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

[jaybird3rd]

I have one question. Don't you think that part of the issue is related to the always growing expectations?

I think that's one contributing factor, but again, this leads into the questions of motivation that I mentioned (and that I might have added to my earlier post after you read it). Are developers in it to live up to other people's expectations, or are they in it to do the kind of work they enjoy? I think one of the biggest mistakes that developers make is to allow the desires of others to become more important to them than their own. If you try to please everybody, you're bound to burn yourself out sooner or later.

 

I think that consumers have a role to play here, too. I actually wish they would stop thinking of themselves as passive consumers, but as active participants in the hobby. Those of us who buy homebrew games need to remember that the developers are not creating these games primarily to please us. They are--or should be--doing it for their own enjoyment and fulfillment; if they choose to share what they've created with us, so much the better (and if they don't, that's their right, too). If we don't like what they do, we can always support somebody else whose work we enjoy more, and if nobody is doing the kind of work we envision, maybe that's an creative possibility that we can play a role in exploring. But if we can't contribute to that process in any constructive way, that's our problem and not the developers', and we aren't entitled go around making demands of them.

[VectorGamer]

I agree in spirit, that if someone were to 'rip off'

 

Hey, that would be a great game to port to the CV!

[Rev]

I agree in spirit, that if someone were to 'rip off'

 

Hey, that would be a great game to port to the CV!

 

no more ports. how about homebrewers make original games?

 

and while i am saying it, why dont someone make more intellivision homebrews....

[+Gemintronic]

Is there a naughty list that one can refer to for companies that violate copyright laws and cheat homebrewers?

[newcoleco]

Is there a naughty list that one can refer to for companies that violate copyright laws and cheat homebrewers?

I don't think there is a list of companies that violate copyrights and cheat homebrewers. However, I think they know when they do act in the grey areas while copying others' game concepts.

 

Only the game designers know which web site they visit, which playable demo or flash game they played while looking for game concepts they want for their own propositions. In a sence they copy someone else work without copying any images, animations, sounds and code, and put it in a nice formatted documentation.

 

Casual gaming industry is essentially based on games easy to get into which correspond for the most part on what retrogaming is without naming it. I'm sure you've seen a bunch of Breakout, Kaboom, Frogger, and even Zelda clones made by the gaming industry, well I've seen them... but I can't provide any proof regarding an homebrew game being copied.

[misspent_youth]

no more ports. how about homebrewers make original games?

and while i am saying it, why dont someone make more intellivision homebrews....

 

I'm sorry, but I would certainly like it if someone could make an arcade quality port of an existing game for a console that it is not currently available on. For example, I would surely love to play Tron or Galaga on my ColecoVision in cartridge format (or even in rom format on a multi-cart if that's how the person putting forth the effort of making that possible wants me to), but you can be 100% certain that the rightful owners of the IP have no interest in making that happen. without the homebrew scene that will never happen. You can also be assured that the majority of classic gamers share my opinion, as evidenced by any thread that questions what games people would to see as homebrews. People name arcade ports and ports from other systems, not 'someone should make a game with a helicopter that turns into a motorcycle that fights crime and captures ghosts while killing zombies'. As was mentioned before, ports of existing IP are the best way that homebrewers can recoup the considerable resources expended in producing any game.

 

I personally think it would be a shame if homebrewers stopped making ports simply because they are not able to pursue a legal remedy for those who would infringe their copyright. It is certain that homebrewers' efforts will be pirated, regardless of what the underlying intellectual property situation is. The only difference is what the author can legally do about it. What needs to happen is that consumers refuse to support the lazy compilers who attempt to make an easy profit off of someone else's work. Making a homebrew port of an existing game is NOT a lazy attempt at profit. selling compilations of roms is.

[Mord]

How about this.... Don't look at it as David Harley(or similar guys) selling the actual ROMS. He is providing a service to people like me who have NO CLUE how to download a ROM onto a multi cart or SD card. All you other guys probably know how to do it. I do not.

 

David Harley also sells a Micro SD card for the Intellivision cuttle cart with all the games and homebrews for a price and it includes the SD card as well. I dont think he is making a ton of money for doing this.

Anyway for a guy like me it is worth it.

 

Yet in the other thread you said you thought you must be the only guy on Atari Age that buys their stuff legit and doesn't download roms/movies/music/etc? You realize for a guy like you, you wouldn't even consider buying or even using such a cart since you're convinced warez is the only reason they're made for, amirite?

 

Either way, the whole "providing a service" excuse, in my opinion, is just that: an excuse.

Whether it's selling a mass archive of roms or publicly offering to build carts of games they don't have the rights to, to anybody willing to send them the cash. I don't consider the morality of such actions entirely black and white, but I do take exception to those trying to say "I'm charging you for my time, not the game" as a way to say what they're doing is perfectly acceptable and legal. It isn't. (I'm sure some people will understand what I'm saying by this: There are several entities that are not welcome on Atari Age for their actions in making unauthorized copies of homebrews - they bill themselves as providing a service, not infringing copyright.)

 

For people who don't know how to load a multicart, that's what tutorials and manuals are for.

 

I feel like I've been trolled.

[Rev]

How about this.... Don't look at it as David Harley(or similar guys) selling the actual ROMS. He is providing a service to people like me who have NO CLUE how to download a ROM onto a multi cart or SD card. All you other guys probably know how to do it. I do not.

 

David Harley also sells a Micro SD card for the Intellivision cuttle cart with all the games and homebrews for a price and it includes the SD card as well. I dont think he is making a ton of money for doing this.

Anyway for a guy like me it is worth it.

 

Yet in the other thread you said you thought you must be the only guy on Atari Age that buys their stuff legit and doesn't download roms/movies/music/etc? You realize for a guy like you, you wouldn't even consider buying or even using such a cart since you're convinced warez is the only reason they're made for, amirite?

 

Either way, the whole "providing a service" excuse, in my opinion, is just that: an excuse.

Whether it's selling a mass archive of roms or publicly offering to build carts of games they don't have the rights to, to anybody willing to send them the cash. I don't consider the morality of such actions entirely black and white, but I do take exception to those trying to say "I'm charging you for my time, not the game" as a way to say what they're doing is perfectly acceptable and legal. It isn't. (I'm sure some people will understand what I'm saying by this: There are several entities that are not welcome on Atari Age for their actions in making unauthorized copies of homebrews - they bill themselves as providing a service, not infringing copyright.)

 

For people who don't know how to load a multicart, that's what tutorials and manuals are for.

 

I feel like I've been trolled.

 

I said a "guy like me". I didn't say ME. I have never wanted to buy this atarimax or download colecovision roms. I prefer the factory released games. Does that clear it up? Now just remember that you can't out troll a troll.....BooYaa!!!!!

 

 

Also what about people selling Multi-cades full of Roms as someone in the other thread brought up?

[jetset]

Jay, you should write a book.

 

He practically just did.

[Rev]

Jay, you should write a book.

 

He practically just did.

 

Now don't you guys copy his words and sell them in a book.

[jaybird3rd]

Jay, you should write a book.

He practically just did.

Heh ... I just checked, and everything I've written in this thread would add up to about six printed pages, and it's only rough-draft quality writing for me, so I'd hardly call it a book.

 

This gets a little off-topic, but I have in fact been thinking about writing a book. It would primarily be a tutorial on how to write homebrew games for one particular classic console (not the ColecoVision), but it would also contain an appendix consisting of a series of essays about some of the topics I've talked about here, and a whole lot more. It would be part how-to guide, part technical manual, part manifesto. Someday, when I finally get my other projects finished, perhaps I'll find the time to do it.

[jetset]

Jay, you should write a book.

 

He practically just did.

 

Now don't you guys copy his words and sell them in a book.

 

Nah! I'll just upload it to a torrent site so everyone gets it for free. :D

[Mord]

Does that clear it up? Now just remember that you can't out troll a troll.....BooYaa!!!!!

 

Perfectly clear that you're a troll. Thanks!

[PacManPlus]

You know, there's another thought process here.

 

Some people (like myself) are not *capable* of coming up with original games, and like to take an existing idea and expand on it.

I did Pac-Man Collection for the 7800 because 1-It's my favorite game, 2-It was one of the few platforms it (Pac-Man) was missing on, and 3-I wanted to throw every option possible in it.

 

I *tried* to go the legal route with this. I went to Namco via their message board, two different e-mail addresses (and re-sent the e-mails), and even someone who *worked* for Namco that used to be a member here (and who worked for Activision prior to that). I *beleive* I even tried calling them (although that one I don't remember 100%). I did not get one response. If I had received a 'no' I would have pulled the game and asked Al not to sell them. It actually frustrated me. I don't care about the reason they didn't answer me. I am a nobody to them. Does it really take that much money to answer an e-mail? Or to even allow x number of carts to sell? Or have x dollars per cart go back to them for licensing? Or even just to write back and say 'we cannot allow this'? Don't they already pay a legal department for things like this anyway?

 

So, because I like to program and wanted to see a missing game fill a void on a system, do I not do it and avoid doing something I love? I don't think so.

 

I have two games presently in the works, one is a conversion of an old board game from 1981 that I may actually be getting permission from Hasbro to do (awaiting an answer, but it sounded promising), and another one is expansion of an early 2600 game.

 

Sometimes it's more than black & white.

 

Bob

[jaybird3rd]

You know, there's another thought process here.

 

Some people (like myself) are not *capable* of coming up with original games, and like to take an existing idea and expand on it.

I did Pac-Man Collection for the 7800 because 1-It's my favorite game, 2-It was one of the few platforms it (Pac-Man) was missing on, and 3-I wanted to throw every option possible in it.

 

I *tried* to go the legal route with this. I went to Namco via their message board, two different e-mail addresses (and re-sent the e-mails), and even someone who *worked* for Namco that used to be a member here (and who worked for Activision prior to that). I *beleive* I even tried calling them (although that one I don't remember 100%). I did not get one response. If I had received a 'no' I would have pulled the game and asked Al not to sell them. It actually frustrated me. I don't care about the reason they didn't answer me. I am a nobody to them. Does it really take that much money to answer an e-mail? Or to even allow x number of carts to sell? Or have x dollars per cart go back to them for licensing? Or even just to write back and say 'we cannot allow this'? Don't they already pay a legal department for things like this anyway?

 

So, because I like to program and wanted to see a missing game fill a void on a system, do I not do it and avoid doing something I love? I don't think so.

 

I have two games presently in the works, one is a conversion of an old board game from 1981 that I may actually be getting permission from Hasbro to do (awaiting an answer, but it sounded promising), and another one is expansion of an early 2600 game.

 

Sometimes it's more than black & white.

 

Bob

I actually think your 7800 Pac-Man Collection is an example of how to do a port the right way. In your case, you took a game you liked and decided to create a port, but instead of making your version an exact clone, you also expanded and elaborated upon the original ideas. That's a creative contribution, even though the game concept came from another source. You also made a reasonable, provable, due diligence effort to contact the copyright owner and obtain permission (which, incidentally, is one of the things Cebus recommends in the guide that I linked to earlier (or maybe in one of his posts in the thread it was posted in; I can't remember)). My posts were written more as a reaction to ports like ColecoVision Mario Brothers, which was an exact copy of the original and which was done with no attempt to obtain permission: the developer/publisher never claimed to have asked for or received permission, and Nintendo isn't in the habit of granting permissions of that kind, implicitly or explicitly.

 

Given those considerations, I wouldn't lump the 7800 Pac-Man Collection under the category of "objectionable" ports at all, and I certainly don't want you to think that I'm trying to disparage or discourage your efforts. Speaking only for myself, I'd still prefer to see more original games, but as I said earlier, developers need to choose projects that are exciting and motivating to them, and nobody else should try to tell them any different.

[VectorGamer]

Given those considerations, I wouldn't lump the 7800 Pac-Man Collection under the category of "objectionable" ports at all

 

For those that argue "stealing" e.g. Mario from Nintendo for a ColecoVision game, the same holds true for Pac-Man Collection. The games found in PMC are more true to the arcade than anything Atari did for any of their systems.

 

Just because it's called "Beef Drop" doesn't mean it's legal. Just because Namco didn't respond does it make it legal to port Pac-Man.

 

I'm on the side of the home brewers: I have bought their products and will continue to do so. But, let's not kid ourselves here in order to justify the legalities surrounding the ownership of Pac-Man, Mario et al.

 

I'm just calling a spade a spade.

[jaybird3rd]

For those that argue "stealing" e.g. Mario from Nintendo for a ColecoVision game, the same holds true for Pac-Man Collection. The games found in PMC are more true to the arcade than anything Atari did for any of their systems.

 

Just because it's called "Beef Drop" doesn't mean it's legal. Just because Namco didn't respond does it make it legal to port Pac-Man.

 

I'm on the side of the home brewers: I have bought their products and will continue to do so. But, let's not kid ourselves here in order to justify the legalities surrounding the ownership of Pac-Man, Mario et al.

 

I'm just calling a spade a spade.

It would have been better to get a definitive answer from Namco regarding the Pac-Man license, to be sure, but they were given every opportunity to provide one and have apparently chosen not to do so. That, from my limited understanding of the legalities involved, puts the Pac-Man Collection in a safer place than the Mario Brothers port, which (again) was apparently done without even the attempt to secure permission.

 

My point (as I stated in my first post in this thread) is only that, if you know you're violating somebody's copyright without even making an effort to contact them, it's hypocritical to then turn around and cry foul if somebody then proceeds to pirate your own work. That was the issue that got the whole conversation started; it wasn't about debating the legality of any particular homebrew project, which I don't have enough knowledge to do with any credibility anyway. As Cebus pointed out in an earlier post, "copyright is incredibly complicated and 99% of everyone has no idea what it means ... each instance is completely different and only general rules apply." All I want is for the people involved in homebrewing to at least try to play within those rules, because if they don't, I think it will hurt all of us.

[Retro Rogue]

Just saw this thread as well.

 

I partially agree with you. You just forget one point, contrary to your belief Homebrew Developper and publisher does not really make money.

 

The small benefit they do (when they does) is re-invested in material to be able to publish the next title.

 

How much or how little money they make for themselves is completely irrelevant. They don't own the property to publish, and if there's money changing hands then it's a commercial product.

 

Now I for one am always happy to support these authors and have bought their products in the past. But lets not kid ourselves on the legality of it and what's actually going on here. A "white lie" is still considered a lie just as selling a property you don't own and have not licensed is still pirating that property. Sugar coating and rationalizing it only serves to try and downplay the illegality of what's going on. It doesn't take it away.

[PacManPlus]

@jaybird3rd: Thank you for the clarification, and for the compliments. I do see what you are saying... Although I always wish I could come up with something original, and program the 7800 as well as, someone like GroovyBee. But I do try as hard as I can and what I come out with is the best I can do.

 

Bob

[Rev]

Does that clear it up? Now just remember that you can't out troll a troll.....BooYaa!!!!!

 

Perfectly clear that you're a troll. Thanks!

 

 

i was actually joking about myself being a troll,thats why i said 'booyaa' after that staement. if anyone is trolling these 2 threads its you.you have nothing constructive to say or even any valid opinions on the subject. you just go with the popular voice so not to cause any trouble. typical sheep.

Edited August 2, 2010 by revolutionika

[jaybird3rd]

@jaybird3rd: Thank you for the clarification, and for the compliments. I do see what you are saying... Although I always wish I could come up with something original, and program the 7800 as well as, someone like GroovyBee. But I do try as hard as I can and what I come out with is the best I can do.

And it's very greatly appreciated, despite anything I said that might have implied otherwise. The 7800 community is lucky to have you, and it wouldn't have grown as it has in recent years without your talents. Thank you.

[retroillucid]

Well, let me express myself please (even if my english is not my cup of tea too )

 

If I decided to make Mario Bros on Colecovision, it was not to pirate Nintendo or to make cash out of it

I always love trowing 25cents in this arcade machine as kid

At this time, I owned a Colecovision and I was expected to get Mario Bros for my delighted console.... yeah.. it never happen...

That's the reason I decided to make Mario Bros on Colecovision

The Box? ... Artworks?... well all in the deepest respect of this liscence

Including the Nintendo logo? ... That's their game after all

Making an exact port? well.. not really, we even included extra level

 

Contacting Nintendo is something I've think alot when I decide to port it to Colecovision. But let's face it, I knew they'll not give a **** and will never get a reply...

 

ColecoVision was an "Arcade Quality Game System" ... they always promote this system that way

This is mainly why homebrewer want to port Arcade Game to it

Don't be fooled, I really like new creations like Newcoleco has done

I even have some new creation that I really want to make

 

I don't really care about Mario Bros beiing a PD Rom, you're right after all, this is a copyrighted game, and I DO REALLY WANT more poeple to enjoy it on Colecovision system or emulator

 

Anyway, no hard feeling everyone!

 

 

Cheers

[Shawn Jefferson]

AtariAge member Cebus Capucinis wrote a short, simple, accessible guide to copyright laws and how to avoid breaking them (the thread in which it was posted, by the way, is an interesting example of how property owners can react to the unauthorized use of their properties in unexpected ways). Read it and follow his guidelines to the letter, and make yourself informed about the laws and legal issues that are involved.

 

That guide is nice, but there is one thing in it that I think is wrong. A work does not need to be published to be covered by copyright-so prototypes are not "fair game". At least that is my understanding, but IANAL. Here are some references though:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law

http://www.ivanhoffman.com/unpublished.html

http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm

 

On the whole topic, I think there is The Law^tm and then there is the code of ethics the community has built up. For instance, creating a port of a game (to a dead system) that uses IP of a "big" company is ok, even though technically it is illegal. As is downloading roms for old or "abandoned" game systems, even though those titles are techically still copyrighted, not to mention that often times there still exists stock that someone has purchased and is still selling-thus you are depriving them of a potential sale and revenue-but this is considered fine within our community too. Selling ROMs on a CD or over the Internet, even for dead game systems is considered entirely wrong. I think the community is largely self-policing, and tending towards least harm, if not technically completely within the law.

[Mord]

Does that clear it up? Now just remember that you can't out troll a troll.....BooYaa!!!!!

 

Perfectly clear that you're a troll. Thanks!

 

i was actually joking about myself being a troll,thats why i said 'booyaa' after that staement. if anyone is trolling these 2 threads its you.you have nothing constructive to say or even any valid opinions on the subject. you just go with the popular voice so not to cause any trouble. typical sheep.

 

You obviously don't know me.

 

Pay attention to the emoticon next time if you expect me to pay attention to your BooYaa.

[Rev]

Does that clear it up? Now just remember that you can't out troll a troll.....BooYaa!!!!!

 

Perfectly clear that you're a troll. Thanks!

 

i was actually joking about myself being a troll,thats why i said 'booyaa' after that staement. if anyone is trolling these 2 threads its you.you have nothing constructive to say or even any valid opinions on the subject. you just go with the popular voice so not to cause any trouble. typical sheep.

 

You obviously don't know me.

 

Pay attention to the emoticon next time if you expect me to pay attention to your BooYaa.

 

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

 

 

 

 

or did i just trick you again?