It's evil to steal a homebrew ROM, but not from Nintendo?

[ColecoFan1981]

Does this mean we can no longer do homebrews, and that we may have to stop all the projects we're currently homebrewing? (In regards to all the copyrighted games out there.)

 

~Ben

[Rev]

Does this mean we can no longer do homebrews, and that we may have to stop all the projects we're currently homebrewing? (In regards to all the copyrighted games out there.)

 

~Ben

 

hell no. keep on making them.seriously.i wish somone would release a donkey kong revision for the intellivision on a cart.

[King_Salamon]

Let's pick on PacMan Collection for a moment... it has to be one of the most 'profitable' homebrew releases. I'm sure Eduardo can give numbers but let's just say they sold 500 copies to date. At the sale price of $40 per title, there may be a 'profit' per copy of $5 (I'm being rather generous at that amount I would think.)... that makes the total 'profit' earned by Eduardo and Opcode a whopping $2,500. Now imagine the LABOR costs that went into this gem of a title! From the programming phase, the cart building, box glueing, label printing and placing on carts, the list goes on and on... let's not forget the shipping and handling time that must have been spent on shipping 500 games! I'm pretty sure 'profit' was a whopping amount in terms of a per hour wage! honestly, I don't think Namco, Nintendo etc are all that concerned over someone making a 'rip-off' of their trademark items on a legacy system. They are after people selling their current properties that would otherwise reduce their profits.

 

But, the real issue is the selling of ROMZ... that is just wrong. Not to mention the artwork...

 

Ahh well... at least we have 2 new Colecovision games to buy! The Void and Pooyan! Who'd have thought we would be playing 2 new games in August 2010 for the Colecovision... within days of each other to boot!?! Amazing! Go homebrewers... as long as you make them, we will support you!

[fiddlepaddle]

When it comes to using intellectual property that belongs to someone else, the damage involves much more than merely the "profit" they might lose; much more important is potential damage to the franchise, trademark, and image of the company. For example, any use of Mickey Mouse in a sexually disgusting manner would likely bring corrective action by Disney lawyers regardless of profit if they thought somebody might associate negative things with the cartoon character in the future. Remember what happened to endorsement values when Tiger Woods' indiscretions became common knowledge? or Michael Jackson and the kids at the ranch thing? These big companies care greatly about their image. We're lucky so few people are interested in homebrews so far.

[Mord]

Actually you have been double tricked because...i ...really...am ...a TROLL!!!!! mmmwwamaaahaahahahaahahahahaaaaaaa

 

or did i just trick you again?

 

Only one way to know for sure. Let's slice off your arm. If it regenerates, you're a troll and we can ban you! If not, I'll owe you a coke! ...and an apology about lopping off the arm.

[Greg2600]

I think the companies which are still in business and hold old copyrights, like Nintendo, SEGA, Activision, whatever calls itself Atari, Konami, Capcom, etc., long ago decided that it wasn't wise to duplicate the record industry's mistakes by attacking your customers. I think most of them saw emulation and rom distribution as irrelevant, or not worth their time exploring. They know it's out there, same as they know that there is a massive buy/sell/trade of vintage games. Money being spent on old games does them no good, they're selling new games. I often was surprised that they didn't fight the piracy much harder. I think for many years, they simply figured they had no use for the old games either. Over the last few years, they've done what the record companies refused to do. They began putting classic games on newer products as easter eggs. Or re-releasing them. Eventually, the downloadable media phenomenon hit, and now people can buy the old games on their new systems. Frankly by not being belligerent, it has greatly endeared the game companies to players and fans. The 8 and 16 bit themed games, Bionic Commando, Mega Man, Sonic, that are quickly becoming more commonplace, show that the game developers know a good thing when they see it. They realized that the popularity of fan grafted "low budget" home brew means commercially done ones would be even more popular, and they have been.

[newcoleco]

I think the companies which are still in business and hold old copyrights, like Nintendo, SEGA, Activision, whatever calls itself Atari, Konami, Capcom, etc., long ago decided that it wasn't wise to duplicate the record industry's mistakes by attacking your customers. I think most of them saw emulation and rom distribution as irrelevant, or not worth their time exploring.

Should I bring again the Nintendo web page regarding what they consider illegal? And the fact that Atari was asking here to rename some homebrew games published by AtariAge? Did you know the story about a serious warning (lawsuit?) a fan received because of an homebrew tetris game on his web site?

 

I'm sorry to reveal that companies don't like it when we use their stuff without permission. Don't f*ck with Nintendo is the best advice I can give you. Sega is more open to the homebrew scene, but not regarding products for sale. And homebrew games based on Exidy games seem ok; the copyrights owner I've talked to 2 years ago appears to like the retrogaming comunity.

 

August 29, 2008

 

That would be us. Tell me more about the unreleased Rip Cord and Side Trak cartridges. Do any prototypes exist? Any screen shots or magazine articles announcing them?

 

thanks

John

August 28, 2008

 

My name is Daniel Bienvenu and I consider myself as a ColecoVision game programmer. I saw you acquired the rights to do new Exidy games and would like to contact Exidy to see if I can negociate with them about making or not ColecoVision version of their classic arcade games.

 

Back in the 80s, Coleco Industries annonced games like Rip Cord and Side Trak to be in cartridges for the ColecoVision game system, but it never happens. I can probably do these game...

Edited August 6, 2010 by newcoleco

[Greg2600]

Should I bring again the Nintendo web page regarding what they consider illegal? And the fact that Atari was asking here to rename some homebrew games published by AtariAge? Did you know the story about a serious warning (lawsuit?) a fan received because of an homebrew tetris game on his web site?

 

I'm sorry to reveal that companies don't like it when we use their stuff without permission. Don't f*ck with Nintendo is the best advice I can give you. Sega is more open to the homebrew scene, but not regarding products for sale. And homebrew games based on Exidy games seem ok; the copyrights owner I've talked to 2 years ago appears to like the retrogaming comunity.

Well if that's the worse they can do?!?!

[newcoleco]

Well if that's the worse they can do?!?!

What do you think can be worst than years in jail (according to Nintendo's web site)?

[ColecoFan1981]

Well if that's the worse they can do?!?!

What do you think can be worst than years in jail (according to Nintendo's web site)?

What could be worse than that, IMO, is a life sentence without parole (repeat offender). I do hope OpcodeGames's founder cheers up and enters rehab to exercise his demons. Everyone needs a break sometime. When he's feeling confident again, I and the rest of us CV/Adam fans will hope for the best in the near future.

~Ben

Edited August 7, 2010 by ColecoFan1981

[Greg2600]

Well if that's the worse they can do?!?!

What do you think can be worst than years in jail (according to Nintendo's web site)?

Sarcasm! Personally, even if I could, I wouldn't touch Nintendo's properties. IMO they do such a good job in handling them, that releasing a homebrew or hack or port that they didn't sanction feels inappropriate.

Edited August 7, 2010 by Greg2600

[LocalH]

Should I bring again the Nintendo web page regarding what they consider illegal? And the fact that Atari was asking here to rename some homebrew games published by AtariAge? Did you know the story about a serious warning (lawsuit?) a fan received because of an homebrew tetris game on his web site?

For the record, it doesn't matter what Nintendo (or any other company) considers illegal, but what the law says (and what judicial precedent provides). I'm not necessarily saying that condones using their trademarks in a homebrew game, only that it's much more complex than what they say. As far as homebrew Tetris games go, the only thing that is illegal is if you use the name Tetris (or a name derived from Tetris). Game rules can not be protected, only specifics such as level layouts, graphical and aural assets (or reasonale facsimilies, depending on the range of possibilities afforded by the game rules themselves), and low-level game code. See LJ65 for a fully legal Tetris-style game for the NES, or this online clone of the 80's game show Press Your Luck. Fully legal, yet most of the outright PYL clones that used the same board layouts, sampled sounds, and graphics done to emulate the original ones exactly were taken down at the request of Fremantle when they partnered with Ludia to make modern home versions.

Edited August 12, 2010 by LocalH