Hozer Videogames Stealing Again / PLEASE READ

[gambler172]

spudsatarigames (Hozer) has listed a copy of Wolfenstein on EBAY. After they were selling Santas Helper last year I contacted them and was told that they didn't know it was my game they were making copies of. I was told that if they wanted to make copies of any of my games in the future that I would be contacted first. Well, I wasn't contacted and since they mention Robert and I in the listing then they obviously know it is our work. I have never asked for royalties from anyone for selling my hacks/games and I don't think an e-mail is too much to ask. They even used an old label that I made.

 

 

Auction:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Wolfenstein-An-Atari-2...1QQcmdZViewItem

 

Most everyone here knows the history of Hozer/Randy so I won't go into that.

Please report this item to EBAY to get this auction pulled.

 

If things like this continue to happen I will never release another BIN. I don't profit off of these games/hacks and I refuse to allow other people to do so without at least contacting me first.

 

Thanks for reading.

 

Scott

Hi Scott

No good,he should have ask you first.

greetings Walter

[mos6507]

I'm kind of changing the subject a little, but the only thing I really don't like with hacks is when the packing makes no mention anywhere that the game is a hack, which is pretty much par for the course.

 

This is kind of dredging up old history, but the prime offender back then was X3V0LuX, since an inordinate amount of effort was put into making a back story for the hack.

 

 

When the game was originally offered, Lee made no mention it was a hack of Astroblast on his website.

 

If people like classic games that much, they should have the common courtesy to cite the original game and authors, preferably in a text line at the bottom of the cart label and manual. Otherwise you're just taking blanket credit for what is mostly someone else's work. Hacks today are a lot better about mentioning the original games, at least on the web pages that promote them. And we do have the central AA hack database. I just wish everyone felt an obligation to make this clear.

Edited March 21, 2008 by mos6507

[Kroko]

How are these different from what Hozer is doing?

So you say that it is OK that Hozer steals from the Hack authors ? I am sure you are pretty alone with that opinion. BTW I think it is not nearly the same if you steal from Microsoft or if you steal from an individual who just wants a little reward for the countless hours he invested into something, may it be legal or not.

 

I am sorry if I repeat myself, but I can't believe that there are people who can not see the difference.

[hex65000]

Or even PAL to NTSC conversions, these are really awesome for the gamer who doesn't have the resources to track down a multi-region TV. As long as these games are not pawned off as an original copy, I'm happy.

So, if I do all the work and convert those games to NTSC and then someone comes and sells them even though I clearly do NOT want him to do so, that's OK for you?

You probably already have one wrong in the form of hacking the PAL version to NTSC. If someone chooses to make more copies after the hack run is up and no more are in sight, where's your injured party? I can concede bad form, but the original hacker made their money off of it. If both are selling it at the same time then, I agree, it becomes a problem, and copies should not be made. However, if you've sold out with no intention of making another one for whatever reason, and demand is through the roof for more. There is the possibility for that gap to be filled; in my opinion, it should be filled. The only explanation I can think of for totally closing a run would be greed or burnout in the hobby. I do feel that any work on an effort should be properly credited. So in the real case over Wolfenstein, the original hacker should get a proper acknowledgment for his work, and in the case of a hack the original author should too if possible.

 

For out of print homebrews I do think that the original creator deserves proper credit, but wouldn't feel bad buying an out of print repro because of the accessibility issue. It may be their property, but if the demand exists, why not make more unless the goal is to drive up the price? It then becomes a mess with forces like greed, limited resources, and some morality thrown in for good measure.

So, if a homebrewer decides to not to release or remove his game from the market (for whatever reasons), do you think it is ok to act against his intentions?

IMO it doesn't matter why the homebrewer does it, it IS and REMAINS his interlectual property. And I would expect the Atari community to respect his wishes. Even though you may not like them.

My complaint is that it has the taste of manufactured rarity. I could make a small number of an item, then when I need cash, just make a few more -- just like printing money -- just like making reproductions of commercial releases. It's just blatant greed is all, and I am not all that huge on it. In that case, if there's a second source and everything else equal, I would consider buying it from the person doing the copying.

 

I know you have coded up some neat stuff and it is logical that it is important to protect your work. That's reasonable, and the fact that at least a version of your stuff is available, right now. In that context, I would buy the official version versus a copy for two reasons:

1) I would _prefer_ to support the creator when possible. It is like supporting small business.

2) Copies aren't necessary because the original is readily available.

2 1/2) Readily available does not mean resellers on Ebay.

 

I know you don't agree with me. I still view that there are some inconsistencies in the community is all. I also wanted to say that given choices, where I would vote with my mighty dollar. To me if the original author is willing to sell it, then I'll buy it from them first. If they want to manufacture a shortage in the interest of making a possible profit in the future, my stance will change to I'll take what I can find.

 

In a way, this reminds me of the re-release / no re-release arguments on DP. In a lot of cases, you can usually guess who has more cash sunk into their collection.

 

Hex.

[ FWIW: Did buy Beggar Prince direct from Super Fighter Team v/s the cheaper Ebay copies available... ]

[Thomas Jentzsch]

You probably already have one wrong in the form of hacking the PAL version to NTSC.

That never occured to me. Actually you are the first to call it wrong, that I converted games previously unavailable for NTSC from PAL. I suppose converting Parker games into standard bankswitching format or 4K ROMs for becoming Supercharger compatible is "wrong" then too?

 

If someone chooses to make more copies after the hack run is up and no more are in sight, where's your injured party?

Me!

 

And what do you mean with "run up"? I offered (and still do) the ROMs for everybody to use them freely, but definitely not to steal my efford, selling(!) carts against my intentions and not even mentioning me. Even Randy has recently apologized for all this.

 

I can concede bad form, but the original hacker made their money off of it.

I never made anything(!) with my TV conversions. Except for making a lot of people happy.

 

If both are selling it at the same time then, I agree, it becomes a problem, and copies should not be made. However, if you've sold out with no intention of making another one for whatever reason, and demand is through the roof for more. There is the possibility for that gap to be filled; in my opinion, it should be filled.

Really. Demand decides everything? Anything limited can be freely pirated? Did it even occure to you that you harm your collector friends then? And last not least, if I do not follow YOUR wishes as a collector I loose my rights? What a crazy logic!

 

I do feel that any work on an effort should be properly credited. So in the real case over Wolfenstein, the original hacker should get a proper acknowledgment for his work, and in the case of a hack the original author should too if possible.

100% agreed here.

 

My complaint is that it has the taste of manufactured rarity. I could make a small number of an item, then when I need cash, just make a few more -- just like printing money -- just like making reproductions of commercial releases. It's just blatant greed is all, and I am not all that huge on it. In that case, if there's a second source and everything else equal, I would consider buying it from the person doing the copying.

So again, your opinion is more important than the orginal programmer? You simply assume greed and then you are free to ignore him, right? Andrew will sure like you.

 

I know you don't agree with me. I still view that there are some inconsistencies in the community is all. I also wanted to say that given choices, where I would vote with my mighty dollar. To me if the original author is willing to sell it, then I'll buy it from them first. If they want to manufacture a shortage in the interest of making a possible profit in the future, my stance will change to I'll take what I can find.

I think I will exclude you from buying my work from now on. So you don't have to look for excuses anymore. Fine?

 

And yes, people like you make me mad. They only show respect to other people as long as it is convenient.

[udisi]

The problem here is that there are two arguments...Legal and Moral. Based on Law and emotion

 

Ethically, No one should reproduce a Homebrew, Hack, or Reproduction without the owners consent.

 

Legally, only a Homebrew is protected. In some cases, so are reproduction where the producer has acquired the rights to the game

 

All hacks are just that, Hacks of source code that the hacker never had rights to in the first place. They do contain new code, but also original code which is not legally used .

 

Morally, I would never reproduce a hack without the hackers permission. This is just out of respect and appreciation. They do put time and effort into their hacks, but I also understand that, the hacker has no legal right to the original code either and thus their work is essentially illegal too. Some people use that reasoning to not respect the wishes of the hacker.

 

I think the Homebrew scene is much more healthy when producers just use some common courtesy. Hozer would probably still be able to produce carts openly, if he had not pissed off the authors of the homebrews and hacks as he did. A little respect goes a long way. In the Homebrew scene, the penalty for not respecting others is to be ostracized and essentially black listed.

 

It's obvious some people don't care as much about respect as being able to have the software because people are obviously still buying certain Hozer carts. AA will never make an Edtris cart without the author's consent, thus people who want that software only have one place to go (Hozer) and are willing to support the action of that producer for it. Now, it's not like the author of that title has never giving consent to Hozer to produce the cart before, but the author is currently MIA, and AA doesn't imply consent. Unless AA can contact Ed, and personally get consent, they'll never make this cart out of principal. I don't believe either company is really wrong here. Hozer had the right, to what extent is only known between Randy and Ed.

 

Let's take another example though like QB. Andrew Davie originally did have Hozer produce his cart, but it was only for a specified run. He's also had AA do a few specified runs. The problem here, is that Hozer decided it could make as many QB's whenever they wanted. That was not the agreement between the author and the producer. This imo, is flat out wrong, and illegal, since QB is a true homebrew and the code is property of Andrew Davie.

 

Some people here will disagree for some reason, saying that Andrew doesn't make the game available all the time, but really that is his decision, it's his game, and people don't have right to it. Should I be able to make Pac-Man Carts and sell them because Atari doesn't make them anymore? I think not.

 

Now the problem here, is that many of the people who just agreed with me on that previous statement will disagree with my next. I even find myself doing this myself to some extent. Under the same reasoning, no one should be making reproductions without consent. The upcoming Gamma Attack, doesn't have the consent of the original authors, yet the community as a whole will overlook that because it was produced by a company that no one wants to go through the trouble to find, contact, and negotiate to legally release the game. I want to see this game as much as everyone else, but no one should be making money off of it, without consent, but we're all so excited to get something new, that we'll overlook the legality of it it. I don't buy the stealing from a company is different from stealing from an individual. It's the same thing. I admit that I'm not perfect, and I too overlook the company stealing as opposed to personal stealing, but that doesn't change the ethics of the argument. I'm happy Gamma Attack is coming out, but it's not legal at all or ethical.

 

I wish the Hozer debacle had had a better outcome. The whole thing just led to us having one less producer of homebrew material. In my opinion, that is a sad outcome. There's no reason Atariage, Hozer, Packrat, 8bit classics, neogames, graygames, shawn sr, cpuwiz, or any of the other producers can't co-exist. Really, they all can, if they respect the authors and each other.

 

There is money involved here, but then again there should be. Programmers should, if they wish, receive some compensation for their work. Producers should be compensated for their time. Some do it for charity, some want some money, and some do it for both. The reason shouldn't matter, but their should be a common goal, which is to make good, new, software. Egos, and differences in philosophy often get into the way here, and it hurts the end result or making new software.

[Shawn]

This whole thread is really sad. Doesn't anyone remember the honor amung friends thing? Cause that is what this all really boils down too and anything else is just to argue samantics.

[+Psionic]

The upcoming Gamma Attack, doesn't have the consent of the original authors, yet the community as a whole will overlook that because it was produced by a company that no one wants to go through the trouble to find, contact, and negotiate to legally release the game. I want to see this game as much as everyone else, but no one should be making money off of it, without consent, but we're all so excited to get something new, that we'll overlook the legality of it it. I don't buy the stealing from a company is different from stealing from an individual. It's the same thing. I admit that I'm not perfect, and I too overlook the company stealing as opposed to personal stealing, but that doesn't change the ethics of the argument. I'm happy Gamma Attack is coming out, but it's not legal at all or ethical.

Completely rubbish.

 

I personally undertook thorough efforts to locate the person(s) responsible for Gammation and Gamma Attack. After some research and a few phone calls, it was determined that the principle person behind Gammation is deceased. Whether or not this person was the actual programmer of the game is unclear, and unfortunately we may never know. Since then, despite a few pretenders to the throne, no one has come forward and produced any evidence that they had any concrete involvement with this game, nor has anyone been able to point us in the direction of anyone else who might have had such involvement.

 

At this point, what obligation does the owner of a previously unknown game or prototype have to respect the supposed copyright of a game with an unknown (and probably indifferent) owner?

[Emehr]

I've been following these discussions for a few years now and I usually don't pipe in, but I have to take issue with this...

 

To me if the original author is willing to sell it, then I'll buy it from them first. If they want to manufacture a shortage in the interest of making a possible profit in the future, my stance will change to I'll take what I can find.

1 - I am positive that hack and homebrew authors aren't getting rich off their games regardless of "manufactured shortages". So getting peeved with hack/homebrew authors because they have limited runs of their product seems silly.

 

2 - If I had to take a guess, limited runs are a way to gauge interest. Remember, these games aren't made in a factory anymore. From what I understand, it's a painstaking and probably tedious undertaking. Just ask Al.

 

3 - Wouldn't it be in your best interest, in the case of a "manufactured shortage" that you missed out on, to email the author requesting that more carts be made? instead of buying from a bootlegger? Or perhaps get the author's permission to have someone make a one-off cart for you for a small fee?

 

4 - Pissing off the hack/homebrew authors is a great way to keep new games from getting made in the future. It's a labor of love. Supporting bootleggers will ultimately result in new games not getting made.

[udisi]

The upcoming Gamma Attack, doesn't have the consent of the original authors, yet the community as a whole will overlook that because it was produced by a company that no one wants to go through the trouble to find, contact, and negotiate to legally release the game. I want to see this game as much as everyone else, but no one should be making money off of it, without consent, but we're all so excited to get something new, that we'll overlook the legality of it it. I don't buy the stealing from a company is different from stealing from an individual. It's the same thing. I admit that I'm not perfect, and I too overlook the company stealing as opposed to personal stealing, but that doesn't change the ethics of the argument. I'm happy Gamma Attack is coming out, but it's not legal at all or ethical.

Completely rubbish.

 

I personally undertook thorough efforts to locate the person(s) responsible for Gammation and Gamma Attack. After some research and a few phone calls, it was determined that the principle person behind Gammation is deceased. Whether or not this person was the actual programmer of the game is unclear, and unfortunately we may never know. Since then, despite a few pretenders to the throne, no one has come forward and produced any evidence that they had any concrete involvement with this game, nor has anyone been able to point us in the direction of anyone else who might have had such involvement.

 

At this point, what obligation does the owner of a previously unknown game or prototype have to respect the supposed copyright of a game with an unknown (and probably indifferent) owner?

 

Honestly, I agree with you here. In cases where the owner is indifferent. I don't see a MORAL problem reproducing a game, but the fact is that someone does own the rights. and it's not completely legal. Just because you can't locate the owner doesn't make it legal. If the owner is dead, his estate would take IP control, and thus his family would probably own the rights. I don't know the structure of the company that made the game, but the company or some owner of the company could actually hold IP rights. Maybe Gamma Attack wasn't the best example, but there are plenty examples out there of people reproducing prototypes without the consent of the authors, that people will turn a blind eye to because they want to play the game.

 

The start of this topic was a Hack, and I kinda went on a whole spiel about homebrew in general. Hacks have no legal argument. They do, however have a moral one, and that's where you get people arguing on both sides here. I was just stating my position is that the programmers wishes should be respected regardless of legality with hacks. Am, I wrong or right? there's no answer really. Some people will take the legality argument, some will take the Morality argument.

 

In the Case of Gamma Attack, I too turn a blind eye to the legality of it, but am I morally right? I may be wrong on both accounts, I may be half and half. It's a grey area. It's just my observation, that the community as a whole is likely to turn a blind eye to the legality of a reproduction as to the reproduction of a homebrew.

[+Psionic]

I don't see a MORAL problem reproducing a game, but the fact is that someone does own the rights. and it's not completely legal. Just because you can't locate the owner doesn't make it legal. If the owner is dead, his estate would take IP control, and thus his family would probably own the rights.

You're assuming the IP owner has a family/heirs. Cross that bridge when you come to it...not something worth worrying about otherwise.

 

I don't know the structure of the company that made the game, but the company or some owner of the company could actually hold IP rights.

Gammation was not a "company" (corporation) at all, it was simply a trade name used by an individual for business purposes. Since it was not a corporation, there were no assets and any rights to any properties would be held by their creators. We have no idea who the creator of Gamma Attack was.

 

Maybe Gamma Attack wasn't the best example, but there are plenty examples out there of people reproducing prototypes without the consent of the authors, that people will turn a blind eye to because they want to play the game...In the Case of Gamma Attack, I too turn a blind eye to the legality of it, but am I morally right? I may be wrong on both accounts, I may be half and half. It's a grey area. It's just my observation, that the community as a whole is likely to turn a blind eye to the legality of a reproduction as to the reproduction of a homebrew.

No, Gamma Attack certainly isn't the best example, but you brought it up, not me.

 

As far as any legal issues go, they're about as serious as going through a red light in the desert at 3 a.m...sure it's illegal, but given the circumstances what the hell is the difference?

[Thomas Jentzsch]

Doesn't anyone remember the honor amung friends thing? Cause that is what this all really boils down too and anything else is just to argue samantics.

I couldn't agree more.

 

But I learned the hard way that I am expecting too much from some people.

[udisi]

I don't see a MORAL problem reproducing a game, but the fact is that someone does own the rights. and it's not completely legal. Just because you can't locate the owner doesn't make it legal. If the owner is dead, his estate would take IP control, and thus his family would probably own the rights.

You're assuming the IP owner has a family/heirs. Cross that bridge when you come to it...not something worth worrying about otherwise.

 

I don't know the structure of the company that made the game, but the company or some owner of the company could actually hold IP rights.

Gammation was not a "company" (corporation) at all, it was simply a trade name used by an individual for business purposes. Since it was not a corporation, there were no assets and any rights to any properties would be held by their creators. We have no idea who the creator of Gamma Attack was.

 

Maybe Gamma Attack wasn't the best example, but there are plenty examples out there of people reproducing prototypes without the consent of the authors, that people will turn a blind eye to because they want to play the game...In the Case of Gamma Attack, I too turn a blind eye to the legality of it, but am I morally right? I may be wrong on both accounts, I may be half and half. It's a grey area. It's just my observation, that the community as a whole is likely to turn a blind eye to the legality of a reproduction as to the reproduction of a homebrew.

No, Gamma Attack certainly isn't the best example, but you brought it up, not me.

 

As far as any legal issues go, they're about as serious as going through a red light in the desert at 3 a.m...sure it's illegal, but given the circumstances what the hell is the difference?

 

I'm agreeing with you, but I still have to point out that it is illegal, reguardless of whatever rationalization you, me or anyone else says.

[rolenta]

At this point, what obligation does the owner of a previously unknown game or prototype have to respect the supposed copyright of a game with an unknown (and probably indifferent) owner?

 

Prior to 1978, the lifespan of a copyright was 28 years. It could then be renewed at that time for another 28 years by the copyright holder or his estate.

 

After 1978, the length of a copyright was changed to the lifespan of the copyright holder plus 50 years after his death.

 

So unless the game was written prior to 1978, which I doubt, it is not in the public domain.

[hex65000]

You probably already have one wrong in the form of hacking the PAL version to NTSC.

That never occured to me. Actually you are the first to call it wrong, that I converted games previously unavailable for NTSC from PAL. I suppose converting Parker games into standard bankswitching format or 4K ROMs for becoming Supercharger compatible is "wrong" then too?

Based on the argument that copying a game without the previous author's permission is morally wrong in all cases, then technically yes. It is wrong. Obviously two wrongs don't make a right though.

If someone chooses to make more copies after the hack run is up and no more are in sight, where's your injured party?

Me! And what do you mean with "run up"? I offered (and still do) the ROMs for everybody to use them freely, but definitely not to steal my efford, selling(!) carts against my intentions and not even mentioning me. Even Randy has recently apologized for all this.

What I mean is _after_ you have sold all of the hack that you are ever going to sell (the hack run is up). Does that clarify the question?

I can concede bad form, but the original hacker made their money off of it.

I never made anything(!) with my TV conversions. Except for making a lot of people happy.

But now we are back to the original problem. Yes, you put a ton of work into the modification. Yes, others (myself included) appreciate it when we can get our hands on PAL exclusive things in NTSC format. Also, this isn't about you and your actions specifically. There are generalizations involved. Perhaps I was unclear on that bit.

 

[ ... Edit ... See below.]

 

My complaint is that it has the taste of manufactured rarity. I could make a small number of an item, then when I need cash, just make a few more -- just like printing money -- just like making reproductions of commercial releases. It's just blatant greed is all, and I am not all that huge on it. In that case, if there's a second source and everything else equal, I would consider buying it from the person doing the copying.

So again, your opinion is more important than the orginal programmer? You simply assume greed and then you are free to ignore him, right? Andrew will surEe like you.

I'm open to other possibilities and explanations as to an author's motivation to intentionally short-run a title. I just can't think of another reason. Wait, back up the happy train... who's Andrew?

I know you don't agree with me. I still view that there are some inconsistencies in the community is all. I also wanted to say that given choices, where I would vote with my mighty dollar. To me if the original author is willing to sell it, then I'll buy it from them first. If they want to manufacture a shortage in the interest of making a possible profit in the future, my stance will change to I'll take what I can find.

I think I will exclude you from buying my work from now on. So you don't have to look for excuses anymore. Fine?

You've totally lost me on why your'e upset here. You do realize that I specifically said that I'd _RATHER_ buy homebrews from the original author v/s a pirate version. For the record, I have purchased through AtariAge a few of titles you have produced. It is your prerogative if you would rather I not purchase any more through the official channel, but that is some crazy logic too.

 

3 - Wouldn't it be in your best interest, in the case of a "manufactured shortage" that you missed out on, to email the author requesting that more carts be made? instead of buying from a bootlegger? Or perhaps get the author's permission to have someone make a one-off cart for you for a small fee?

4 - Pissing off the hack/homebrew authors is a great way to keep new games from getting made in the future. It's a labor of love. Supporting bootleggers will ultimately result in new games not getting made.

I like suggestion #3. The only problem with #4 at this point is that I've already irritated at least one person. Admittedly, something like Edtris is what comes to mind. Perhaps it's a bad example.

 

Hex.

[ Going to take a break from getting a beating to watch Godzilla. ]

 

edit: Section removed per moderator request.

[+Psionic]

At this point, what obligation does the owner of a previously unknown game or prototype have to respect the supposed copyright of a game with an unknown (and probably indifferent) owner?

blah blah blah blah blah

[cosmosiss]

In case anyone missed it:

breaking the law.

[Thomas Jentzsch]

Based on the argument that copying a game without the previous author's permission is morally wrong in all cases, then technically yes. It is wrong. Obviously two wrongs don't make a right though.

The difference is, that for original games the authors usually don't care at all. Homebrewers do!

 

What I mean is _after_ you have sold all of the hack that you are ever going to sell (the hack run is up). Does that clarify the question?

No. Because those hacks where NEVER made for sale. They are for FREE and definitely not meant to base someone elses business on them. Everybody should at least ask me before they start making carts for others.

 

Heck, some people even asked me if they are allowed to make a personal copy for themselves (of course they can).

 

Okay, how about this: Explain to me, the difference between the Hoser pirate and the following picture other than the creator.

I am a programmer, I don't care for collective value at all. My work (= binary!) has been copied. The package is completely irrelevant to me.

 

I'm open to other possibilities and explanations as to an author's motivation to intentionally short-run a title. I just can't think of another reason.

There are numerous different reasons. If you cannot imagine anything else than greed, then maybe that's your problem.

 

Wait, back up the happy train... who's Andrew?

Andrew Davie, author of QB and the coming (limited!) Boulder Dash.

 

I know you don't agree with me. I still view that there are some inconsistencies in the community is all. I also wanted to say that given choices, where I would vote with my mighty dollar. To me if the original author is willing to sell it, then I'll buy it from them first. If they want to manufacture a shortage in the interest of making a possible profit in the future, my stance will change to I'll take what I can find.

Again you are only thinking in terms of money. That's NOT my world. You have to accept that not all people think like you. Your (ex) mighty dollar is not giving you ANY rights about my work.

 

You've totally lost me on why your'e upset here. You do realize that I specifically said that I'd _RATHER_ buy homebrews from the original author v/s a pirate version. For the record, I have purchased through AtariAge a few of titles you have produced. It is your prerogative if you would rather I not purchase any more through the official channel, but that is some crazy logic too.

You cannot understand, because we both have a fundamental different understanding here. Your world is very different to mine. In your world, money rules everything, in my world this is NOT true for my hobby.

 

If you _RATHER_ buy from me, that's ok. But it implies that if I do not sell you like you want me to, your money overrules my wishes. That's the point I heavily dislike.

[Thomas Jentzsch]

Prior to 1978, the lifespan of a copyright was 28 years. It could then be renewed at that time for another 28 years by the copyright holder or his estate.

 

After 1978, the length of a copyright was changed to the lifespan of the copyright holder plus 50 years after his death.

 

So unless the game was written prior to 1978, which I doubt, it is not in the public domain.

Legally you may be right, though the law might be different in other parts of the world. But that never was my point. There are many legally uncertain areas in our hobby. Probably this whole website is acting in a grey area.

 

Anyway, we should not base our actions between us on the law, but on a common understanding and respect for each other. If a community starts arguing about legal matters in inter-community afairs, something is definitely wrong!

[FireTiger]

Legally you may be right, though the law might be different in other parts of the world. But that never was my point. There are many legally uncertain areas in our hobby. Probably this whole website is acting in a grey area.

 

Anyway, we should not base our actions between us on the law, but on a common understanding and respect for each other. If a community starts arguing about legal matters in inter-community affairs, something is definitely wrong!

 

Post of the Thread award goes to....Thomas for sane, relevant, and rational posting.

 

-the reason we are pissed off at Hozer is that he sells often an inferior product that can be obtained from the creators, in most cases, as if he is the only distributer and that he did more work on them then burning them to a chip...

 

His attitude bites, he is in it for the money and the game designers don't see penny one of their 'royalties' (such as they might be after the cost of production).

 

Honestly its the difference in:

 

1) buying a really nice plant grafting form a farmer/gardener who knows what they are doing, or buying random plants from the back of a van

 

2) buying shrimp fresh off the dock in Jacksonville, FL, obviously packed in ice since they were caught, or buying them from a van in down town...oh..Kansas City, Kansas.. (just as a place with no river/ocean for shrimp, nothing personal)

 

3) buying a "real reproduction of art you love" (it was made in the correct media by hand not mass produced), or buying a reproduction copied from someones' lithograph made on a color copier at Kinko's

 

4) Having an illusionist/magician come to your kids party to preform in person, or putting in a DVD of a illusionist/magician made illegally at a performance.

 

---------------------

 

I hope these examples might only clarify, ignore the ones that are obscure to you, were all have different interest so some of these might be ... obtuse.

[jetset]

he is in it for the money

 

That describes many members of this community. So what?

I wouldn't defend Randy for making repros of games that are currently making money and royalties for homebrew authors, but considering he sells his carts for roughly the cost of the board and the cart I wonder really how much money he really makes. That compared to people selling repros on ebay or here for ridiculous amounts, in some cases all but completely hiding the fact that the games aren't authentic.

 

Sorry...Randy is wrong for making and selling repros of homebrews and even hacks without permission, however there are several people who are doing essentially the same and have no room to talk.

[Albert]

but considering he sells his carts for roughly the cost of the board and the cart I wonder really how much money he really makes.

This is not true at all. He's making money on the carts he's selling.

 

..Al

[FireTiger]

he is in it for the money

 

That describes many members of this community. So what?

I wouldn't defend Randy for making repros of games that are currently making money and royalties for homebrew authors, but considering he sells his carts for roughly the cost of the board and the cart I wonder really how much money he really makes. That compared to people selling repros on ebay or here for ridiculous amounts, in some cases all but completely hiding the fact that the games aren't authentic.

 

Sorry...Randy is wrong for making and selling repros of homebrews and even hacks without permission, however there are several people who are doing essentially the same and have no room to talk.

 

 

Depends on what broad and chip you uses, 'assuming' AA values are the lowest in the whole world and there isn't any markup on the boards...

 

broads are 3.50 -> 9.00 retail from AA

 

cart shells are 'worth' .50 cents if cleaned or not silver label to AA

 

manuals can be printed on a color laser printer for dirt cheep, or they can be done by a digital printing company

(for 8 pages, 8.5*5.5 color two sided = approx 1.00 per manual)

 

no clue how much the chips cost but if they are volatile or from some 3rd world country he likely gets them in bulk for dirt cheep, unlike here (AA) where they are good stable chips... I'll guess ... um 0.10-> 0.50 per unit from a "cheepy place"...

 

if the man has any brains whatever device he uses to solder/de-solder and whatever device he uses to burn to the chips is already paid for...

 

If he ships Media Mail (or whatever it is now at under 1 lb to the USA), cost is 1.30-1.80 + whatever for DC...

 

So only at the most expensive orders possible (digital printing, socketed broad, stable chips) is he losing money on this, otherwise he makes nearly 40% profit if he takes the cheapest way out... remember the author of the hack/Homebrew gets nothing, and he isn't running a huge awesome server...

 

Of course if he contacted Pixels Past before they knew he was a crook and he ordered ....1000 broads, a bulk price may have been cheaper at that time or for a huge quantity.

 

but that is assuming his time is worthless because he doesn't respect the community...

[jetset]

but considering he sells his carts for roughly the cost of the board and the cart I wonder really how much money he really makes.

This is not true at all. He's making money on the carts he's selling.

 

..Al

 

 

I'd honestly be curious how much. He charges $11.00 for 2-4k games, and $16 for larger. What is the cost of a board and chip, or whatever goes into making a cart?

I think a lot (but not all) of the angst at Randy is that he's an option for people wanting to sell repros for $35-$40 on ebay and he's undercutting their profit.

Granted I definetly don't condone his selling hombrews and/or hacks without permission, but games where the author has left the community and/or the games are out of production OR games where Randy has as much right to make repros as anyone (like Edtris for example) I don't get the pissing about it.

We frigging cheer people who buy 2-3 copies of numbered or "exclusive" games with the only intent being to make money off them on ebay, yet Randy making a cheap repro of that same game is a crime. Why?

[Albert]

I'd honestly be curious how much. He charges $11.00 for 2-4k games, and $16 for larger. What is the cost of a board and chip, or whatever goes into making a cart?

I obviously don't know Randy's exact costs, but he's always bragged about being able to make 2600 carts as inexpensively as possible. I'm sure his costs are less than mine. It shouldn't cost him any more than $5-6 to make an individual 4K cartridge, with the bankswitch (8K/16K/32K) games costing a little more. And that's being generous.

 

I think a lot (but not all) of the angst at Randy is that he's an option for people wanting to sell repros for $35-$40 on ebay and he's undercutting their profit.

I don't think anyone cares about him selling repros--I really don't know where you're getting this from. The main issue is with the hacks and homebrews, as well as other incidents from the past.

 

..Al