Warez and Abandonware 343
markm writes "Stephen Granade, webmaster of the interactive fiction site at
About.Com has written
an excellent article
on the warez and abandonware scene. It's worth checking out, even if you don't
participate in trading warez."
What are your favorite abandoned games that you'd like to try playing again? Would you pay?
Re:Old Games (Score:2)
Activision may still have a clerk somewhere looking after Pitfall, in the event they think to revive it
Actually, Activision has already revived the original Pitfall [activision.com]
- Sam
Einstein (Score:2)
Einstein is dead and he's no longer working on his models for the universe. So does that mean that The Unified Theory is abandonware? Should physicists stop thinking about it until they get a license?
Re:Old Games (Score:2)
Some yes, many, no. A lot of these games were from companies which no longer exist, copyrights not enforced or renewed. I knew one of the original Apple game writers, and when his first employer Sirius Software folded the rights to the games were basically sent to the landfill, source code and all. Activision may still have a clerk somewhere looking after Pitfall, in the event they think to revive it, but there are few of these companies who survived to the present. If somewhere, someone does have these things in a filing cabinet, it's a good bet they don't even know it.
Fascinating stuff, I have several old SoftTalk and SoftLine magazines from 1981-1982 and there's legion games and game companies listed in there which probably didn't last past 1983. One or two good titles, tapped out then closed the doors. Much of that stuff could stand a tad updating (i.e. do the art in more than 16 colors) and be lots of fun today.
Nice to see some people working on the old M.U.L.E. game, as one of the original designers of the game has passed away, it's probable it won't ever be officially released again. Then, EA distributed it, maybe they could still pull something.
--
AltaVista, Google's Warez Search Engine (Score:2)
-
AltaVista'z Warez Search Engine [altavista.com]
-
Google'z Warez Search Engine [google.com]
I'm sure the basic principles applied above can be used to turn many of the available search engines into warez search enginez.31ee7e1y Yours,
Michael D. Crawford
GoingWare Inc
Re:Wolfenstein, baby (Score:2)
Truly original games are rather more rare than you might think and a new viewpoint does not a new genre make.
(Favourite old game - Deathchase on the Spectrum. Chasing through forests very fast, trying to shoot other motorbikes. Fantastic tension, brilliant game, ran on a Z80 and had 9K of code. Also arguably near-Wolfenstein3D-level first person 3D...)
Re:I'd pay (Score:2)
I appreciate that Budget is still available, and certainly in the UK some labels have tried flogging 'Classics' at UKP5 a go. But I just can't find the gameplay in the titles that are available.
With the the low cost / MB of disk space, and even the decreasing costs of bandwidth I don't see why people that hold the rights can't make these games / apps available. E-Commerce gurus scream at us about the benefits of micro-payments and the fact that it's the future, so why not download at UKP 1-2 a go (even I can afford that risk) and bill it monthly to your credit card, nothing to loose, the costs of hosting and then some could be made back, and I would (for once
Well, that's my 2p worth, off to dig out my copy of Dune II.
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:2)
Someone who is content playing Super Mario Brothers has less motivation to purchase a new game for the N64.
That said, abadonware has an important purpose, which I feel justifies the existance of these sites: The preversation of video game history.
Even though audio recording technology has existed since the 1870s, we have virtually no audio recordings from before 1890 or so. Most of the recordings in the first two decades of audio recording technology have been permanently lost.
Movies have a similar problem.
People have worked hard making ROMs available for MAME, making disk images of early 80s PC games, and making ROMs of NES games. Because of their work, and the wide distribution of these files, a nearly complete history of the first generation of video games will be available when the copyrights finally expire.
Now, I would we lying if I told you I did not have an axe to grind here. I do. I enjoyed playing those video games in the early 80s. I am really glad that I am finally able to play those video games again. In fact, I have access to far more games today from that era than I did back when I was playing those video games.
The place where I draw the line is with the 16-bit generation of video games. In my book, anything 8-bit that is not being sold new today is up for grabs. Obtaining 8-bit (and older) video games is "preserving video game history". 16-bit and newer video games is piracy (read: stealing), plain and simple. One exception: The Game Boy is an 8-bit unit. Since the Game Boy is still being made today, obtaining Game Boy games is piracy.
- Sam
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:2)
Anne Marie wrote:
IANAL, but I do know basic property law. And with that in mind, your analogy is flawed. Rather than having an expiration date for copyrights, after which redistribution is legal, be analogous to a burglar breaking into a hypothetical attic, copyright expiration is more akin to the following situation:
Say we have a Mr. Smith, who owns a house, and is a firm believer in private property rights. Let's imagine also that there is a small, neglected patch of land in the corner of his property. If someone comes along and maintains this patch of land (perhaps he builds a shack on it, or perhaps he hosts a website), and Smith doesn't object for a period of time, then the land, title notwithstanding, is not Smith's anymore.
While the analogy that I make is flawed as well, my point stands, that property law, even for physical property, is clearly not as unambiguous as your burglar in the attic example paints it as.
Re:I kind of liked... (Score:2)
Oh the humanity! I lost several good keys on my keyboard to that game.
THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL NATURE OF CURRENT COPYRIGHT (Score:2)
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8
I believe that the US copyright law is unconsititutional, because (1) It extends after the Author's or Inventor's death (2) That it is not neccesaraly to the Author or Inventor (companies hold copyrights) (3) The right is infringed upon by companies, and other organizations.
Brief note on the origins of copyright: It was originally a tool of oppression. It was first granted to some publishing houses in England for 7 years, with the understanding that they would suppress books and writings that were not liked by the ruling power, the king.
I think we see the origins coming through very well, but I doubt that the US Supreme Court will have the backbone to stand up to the lobbists, hired by companies that are infringing upon that Constitutional right.
At the risk of repeating.... (Score:2)
The entire point of intellectual property, from a corporate point of view, is to allow a company to continualy gather profits from something even after its been left abandoned (eg Sim Earth).
As an end user I would --love-- to be able to buy a copy of Sim Earth, especialy one designed to take advantage of hardware/software developments in the last 10 years or so. Unfortunately, Sim Earth was abandoned.
Now we end users have built into our minds this concept of depreciation. Go to www.geeks.com [geeks.com] and check out the price on a 386 processor, less than a dollar! It sure was a hell of a lot more expensive than Sim Earth was at the time wasn't it?
What it really boils down to is that we're willing to pay for software that the "owners" are willing to keep up to date. Software depreciates just like hardware does.
Sell this stuff at a price that reflects its age, keep it up to date, or give it away for free. I think those are the only options that will fly with this readership.
Flawed analysis. (Score:4)
In the eyes of the law, the right of propertyowners to control the use of their property is a natural right. The right of people to be equal, regardless of skin color, is a natural right. The right to vote, regardless of gender, is a natural right. Note that the Constitution has not always specifically acknowledged these natural rights, and there are many natural rights which the Constitution does not recognize.
In addition to natural rights, there are such things as artificial rights. These are more accurately called "privileges". Just like you have a natural right to travel where you like in the US, you have an artificial right to drive on public highways. Remember how they told you in Driver's Ed that driving is a privilege and can be revoked by the State at will? It's the same principle.
Interesting, copyright is not a natural right. All natural rights recognized by the Constitution are phrased in terms of absolutes and imperatives: the government shall not pass law that restricts your freedom of speech, it shall not forbid you arms, it must get a warrant from a judge before violating your privacy rights, etc.
Copyright is a permissive, not an absolute. Congress may, in order to further social goals (scientific discoveries, literary development, etc.) secure for authors and inventors a monopoly on the usage of their creations. As can be seen from the wording of the Constitution, copyright is not a right--it's a privilege.
2. WHO'S IN CHARGE HERE?
The fundamental question of any government is, and always will be, who's in charge here? In the United States, that question was answered in 1783 when Washington accepted Cornwall's surrender, and again in 1789 when our Constitution was established: we the people are.
If we, the people, feel that the social ills of copyright outweigh its beneficial effects, then it is our absolute and sovereign right to ignore any and all acts of Congress which are contrary to our wishes.
America has a long tradition of rabble-rousing, much to the dismay of the government. When civil rights were not recognized by Congress and segregation was still the law, we, the people, marched on Selma and on Washington. We, the people, disobeyed the government. When Vietnam was tearing the country in half, we, the people, burned draft cards and engaged in civil disobedience.
Congress is not in charge of the government. Nor is the judiciary, nor is the executive. The people who are ultimately in charge are you and me.
3. WHAT IS THEFT, ANYWAY?
Black's Law describes theft as the unauthorized (not unlawful) deprivation of property, or in some cases, benefit of that property.
By that legal definition, unauthorized copying is not and cannot be theft. The `benefit of property' is none; if the author of the software is sitting on it and not turning a dime of profit by sitting on it, then I'm not depriving him of a dime by using it anyway and sharing it with my friends. After all, he still has his original copy (so I'm not depriving him of property), and he's not been deprived of any benefit (since he was receiving no benefit before).
Unauthorized copying is not equivalent to theft. Black's Law says so.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. "... The focus will switch to owning intellectual property."
As pointed out, it is impossible to own intellectual property. Physical property exists as a natural right; "intellectual property" is a privilege granted by the State, and privileges can always be revoked.
The alternative is to elevate intellectual property to the level of natural right, and if you're arguing that this should be the case, you're going to have a hard time convincing me--but please, try!
2. "If I broke into your home and took things out of your attic or basement, then you'd be outraged. But somehow calling it `IP' makes the difference? Does it really?"
Absolutely. The former is theft--the deprival of property and benefit thereof. The latter is unauthorized copying.
Now, it's likely that a theft argument can be made for unauthorized copying of material which is already available for a fee. If my favorite garage band is selling CDs for $10 a pop and I start burning copies of that CD for all my friends, I'm depriving them of a fraction of $10 per sale. (After all, most of my friends wouldn't buy their CD; of the ten people I burned a CD for, the band probably lost only one sale. Thus, their losses are $10, not $100.)
In the case of abandonware, no profit is being made, and thus, no damage has been done.
Re:Warez (Score:2)
Alternate legal method, I just hate all the warez sites.. affiliation with porn is a must for them for some weird reason, and all sorts of other things I just dont want to have to deal with while downloading (illegal) software.
The best game you've never heard of... (Score:2)
Subspace was one of the first massive mutliplayer online games. Based on a top-down asteriods view model; you battle it out against hundreds of other players in other space ships.
The graphics leave much to be desired, but the gameplay is fantastic. Like Othello, the game is easy to learn but has incredible depths and strategies of gameplay to master. Games like capture the flag, soccer, king of the hill, trench wars, and 4 on 4 leagues are all different zones available to play.
Originally the game was released and supported by Virgin interactive entertainment. Although soon after the game was released, VIE was bought out and Subspace was abandoned. But thanks to the efforts of players and former VIE programmers the game development continues. Players help program extensions to the game and provide servers that are free for everyone to play.
I encourage you to visit some of these links for more information on this incredible game:
#4 on tweak3d's most addictive top ten [tweak3d.net]
General Subspace info and downloads [subspace.net]
Powerball info, the best zone in Subspace [spiritwood.com]
Pirates! (Score:2)
Jumpman (OT?) (Score:2)
That game was so awesome. I still have dreams about that damn room where you had to put the tones in the right order(i'm half tone deaf). By the way, the best C64 game of all time... Jumpman!
Ok, I hate to do this, but, the capitolist dog in my just can't help it at the mention of Jumpman...
There are two new Jumpman games under development. Randy Glover (the original author of Jumpman) is working on Jumpman II, and MidnightRyder.Com (my company) is working on Jumpman: 2049 (authorized by Randy Glover - yep, two separate Jumpman titles being developed at the same time, going different directions - fairly cool!) Drop by MidnightRyder.Com [midnightryder.com] and check in on development of Jumpman: 2049, and look at Randy Glover's entries on the Developer's Diaries section for what he's up to with Jumpman II
The other person I talk to from time to time is working on something called The Jumpman Project - basically, he took the original version from IBM for the PC (no, not Jumpman Lives! produced much later - IBM actually ported a version of Jumpman way, way back during the CGA gfx era) which was some serious abandonware, and has began hacking it into shape. It now runs under Windows (and I'm sure WINE would run it, but, haven't tried yet), has a brand new partial working level editor, etc. He didn't just pirate it, like most of the abandonware stuff - he took it, and is somewhat modernizing it. Very cool. Check out Jeff's work at Jumpman Project [classicgaming.com]. One really cool part - Randy knows it exists, and has no problem with his work on it :-)
Can common law override copyright? (Score:4)
One of the facets under common law is that if someone doesn't use something for ten years, does not show any significant effort to maintain it, and someone else does these actions instead independant of the owner, the latter person gains the right to use that property as they see fit without the ability for the original onwer to prohibit them from doing so. Typically this is used with tracts of land, but I suspect it could apply to other things.
Now this is not quite a transfer of ownership, but it still is something significant. The question then arises as to if the latter person can then give copies of the item to everyone. It's hard to say; I don't know any court precedent here. A court case like this would be interesting to see.
Re:Limitations on Software Copywrite (Score:2)
Your suggestion would violate at least three provisions of the Universal Copyright Convention (specifying minimum length of copyright, barring continuing registration requirements, and barring members from ever shortening the copyright protections provided for in their laws). And UCC complinace is required by the General Agreement on Tarrifs and Trade, which has massive repercusions for every U.S. industry that sells anything overseas.
Is a EULA valid if the company doesn't exist? (Score:2)
If I enter into a EULA with a company re: a game, and years later that company ceases to exist, is the EULA still valid? Who'd prosecute me for, say, reverse engineering the game (prohibited in the EULA right now)?
Could I reverse engineer Frantic Freddie or Miner 2049'er now and use their sprite 'jumping man' code?
Favorite Abandoned Games (Score:2)
Old EA games like the Bard's Tale series and Wasteland. EA recently released a package containing all of these for $20, but it'd be great to see updated versions that could take advantage of higher resolutions than the 64k EGA card i used for most of these games. I also miss Duke Nukem 3D, and am very sure that there's enough of a market to support a open/group rewrite of the engine to do OpenGL. In fact, this would probably get done before Duke Nukem Forever is actually released. I mean, I remember when the DNF people announced the change from the Q1 engine to the Q2 engine. And i want to be playing pool and waving money at strippers now....
Re:Please don't leave behind ! (Score:2)
The authers seldem have the rights to the software.
That myu friend lies with some big autonamous corparationm, for which the reasons of not letting go have been said here many times already (so I won't bore you with em again)
Only reason i posted this is to say my bit abou companies ripping the real lovers of games off. the coders.
I did a bit of game programming commercially for a bit. It sucked, I quit. too much politics and bullshit. So maybe I'm a sad hippy of something but I'd rather just do it for the fun myself.
Yes lot's of shit shovelware comes out. but what about the poor coders, do you think they really want to be programming that shit? they just do it cause one day they might, just might be given the chance to do something good, something they want.
Here's another tit-bit from inside the games companys. all programmers (\I won; even mention the rest of the design crew, but do include then) use warez games, they download em and play em.
Yes they purchace stuff that is good.
It's the games companies that suck and don;t you forget it.
ahh, i'm tired now, hope i didn;t miss owt!
k.
"If it wasn't free I wouldn't have gotten it" (Score:2)
Just because you would not have bought the software if it wasn't free, doesn't mean that it's alright for you to steal it. That's like saying that I could hope on an airplane to Paris right now, for free. The plane will go to Paris with or without me, so it won't make a difference, right?
Wrong. That's just not how it works. And that's not how it works with software either.
"Squaters Rights" (Score:2)
Essentially, if you are walking along and spot a nice piece of land you can venture on and set up camp. If you aren't chased off by the owner or someone acting on his behalf for 7 years you can claim ownership.
Note that this "chasing off" doesn't have to be effective. A "Go away" letter copied to a credible 3rd party is enough to stop the clock.
This was created to prevent good land from going to waist. Essentially it said "use it or loose it". Why should the most permanent and respected property right ( land ) be less than the 2nd most transient ? Copyrights.
Re:This is why. (Score:3)
It's very very simple... (Score:2)
Kinda like the GPL frinstance? I have an idea why. Read on.
For example, I liked the game Quarantine for the PC. You're a taxi driver taking people around a futuristic city that's filled with psychos and diseased people (yeah, I'm pretty twisted, get used to it). I'm 99.99% sure they haven't sold a copy of this in 3 or 4 years, so why not throw it on a FTP or web site somewhere with a new license and make it available to anyone who wants it?
Everyone has a piece of Abandonware they'd like to see revived and available; personally, I'd love to be able to get the original Wing Commander and Masters of Orion, but I can't, legally.
The other idea I had is an "expiration" if you will on software copywrites, like patents. After X years, the software's EULA no longer applies and people can do whatever they want with it (including make copies).
Did you read the article? There is an expiration; the same 75 year limit on all copyrights if they're not renewed. I think it's up to our generation to explain to the copyright lawyers why 75 years is a tad long for a copyright on a computer game.
Basically, this is about greed. Companies feel like giving ANYTHING away for free is anathema, even the lint from their pockets and the contents of the urinals in their mens' rooms - even if they couldn't get anyone to pay for it. Additionally, they don't want to release abandonware because they WANT these titles to be dead (not the developers, the suits with the copyrights). Why? Several reasons. If you're happy with your old games, why buy new? By ruining and making unavailable old titles, they force everyone to buy new. Blizzard has demonstrated this principle quite adeptly with its recent axe-job on Diablo 1, aimed at increasing sales of Diablo 2.
Also, some of these games vanished for good reason - though they may have a devoted little following, perhaps they just made everyone else retch. Maybe these companies don't want bad games from the past ruining their "image".
There are a lot of factors, but greed is the most simple one. They can't stand the thought that people might use the product somehow to make a buck, or to get an idea for a new game, or just to enjoy it for free, or anything. The only thought in their minds is, "We spent x amount of money and y amount of time developing that game back in '91, and they want it for FREE?? Who do they think they ARE?" In their mind, there is no difference between the 14 year old w4r3z d00d who burns cracked copies of Quake 3 for his friends, and the 30 year old sysadmin who wants to play a 10 year old game for old time's sake. No difference, at all.
You're dealing with the corporate mentality. Get used to it.
-Kasreyn.
What is the product, really? (Score:5)
The product is not the list of bits on the disk.
If game companies made old games freely available, it WOULD cut into their new business. You can not simultaneously argue that they should free these old games since you would love to play them and argue that they aren't losing business when they free the old games.
The week you spend playing Bard's Tale is one week of delayed revenues for Ultima 2001 Pro Special Gold Edition.
Bingo Foo
---
The IRS says 3 years (Score:2)
For tax expense purposes, the IRS treats off-the-shelf commercial software as a depreciable intangible asset. When you buy, say, Office 97 for $600, the IRS makes you write it off in $200 chunks over 3 years.
So why can't software copyrights be the same way? 3 years is about the real practical shelf life limit for most software. Heck, most games end up in the remainder bin a lot sooner. 75 years is rediculous for something as ephemeral as software. By that time the aluminum substrate on the CD will have long since oxidized. There will be nothing for the future Bartlebys [bartleby.com] of the late 21st century to salvage.
Re:This is why. (Score:2)
The shareholders could also say 'if it's deprecated, and not worth everything, why does everyone download it?'
Re:This is why. (Score:2)
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:2)
We/you can affect the profits of current games without having to resort to warez or even MAME ROMs. Abandonware is about saving a cultural heritige, not about getting stuff free.
So let's find Mozart's decendants (Score:3)
Re:Ancient games should not be copyright released (Score:2)
You don't have to give up the name. Just the game. Make the game freely downloadable for anyone who wants it. The corporation can still own the brand name.
Re:SimEarth (Score:3)
Robots are your friends.
Has anybody tried asking? (Score:2)
Anyone with an Amiga or UAE and a legal set of ROMs can get many classic games.
Back to copyright, and the idea pool (Score:2)
Now that we have established that ideas are unownable, let's just look at what the software industry is. When you go to a software store you pay maybe $50 for some box on a shelf. I'd wager that perhaps 2 to 8 dollars of that might actually be material value, transportation costs, advertising costs, etc. The rest of the money you are paying for an *artificial scarcity*, created by a bunch of people *hoarding ideas*. Wow, that sounds radical. But, if you go back to ideas as unownable, you can see software, as a product, really a result of a group of people who take some ideas, generate some ideas, and then gather in a circle and hoard those ideas. This isn't necessarily Evil. We realize that we have to incentivize people to create stuff, in the face of unownable ideas. The way we do this is with copyright and patents. Now the core of the whole problem is that copyright and patents last *way too long* in the software industry. 75 years is outrages even for a material work (e.g. a book), let alone a piece of software. Chances are, you will *die* before your copyright on piece of text expires. That is just silly. That is stepping far over the bounds of simple incentive. And software gets obsoleted even faster. A year, maybe two or three. I'd say copyright should last maybe five years on software, maybe push it to ten. Do *you* buy any software that is older than ten years? What possible profit motive, other than plain stinginess, the opportunity to screw over that poor old soul with the legacy system, could people have for software this old?
We are allowing people to create kingdoms and empires upon artificial ownership of ideas. So there are a few robin hoods around. It just galls me that software companies, or other types of "media" companies, think that they have an inherent *right* to profit. Imagine a brand new technology is invented tomorrow, by which a material, once it is created, is instantly duplicated just by the consumer wishing it to be so. This isn't exactly the software industry, but it is far closer to it, than a physical economy. Would these same companies be outraged that their *right* to exploit this new technology for profit has been undermined? I'm sorry, but physics cares nothing for your profit motives. If you don't like technology go somewhere else or enter a new business sector. Nobody is guaranteed the right to profit from new technologies. Sometimes it's just "tough".
Hmmm...many familiar replies (Score:2)
Is there only greed? (Score:3)
If you copy the money, you may be jailed for counterfitting.
If I copy the software, I may get jailed for copyright infringement.
In both cases, society has something to gain by perserving the value of the item.
The value of each is almost entirely artificial.
On one end of the scale we have commercial software, where you get very little value for your money.
On the other end, you have opensource, where you get very little money for your value.
We really need something in the middle.
How about software we pay for with kindness?
When will the industry mature?
No, I would not pay! (Score:2)
I would click an ad, maybe but not pay!
No way!
If people don't even pay for cutting edge
software, would they pay for old junk?
Re:Star Control II! (Score:2)
Re:Limitations on Software Copywrite (Score:2)
Every so often the Mickey Mouse* copyright comes up, and Disney and the Gershwin grandchildren (who have are rich despite having produced no music of their own) pays whoever to extend copyright laws for a few years, and our intellectual property rights are eroded that much more.
Unfortunatly, sensible copyright laws conflict with corporate greed [corporations.org], and since the corporations own the politicos [opensecrets.org], there's not much that's going to change that without a massive overhaul of the system.
Remember, public companies can be held legally liable to their shareholders if they choose doing what's right (not abusing democracy) over what's profitable (keeping the rights to a dopey mouse because they haven't come up with a better mascot in 75 years). If that's not a recipie for social disaster, I don't know what is.
* Mickey Mouse is the trademark of Disney
--
Re:What is the product, really? (Score:2)
r)etry.
Limitations on Software Copywrite (Score:4)
For example, I liked the game Quarantine for the PC. You're a taxi driver taking people around a futuristic city that's filled with psychos and diseased people (yeah, I'm pretty twisted, get used to it). I'm 99.99% sure they haven't sold a copy of this in 3 or 4 years, so why not throw it on a FTP or web site somewhere with a new license and make it available to anyone who wants it?
The other idea I had is an "expiration" if you will on software copywrites, like patents. After X years, the software's EULA no longer applies and people can do whatever they want with it (including make copies).
Ancient games should not be copyright released (Score:4)
Imagine Elite for the BBC Master was released from copyright. Modern versions of Elite would not then be made, at least not with the Elite name; companies would shy from associating with a rogue brand. Look at what happened to Doom.
It's not so much that the style of game would die; there will always be better updated clones. It's just that games of the same name would not be released. I'm quite nostalgic, and like to see games with the proper name. It gives the develepors a tradition to uphold and may even improve quality.
It's best all round if the games companies just turn a blind eye to pirating of ancient games, in the long run, I think.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
I kind of liked... (Score:2)
Ran on the original IBM PC back in '82 or so.
Losses Due to Piracy? (Score:4)
I don't understand how that could give an accurate estimate of lost revenue. Suppose a company had 1000 computers, each with a licensed copy of MS Office. Then, they scrapped all those computers, and bought 1000 new computers, and installed the old MS Office onto the new computers. There would now be a difference of 1000 between computer sales and software sales. There was no piracy involved, but according to that statement, MS lost around $400K ($400 for Office x 1000 computers) to piracy. How does that work? Even if the company sold the 1000 old computers to users, who in turn bought 1000 copies of MS Office, you'd still have a deficit of 1000 (+1000 new computers, +1000 old computers, -1000 MS Office).
Re:Flawed analysis. (Score:2)
There is no such thing as a "natural" right. All rights are artificial. As a country, we (well, the founders) made a list of rights that our country will consider to be "natural" rights, which places them above all other rights our country acknowledges. Other countries have essentially done the same, and so has the UN, and their lists don't always match up with ours. All the list does is state what our country considers to be the most important rights to protect. We, the people, can and should rise up to amend this list as needed as new rights and needs arise. We should not allow coorporations to amend this list for their own interest when that interest conflicts with the people's interest.
Edward Burr
Re:What is the product, really? (Score:2)
Don't tell me they've started putting those in the hamburgers...chicken heads were bad enough!
Re:Limitations on Software Copywrite (Score:2)
Copyright Law was created to encourage companies to produce works for the people -- not for companies to be able to have a virtually unlimited monopoly on the copyrighted works.
--
Re:This is why. (Score:2)
Corporations throw away millions of dollars just to get people to think of their products, this is called advertising. Nobody questions this...
So why is it impossible to understand that a company would give away something with absolutely no chance of making any money, to get people to think of their other products?
The goal of a company is to make money, but that doesn't mean that every single action must result in the company making money, merely that the whole series of actions a company take be designed to earn money. Advertising doesn't make money, advertising helps sell products. Giving old games away doesn't make money, new customers interested in your product like does.
Stuart Campbell says leave emulation alone! (Score:4)
Now, I've never wanted to point this out to Stuart, but most of his earnings come from game-related punditry. If the only games available were badly-done freeware clones, why would anyone want to have them reviewed, especially by a man with an evil streak a mile wide? But I digress...
I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me here (Score:2)
Think about it, for a second. By saying "we recognize that you used to have a right to your copyright but aren't still using it", you're saying that anyone anywhere can determine which property rights are valid and which aren't and which should be respected and which shouldn't. If I broke into your home and took things out of your attic or basement, then you'd be outraged. But somehow calling it "IP" makes the difference? Does it really?
The law is ambiguous, to some extent, unfortunately. On slashdot a few months ago, there was a quote from David Boies about how copyright can be overruled if it's been exercised in bad faith. But no one is arguing about bad faith here. The owners are exercising their good faith in letting their use lapse. But that's not the same as letting their ownership lapse.
Ownership is fundamental to the American dream and to every other civilized nation's conception of self image and self worth. Today, we all dream that someday we will own our own homes or houses. When the housing shortage is solved in the future and we all don't have to worry about owning our own houses (just as today we mostly don't have to worry about owning our own rumproast), the focus will switch to owning intellectual property. It's almost inevitable. And I'll be on the front lines marching for copyright owners' rights, just as my cousins marched with Martin Luther King Jr for other civil rights.
Re:Flawed analysis. (Score:2)
True.
> you have an artificial right to drive on public highways.
False.
Read the documented court cases in The Right To Travel [cmu.edu]
EVERYONE has the right to travel on public highways. You DO NOT need a driver's license. (I have a International Driver's Permit.)
Warez (Score:2)
but I could never find out were exactly to download a game at! it would say download, and you click it, and it opens 50 windows of different sites, then you try somewhere else and it does the same thing, I tried for like a hour, but could never actually get to the point of downloading something or acces to an FTP archive.
Any one want to help a poor gamer out??
Is this used so that it is alot harder for Companies to be able to find out who exactly is letting people download their games?
Re:This is why. (Score:2)
Like I said, I'm not saying that these companies are right, or that it's justified.. this is just why it happens. It's IP. It's not like it's a warehouse full of inventory that is costing them money; in those cases, you see companies dropping old inventory cheap.
It's purely IP, and as such, costs really nothing to simply do nothing at all with. As the cost of keeping it just in case it's valuable someday is effectively zero, there is no justification for 'releasing' it into the public domain, or otherwise.
That's not to say there may be PR value... but that's the issue now, isn't it?
Wasteland (Score:2)
Copyright point (Score:2)
On the other hand, I do know some lawyers can be absolute industry bitches. I remember working as an intern in high school a few years ago at a law firm, whose one client was Hasbro. Basically, this guy decided to scan sites like download.com and search for anything looking remotely like Hasbro-owned games. Extremely changed versions of Battleship were one good example. And often the software owners were giving their software out as freeware.
I remember when he asked me if I knew "any other sites that might be doing this", as he was a technical idiot. I just shook my head and told him no. Better one less law idiot roams free than Hasbro makes millions off of lawsuits on minor programmers.
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:3)
Yes, it's different. If you steal my IP, I still have my IP. We both have it now.
Do we both have the blood, sweat, tears and long lonely hours that went into creating it?
What's Happening!! (Score:2)
Some software does, some doesn't. It's worth pointing out that people are still buying the "arcade classics" collections -- games which were considered "abandonware" five years back. I can easily see this trend continuing, with games of the past and present being packaged for purchase in an easily accessible, readily playable digital library form. Much the same idea as the classic film networks we have here in American cable TV, though of course not as mainstream (yet). As we've seen with Napster, once some variety of piracy goes far enough mainstream, a business motive develops, and the rights owners will usually find a way to work out the legal issues and develop the market.
In fact, I think games are among the most value-retaining works. How many people would you find paying hundreds of dollars for a dedicated Lotus 1-2-3 or The Print Shop 1.0 terminal, compared to a Robotron or Centipede machine?
The demand for scarce older games, such as the Infocom games, suggests an opportunity for re-issue. It's hard to imagine that there's a significant demand yet insignificant commercial value for anything as easily distributable and generally support-free as game software.
Wolfenstein, baby (Score:3)
It's a fine game. Sure, there's no up and down, no mouselook, etc., but it was elegant in its simplicity.
My vote is for Wolfenstein as game of the century.
Now...back to Tribes...
Re:Ventures into Karma Whoring. (Score:2)
Mhm, you totally missed the part about my free code for everyone for everything if it's written to be free. That's really conventional isn't it.
You must be a hellishly mediocre person if you are blind to what people say and only hear what you want.
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:2)
Old Games (Score:2)
Can you imagine a world where everyone just took everything they wanted, without any thought for others? This is the type of world warez promotes. People stealing from others, doing it under the name of "sharing". They should just call it what it is, stealing and piracy. If I made a game, even if I wasn't selling it, I wouldn't want others to have it just because they could get it. I'm sure the authors of these old games feel the same way. They need to protect what they have put all their time and effort into. Making money isn't the only reason for making games.
Re:You have got to be kidding... (Score:2)
I.E. Some 'Piracy' may simply be the result of a sloppy "pay for what's appropriate" protocol.
`ø,,ø`ø,,ø!
Some excellent abandonware sites (Score:2)
Abandonware Oasis (has a search engine) [qb45.com] The Abandonkeep [abandonkeep.com] Gaming Depot [gamingdepot.com]
DOS Graveyard Adult Games - Plenty of jerkables here [dosgraveyard.org]
I've said it before and I'll say it again. (Score:2)
1. Let the software, music, and publishing industries have their way. Give them a copyright for as long as they want it with the exception that they have to follow a few simple rules.
2. One of the major rules is that they have to provide upon request a full electronic copy (via cd or other reasonable media) for a reasonable price. This way they would still get to hold on to their intellectual property, and make a reasonable profit from it. If they were unwilling to do so, that document, song, software title, or whatever else would then enter the Public Domain after a certain period of time (I think five years would be reasonable).
3. In order to discourage offering the software for only one day every five years, and effectively never having to provide it, there would have to be a stipulation as to what percentage of that time the data would have to be available.
4. If a particular copyright holder were somehow unable to provide the service for an extended period of time that person can get an extension if reasonable grounds can be shown as to why they were unable to meet the requirments.
This way, people can obtain out of print books, old songs, or old software, without having to resort to breaking copyright, and without having to go through the hassle of trying to find it used.
Unfortunatly, things seem to be going in the opposite direction, but I don't want to go there, because it will just depress me.
Re:POPULOUS!!! (Score:2)
I used to play Impossible Mission, for days on end, just trying to beat my best time (like 32:00) which was just fine. I loved the game, but they came out with Impossible Mission II which involved more buildings, more traps, more puzzles, more crap and I wasn't interested in managing that much information for a game I used to play for an hour or so.
SimCity was ok, on my Amiga, but it was either too complicated or too simple, not the happy middle ground. Oddly, after struggling for hours to build up a thriving metropolis I'd get pissed and just trash it with the monster lizard, tornado and whatever else could happen. Stupidly, everything suddenly went really well.
Like to see Seven Cities of Gold, again, that was pretty cool, and Mail Order Monsters 8)
Would I pay? Well, considering the couple thousand bucks I threw away back in my heyday, I still feel somewhat cheated. Make the price right and I might, make it too high and I'm gonna be a pirate.
--
Let's continue the analogy - even further (Score:2)
Or from another angle, if you let your property get run down, the others in the neighborhood may object, because it hurts their property value. You may find youself in court, to either shape up or sell.
"Abadoned"? They're refusing to look very hard. (Score:4)
Unfortunately, anyone with a few minutes of looking online can find *NEW* *FOR SALE* *FROM THE PUBLISHER* copies of a lot of the titles that are offered. Interplay's Forgotten Realms archives [look at http://www.digitalriver.com/dr/v2/Ec_Main.entry24
Many publishers have offered those games for sale, but I see "abandoned" sites listing the same titles online. Just because it's not front and center at your local Best Buy or Fry's seems to make some think nobody can find it.
If and when the "abandoned" crowd can actually clean up their act and bother to remove titles that are legally available for sale, then I might think of them as different from the "warez" groups. For now, they're merely lying about what's truly not available.
Re:What is the product, really? (Score:2)
That's not really fair. Did the week I spent reading The Hobbit delay revenues of the newest Harry Potter book?
The demand for classic games is minimal. The majority of customers would look at the classic title and turn up their noses. The hard core gamers will buy Ultima 2001 ASAP as soon as possible anyway. The bitter old fogies won't buy Ultima 2000 at all.
Examples (Score:2)
On our platform there is an outstanding MIDI sequencer called Inspiration.
It always worked, from the oldest ARChimedes to the most recents RiscPCs.
I wanted to buy it because it would have been worth several dozen ounds.
I have never been able to find its author.
Even its concurrents could'nt help me.
I think this is because I was a "late" Acorn user (1994) and Inspiration's author had changed of development platform.
It is a pity because he really desserves his money.
I however kept this floppy and even "shared" it around me.
We all know we will gladly pay the guy who'll prove us he made it.
I used to play it for hours and I was proud to sort out all of its enigmas, and zto find all its secrets levels or areas.
I know who [id-software.com] made it and I contacted them to order it in its official package.
No answer...
I however found the 6th episode on some "unofficial" web site.
In this case however, I found a way to retribute ID: I just bought some of their others games: Doom and Quake3.
I still think I bought these for the wrong reasons (I don't play them that often) but it was the only way I found to pay them...
--
Afraid Not: Re:Can common law override copyright? (Score:2)
Nope. This is specific to land [pedantry](and I think it's 12 years rather than 10)[/pedantry]. If you hold a copyright, you maintain that copyright for the full term - in the EU currently life of author plus, IIRC, seventy years.
There may be bars to selective enforcement of copyright, but it can't be taken over by someone else's actions in this way, no matter how well meaning or useful. More's the pity.
why abandonware doesn't work like you want it to (Score:2)
Even if they just repackage it in a zip file and put it up for download, it's not free to a company. They have to pay employees to spend time jumping through internal legal hoops and getting permission. Then, they have to pay for the bandwidth so you can download their software for free.
If you folks really want abandonware, you need to take the first step. Perhaps create some kind of portal that offers to host the abandonware for download and give the company that 'donates' abandonware free advertising/reviews/etc for their new games.
You don't get something for free.
-lb
Red Storm Rising (Score:2)
I used to play Red Storm Rising on my old 286. I haven't paid much attention to current naval warfare games, but my guess is the learning curve would be significant compared to RSR (and who has the time?).
I think I've still got the old maps and the 5.25" disks around, but amazingly my Athlon system doesn't have a 5.25" drive to read the disks (I doubt they are still readable after all these years anyway). RSR was one of those games where you have to actually insert the original floppy in the drive before it will let you play (even though the whole game had been copied to the hard drive).
I'd love to play RSR again, and since I did pay for it, I should be within my rights to get it from an abandonware site. From what I've seen, though, Microprose has largely put a stop to distribution of the game. I understand their point of view, but then, I have already paid for it.
Please forgive this pointless rambling about an old game I have fond memories of.
-Steve
Use of "Warez" in a Mainstream Article (Score:2)
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:2)
Now that's an interesting point. Here is how it worked. The southern states seceded. The northern states said "You can't do that." The souther states said, "We just did." The north said "If we can kick your ass, then that means you didn't." The south said "If we can kick your ass, that means we did." Well, the north kicked the south's ass. That means the south didn't secede right? Well, after the war the north imposed all these laws upon the south to "reform" them and "Reconstruct" the Union. Many of these laws were unfair and the south protested them. "We are states damn it, we don't want to be steamrolled like this." And the north answered "You aren't states, you seceded."
Hmm, didn't we fight a war saying it's imposible to secede? Didn't that war establish that secession is impossible? If so, how could they impose these laws upon member states?
Answer. The people in power make the rules. That's why we need the second ammendment.
Steven
ChipWits vs Robot Odyssey (Score:2)
ChipWits may either be a renamed version of RO, or it may have been another's version of it, or maybe it was a prior version (RO, if I remember right, was actually a sequel or something)...
Worldcom [worldcom.com] - Generation Duh!
Re:Poor anti-piracy argument (Score:2)
why? well... here's a few reasons:
-reverse engineering (legal in europe)
-it's an uninstalled copy that resides on the network for easy installation/not having to walk around looking for a CD.
-it's outdated/we have better alternatives. (how many editors do you have installed? and how many do you use? If you use vi, you probably don't use emacs..)
//rdj
3D Ant Attack (Score:2)
3D Ant Attack was a 3D platform game released in 1983 for the Sinclair/Timex ZX Spectrum that could be argued to be the precursor to the Tomb Raiders of today.
Abandonware sites effectively archive such classic games in a similar way to the classic computer/consoles museums that exist legally.
Considering the ongoing trend for eye candy over gameplay we need the old games to be around as examples of good game design.
For example RARE, nee Ultimate Play The Game produced games for the old 8-bit computers that are still relevant today in terms of game design and sheer playability. Play UPG games like Cookie, Knightlore, Tranz-Am and JetPac and see how games should be designed. You can't even download the spectrum originals from Rare's site so without Abandonware their work could be lost.
P.S. For decent warez site vist new-warez [new-warez.com] and don't forget to visit astalavista [astalavista.box.sk] if you need to get round pesky copy protection on old software (and a damn good site for security info too)
Re:Limitations on Software Copywrite (Score:2)
The drawbacks would be be that it would cost everyone who wanted to register a licence, and it would put a lot of extra strain on the patent office, even with incresed revenue.
Re:"Warez" can be good for a company. (Score:2)
Re:Limitations on Software Copywrite (Score:2)
However, I think the driving motivation behind the enforcement of copyrights on old games has more to do with the protection of the game's characters, graphics, sounds, etc than it does with the actual code that you run. A lot of games (especially in the console arena) reuse the same names, characters, and so on. IANAL, but I would imagine that defending the copyright on an old game is probably what their lawyers tell them to do to defend the integrity of their game characters.
Are games themselves copyrightable? Ie, is the way the game is played, rules, and so on actually copyrightable? Could I come out with a game called "Myopoly" that is based on moving around a board, buying property and building dwellings or would Hasbro sue me for it?
Re:Ancient games should not be copyright released (Score:2)
Uhm....
Exactly. id is making Doom 3. Which direction were you going with this post again?
Fear my low SlashID! (bidding starts at $500)
Re:Ancient games should not be copyright released (Score:2)
What happened to Doom? Last I heard they made a sequel (Doom 2!), and there's a multi-million dollar movie in production. If that's the "bad scenario", sign me up!...
---------------------------------------------
Abandonware: BOOKS and MUSIC (Score:2)
Problem is that the publishing companies have successfully lobbied time and again to extend copyrights well past the point of the original authors or their heirs profiting from them.
There are huge quantities of out of print books, some of which are very good, that should make it into the Gutenburg project, or something similar. But the original publishers hold on to the rights, and would rather that the old editions rot away to dust rather than have them become freely available online.
This is very similar to obsolete software, but applies to the broader cultural heritage.
If it has some possibility of commercial value, they will not give it away, ever.
And if it dis-appears, then it obviously had no commercial value.
[snort]
Re:Ventures into Karma Whoring. (Score:2)
And it is unconventional, if you haven't noticed there are a bunch of GPL-zealots here. I don't do that shit, if you listened to what I said - It is FREE, in all senses - that means you can do with it what you will, it's everyones property. Go put it in your proprietary product.
For Slashdot to accept this they'd have to drop every bandwagon they have jumped on (QT/KDE, GPL License violation witch hunts, etc). I'm not being angry, I'm turning your initial statement back around on you when you didn't stop to consider what the hell I was saying. I, in no way, called Sig11/Anne Marie/whoever mediocre, nor insult them. To go back to my original post, I stated that their post was incorrect (perhaps in a manner you think is wrong, that's your opinion). Now, if telling someone that they are wrong and asking them to stop being so vocally wrong is telling them they are mediocre, then sure.. that's one twisted perspective but I plead guilty. The kicker comes in is that whoever they are, they know they are wrong (it seems so most of the time) but post just to get the karma and the responses. That is my point, I never said they were mediocre (in fact, almost the opposite with one of my opening sentences: You got the game down perfectly.
That is not a sign of mediocrity, and also: you don't actually have your own thoughts but only listen to those with the loudest bullhorn., this goes into the whole karma whoring game. They are saying what the people want to hear, regardless of the truth behind it.
You have a serious problem with perspective, and reasoning it seems. You decided that I was calling him mediocre for whatever reason. Feel free to your own opinion, but you are absolutely wrong.
Perhaps you should really look at what I said, it was no attack - it was a request. And everything I said was factual (they did not read the article, perhaps skimmed it - but to come it at #22 with missing massive points of the article provides very conclusive evidence that they did not in fact read it) So, if you compare this with the guidelines for how to get karma that are all over the place, "Get in clear and early, go with the herd" is what they did. They karma whored. Now that that is proven, where the hell did I attack the person? I merely told them that I didn't want to see their karma whore posts anymore. Are they going to listen? No. I know that, I just wanted to post and nothing more.
So, if you have any chance of saving grace at this moment you will just shut up and walk away, because you do not even understand the start of this thread.
I'd pay (Score:2)
Sure, some people would still 'share' it, but the real fans would pay for it. I'd especially like to pay $5-$10 for games that I no longer have the original media for (Wing Commander I and II, much of the early Kings Quest games, etc).
I wouldn't even care if they didn't offer support. I'd understand.
Anyway, I think it's patently foolish for companies not to offer these games for (for pay) download. Free would be nice, but I'd understand if they still wanna make a buck or two.
My favorite old games (Score:2)
Phantasy Star, no bloody II, III, or IV Just Phantasy Star on the original Sega Master System. Man that game was great. Three planets, tons of dungeons, you had to talk to virtually EVERYONE to get info you NEEDED! Explore every freakin INCH of every world and then do some quasi-dimensional-transport thing to beat the big bad villan, only the big bad villan wasn't the real big bad villan! Try as I might, I can't beat the Succubus no matter how long I wait before I go to the Governor the first time. That damn thing is TOUGH. A good mix of new characters and old favorites like Medusa. Good story too.
I still have that SMS and the cart around. I have it in a box in the attic and emulate the system and load a ROM for the game(in fact, that's the reason I downloaded an emulator and the ROM, because I wanted to play PS again, no other games, just PS). I'd love to be able to play some of my old favorites again without rummaging through garage sales or illegally downloading ROMs.
Sadly, I don't think it will happen. Why? It's not just the market and the consumer who have moved on, technology has as well. I found an old copy of S(pace)Q(uest) IV and loaded it up on my PII-450 and it's unplayable. The game is tied to system clock and while you're supposed to have a certain amount of time to hide before the bad guys come and shoot you, the time runs out before you can do anything. Yes, I know I could run a emulator for an older/slower machine and get this taken care of, but the average joe expects software to work out of the box. If he buys SQ as part of a collection of old games for a buck at the local bookstore and it doesn't work, he's going to want someone on the other end of the support line. Sure turning your old games back into a revenue sream sounds great, but would you get enough revenue to offset the support costs? I doubt it.
Steven
Apples and Oranges (Score:2)
Protecting hard goods: Good. Protecting software the same as natural goods: Bad. That's why I'm Against Intelectual Property [danny.oz.au].
'nuf said.
Re:Ancient games should not be copyright released (Score:2)
Before the internet, books would go out of print, and bookstores would stop carrying them once demand dropped below a certain threshold. Now we have the possibility of an authors words being available for ever, instantly accessible to anyone who wants them. Not only that, but there are people queueing up to do this for them for free. So instead of making no money & fading into obscurity, you can make no money and be slightly less obscure.
The buggy whip manufacturers will be the death of the internet yet.
--
Re:This is why. (Score:2)
There IS an expiration on copyright. (Score:2)
Re:Back to copyright, and the idea pool (Score:2)
Ok, fine, patents then. They're supposed to be for processes or inventions, but in reality they are applied to ideas. E.g., DeCSS code is an entirely original expression (AFAIK) of an unoriginal idea, but the MPAA is fighting against the ability of others to use that idea (CSS). In reality copyright and patents provide protection for ideas, not just their physical implementations (e.g., a "process" is basically an idea...it doesn't really consist itself of anything physical).
Sorry bud, but you have no right to profit off their work, or to even use their work without their permission.
Who said profit? Who said work? I'm not claiming I have a right to profit off others' work (insofar as the germination of an idea is not quantifiable "work"). But I think that ideas are fundamentally different from physical objects or processes. They are inherently unownable. So yes, although we've been socialized to think of ideas as being "owned" by their creators, they are in fact, short of artifical intervention such as laws, owned by everyone the second they are exposed (the rationale being that no one really creates ideas in an absolute vacuum - they are created within a whole environment of other ideas; since we cannot possible quantify what or whose ideas have contributed to a new idea, we must resign ourselves to accepting that *everybody* has a fair share in the new idea). So, yes, I believe people have the natural "right" to use other's ideas once they are exposed. I thought this was the whole basis for progress. If Ogg patented the wheel, we'd be up a creek wouldn't we?
That's not to say that I have a right to their *code* (which they spent personal, quantifiable effort creating) or any physical product they produce with their idea.
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:3)
IP is a concept fabricated by the government. If you have an idea that you want to hide, that's fine. But making laws so you can sell those ideas and enforce their containment creates artificial value and outlandish expectations for law enforcement.
Not injuring people is an obvious societal law. (Fear of injury precludes order.)
Not taking people's stuff is almost as obvious. (To remain a stable society, people must be confident they won't forcefully lose the goods they already have.)
IP is not obvious, and, I believe, not justifiable. Do IP laws encourage innovation? That's not certain. That would imply that corporations would always out-innovate academia.
Do people deserve money for work done on ideas? This one's tougher. What determines what's worth money? Something is worth money only if someone's willing to pay for it. Government or no government, someone will pay for a chair. Government or no government, someone will pay for a service. IP is only long-term valuable if the government says it is. Otherwise, the purchaser of IP is able to sell it for less to someone else, and he is able to sell it for less to someone else, and so on until it is free.
Legal wrangling over intellectual property is only going to get worse as bandwidth increases. I think that's a sign that it was a flawed idea to begin with.
Right now, I respect IP laws. I don't trade in warez, I ripped all my mp3's from my own CDs. But that's not because I think the reasoning behind IP is valid. It's because I've agreed to live in the United States, and part of that agreement is abiding by laws whether I agree with them or not.
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:3)
Okay, let's review here -- Copyright expires. It currently expires after 75 years for these sorts of things (video games, but terms are different depending on the exact circumstances).
So we already have a situation where we "take away" what someone else owns, we just wait 75 years. The abandonware folks are saying the period of time should be shorter for software since it disappears so quickly (and loses commercial value equally as fast).
No one is suggesting we man the barricades to burn the companies to the ground, just that we reevaluate whether the current situation really addresses the reality of the monopoly copyright grants (the same reason folks are suggesting we think about making computer patents expire quicker as well!)...
---------------------------------------------
This is why. (Score:5)
As a public company, their Intellectual Property is viewed by the investment community as an assett.
A company giving away it's assets for no monetary gain runs the risk of having it's directors in some severe class action lawsuits, for improperly managing company assets.
THAT is why public companies don't just 'give shit away because it's the right thing to do'. Because even if the Management, and the Board think it's okay... it opens a VERY REAL door for a class action lawsuit from the shareholders.
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:3)
A couple of points:
A. Equating intellectual property rights with actual property rights is an extremely ify proposition. The awful consequences you trot forth in the case actual property rights are not observed (breaking into a home) actually do a pretty good job of illustrating why intellectual property rights are completely different from, and don't deserve the same level of respect as, actual property rights.
B. I have bought (that is paid for, with actual, real money) quite a few games which I am no longer able to play because either: (i) the media has worn out (ancient floppies), (ii) I no longer have a reader for the media (5.25" disk drives), or (iii) I no longer have the necessary hardware (Atari 2600). Abandonware sites, and modern emulators of old hardware, permit users like me to continue playing games we already paid for.
And yes, I am a lawyer. Actually, an intellectual property attorney, although I am in the process of extracting myself from that cesspool of intellectual dishonesty.
-Steve
Re:Limitations on Software Copywrite (Score:3)
For that matter, rather than tweaking the copyright law (not bloody likely), why not just have software companies license the abandonware sites to re-release them under a different EULA?
Something like "We, MegaCorp license you, Joe Abandonware D00d, to distribute ReallyOldGame on our behalf. In exchange for this license, you agree to pay us $1.00 and require your users to click through on an EULA that says as a condition of download they won't sell it commercially, develop other games based on it, etc. etc. etc."
If I were a MegaCorp CEO, I'd request that my landshark draw up such a contract and "make it known" through back channels that the option was available.
Voila - my trademarks (the potentially-valuable intellectual property, namely my characters, storylines, and package design) are still protected, and Joe Abandonware D00d is no different than any other software retailer who buys my software for to sell. (It's just that unlike most retailers, Joe only gets to distribute the stuff that's so old no paying customer wants to touch it, and he doesn't get to profit from it.) My assets are protected, Joe isn't taking anything from my retail sales channel, everybody breaks even, except the users win.
Let's continue the analogy (Score:3)
--
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he (Score:3)
Please don't leave behind ! (Score:5)
To all software authors,
For crying out loud, when the users pay money to purchase the programs you wrote, the did it because of their trust in you.
I am not a warez user, nor will I ever be. I respect the goodworks and time and effort you've put into your software product, but if you ever decide to ABANDON the product you have written, please consider the users who have PAID THEIR MONEY to purchase the product! Please, don't leave them holding the empty bag.
The VERY LEAST you can do is to let the users have the SOURCE CODE of the ABANDONWARE, and let them decide what they (the users) gonna do with it.
I am speaking from experience, both as a user and an author of an already abandon software. I feel very sad that after I have paid good money for something - which I thought might have SOME MORE MILAGE TO GO, for years to come - and wake up to find that the software I use can no longer be used on newer OS environments, and the original author has decided to abandon the product altogether !
One example I can point to is Optasm, an excellent Assembly Language compiler. After the author sold his company (along with all the copyrights of his software) to Symantec corp, Symantec decided to DISCONTINUE the development of Optasm, and YET, they (the folks at Symantec) steadfastly refused to release the source code for Optasm, and we, the users who have appreciated the way Optasm compile the assembly code, are now facing NO OPTION but giving up our favorite assembly language compiler altogether.
Had Symantec releases the source code to Optasm, I bet someone (even perhaps moi!) may try to modify it to run on other OS environment, including the Open-Source ones, such as Linux or FreeBSD !
Now, I am not saying that the assembler language utilities for LInux or FreeBSD is not good, but if you compare the way Optasm did the compilation to those currently available for Linux and FreeBSD, there's just NO comparison at all!
Hopefully, one day, Symantec will come to the conclusion that releasing the source code for products that they have decided to TOTALLY ABANDON may generate goodwills for the company, goodwills that may reap MORE BENEFITS in the future, in term of support and sales of future products.
Let me re-iterate my point again, I am NOT interested in Warez, but please give me the source code of the product if you the author decides to abandon it.
Thank you again for reading.