think the US will pay a big price in the long term by passing these "mediocrity protection" laws. I would not be surprised at all to see more and more smart people begin going to countries where they won't be blocked at every turn when they try to build on other people's work.
  • I just don't get it (Score:2, Interesting)

    by krelian ( 525362 ) on Monday June 23, 2003 @01:56AM (#6271258)
    Their are thousands of warez sites on the web, a few major p2p programs with millions of users, a flourishing IRC network used mainly for warez trafficking and the only sites that are brought down are the unique, special nische sites who serve a small community that are just trying to share their unique hobby. They will never stop piracy that way. The only thing that they are going to do is show us their stupidity and upset some decent people while they are doing that.
  • by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportland&yahoo,com> on Monday June 23, 2003 @02:05PM (#6275233) Homepage Journal
    I would agree that dmca@idsa.com looks legit. In fact, I would say dmca@idsa.com is a pretty good one to choose, since dmca@idsa.com is easy to remember.

"If I do not want others to quote me, I do not speak." -- Phil Wayne

Working...