Games I'm allowed to play

[guitarmas]

I understand the whole thing about using published atari games for the public to use at no cost.

 

Are Homebrews and Prototypes affected by this rule too?

 

Thanks,

Edited September 11, 2015 by guitarmas

[Philflound]

I guess if you can get the emulators for them, you can play them. Visit atarimania.com for whatever files you need.

 

Phil

[+DrVenkman]

I don't quite understand the question? Who says what games you're allowed or not allowed to play? You look like a grown man to me. Who says you can't play whatever game you want?

[fiddlepaddle]

What 'rule'? There are laws, and maybe respect for someone's wishes. You can break the law by playing an illegal copy without permission, but that depends on the game, the manner in which you play, and whether permission has been given. It can get very complicated to determine the answer to that, in a purely technical way. In reality, old games are less of a problem than newer games, and millions of people emulate thousands of different games without any practical restraint.

 

Of course, there is also ambiguity, which may or may not apply here, just depending...

[CPUWIZ]

Until you start eating broccoli, you are not allowed to play any games at all, son.

[Shawn]

Until you start eating broccoli, you are not allowed to play any games at all, son.

 

[guitarmas]

I was just curious which games are protected by a copyright. I mean I would like to play all those 2600 games on my newly acquired 7800 through a multicart, but I don't want to infringe on any copyright laws though.

 

 

Until you start eating broccoli, you are not allowed to play any games at all, son.

 

You never understand me!

Edited September 12, 2015 by guitarmas

[+FujiSkunk]

All games are protected by copyright. And strictly speaking, unless the IP owners have given permission, you do not have a legal right to play games on an emulator or in a multicart. Most homebrew authors have given such permission. Most if not all owners of games released back in the day have not given such permission, at least not in any legally binding way.

 

Having said that, no one is going to come beating down your door for playing Atari 2600 games on your multicart or emulator*. In fact, most companies have either turned a blind eye or given some form of tacit approval (again, not legally binding), and most developers when asked have said either they aren't concerned or they welcome the attention their old games are getting. One notable exception is Activision, who asked AtariAge to stop distributing their ROMs. Even then, those ROMs aren't hard to find, and David Crane has stated he isn't worried about it.

 

So, ultimately it boils down to you and your conscience. Myself, I lose no sleep over collecting ROMs and playing them on multicarts and emulators. For the games I like, I'll hunt down a legal copy, be it an original cartridge or disc or part of a legally-released compilation of emulated games, but even then I'll keep the ROM image.

 

* Unless it's the full release of Boulder Dash.

[Nutsy Doodleheimer]

http://youtu.be/-VBZClrxDLQ

[Buttons]

Don't steal...

Edited September 12, 2015 by Buttons

[Papa]

You wouldn't want anyone stealing a riff you just came up with, right? I've had my personal recordings of my own created music deleted from a private community at least twice (with no response when the admins are questioned on it. The rules even stated that one would be informed before deletion if copyrights are infringed upon!)! That was my personal work and it hurt pretty bad. My initial worry was that someone was planning on stealing it for their own use (as happens at times. "I Want a New Drug" was ripped off to become "The Ghostbusters" theme to name one popular past conflict).

 

I obviously don't mind people playing the beta or early BIN files of games that I make and post for everyone. I wouldn't want someone making a cartridge of my game without my permission, though. I've noticed that there seems to be a strong defense of game music as of late and it's use in clones and copies. I know that rights in media run their course and can't be defended unless renewed or rehashed somehow. It used to be a certain number of years for a certain type of media.

 

As far as games go, I try to always have the game before I emulate it. At least a box (proof of purchase) or broken copy to be safe.

 

Artists are often used as tools of expression for the higher ups and really aren't as super-rich as they are sometimes portrayed (not most of them anyway)...

 

Metallica comes to mind. Sure it seems a bit whiny or even sophmorish or bitchy for them to raise arms against Napster, however, they knew that royalties from their work was what was putting food on the table for their families and keeping them in their (at the time modest) homes. I know they weren't running the risk of going broke or anything, but it hurts artists to have their work ripped off in more ways than just the obvious kick in the nuts of having it stolen right in front of you. It all adds up.

 

For instance. One might have no qualms about downloading four gigs of arcade games and MAME to play all those missed adventures with unlimited quarters. I would rather buy up as many compilation disks before emulating outside of that. Many of the multicart JAMMA offerings are unlicensed or bootlegs. There are quite a few that are licensed and used in arcades for credit play in the eastern world (although those licenses are often shaky at best). Once I got the Capcom collections, Activision, Atari, Sega, TAITO, Midway, etc. I could then emulate outside of the intended system without that bad feeling like I ripped off someone.

 

We all borrow from one another and piggyback each others ideas to be creative, but that's quite a bit different than stealing work all together.

On a counterpoint, much of the older software is just fee advertising for whatever modern incarnations of work have survived and usually not worth defending when being downloaded by everyone en masse.

Edited September 12, 2015 by Papa

[Emehr]

My own personal rule is this: is somebody potentially losing money because I'm using this software? If that particular build of the software is not on the market or if the hardware (or operating system) that is required for the software to run is no longer in production, the answer is generally "no". All software is protected by copyright. It's not yours to copy, sell, or give away. Otherwise you dilute the market and reduce the demand of the product, which affects the author or publisher. If there is no market or if the product is no longer in production, then there is nothing to dilute and nobody is affected. That approach seems reasonable to me so that's what I go by. It doesn't mean I don't buy obsolete games and software though. I like old media and the packaging and documentation that goes with it.

[BladeOfOsiris]

You can only play the bad games

[Rhomaios]

You wouldn't want anyone stealing a riff you just came up with, right? I've had my personal recordings of my own created music deleted from a private community at least twice (with no response when the admins are questioned on it. The rules even stated that one would be informed before deletion if copyrights are infringed upon!)! That was my personal work and it hurt pretty bad. My initial worry was that someone was planning on stealing it for their own use (as happens at times. "I Want a New Drug" was ripped off to become "The Ghostbusters" theme to name one popular past conflict).

 

That's not the same though. If someone is playing your music in the privacy of their own bedroom, are you really going to care? If they release an album and sell it for major monies, then that's messed up.

[Jinks]

What do you think someone might tell your mom?

Games are to be played. Laws were made to be broken. Game on!!

[Andromeda Stardust]

It's definitely illegal, but emulation, downloading commercial ROMs of old games, hacking, console modding, etc is like doing 5 miles over. Nobody cares and everybody does it. Cops generally let it slide, but do ten+ and get a ticket. The "ten+ miles over" in this situation is pirating modern games, creating bootlegs of homebrew or rare games, dumping and releasing homebrews without the authors consent, etc...

 

The question is not whether what you are doing is illegal, but how far an individual or community is willing to set the bar. There is a large gray area between harmless fun and total douchebaggery. If you're doing 115 mph on the freeway, that's douchebaggary.

Edited September 13, 2015 by stardust4ever

[Opry99er]

As Emehr said, if the game is still in production or if it will cost someone money, I count that as a no-no.

 

If someone writes a game for distribution and with the intent of selling that game for profit, I typically do not play that game unless I have a physical copy.

 

That said, games like GORF and Enduro no longer have any new profits being made by either the authors or distribution companies... I will DL and play those, partly because I have physical copies and partly because playing them in emulation is not costing anyone anything.

 

This is why I have not played Space Rocks yet. Looks like my 'new favorite game,' but it feels like cheating to play it because the author still makes money off sales.

 

Gives me incentive to buy the cart.

 

Personal choice, not an indictment of anyone who does not follow this line of thinking.

Edited September 13, 2015 by Opry99er

[+KaeruYojimbo]

I tend to look at 2600 games as abandonware. With a few notable exceptions (Activision is still active and still releases collections of 2600 games, ATGames puts Atari games on the Flashback consoles and maybe Intellivision Productions, which I'm guessing owns the rights to the M-Network games, but I don't know for sure) most of the companies that published 2600 games either don't exist anymore or are out of the video games business. Either way, they haven't attempted to make any money off these games in 30 years and aren't losing anything because I download a ROM. It's not like they'd get the money if I went out and bought the game on cart anyway.

 

As for homebrews, if the author makes the ROM available (the actual author of the game, not some dingus who got hold of the ROM and put it on the web somewhere), I see that as permission to download and play the game, but not to distribute it and certainly not to sell it in any form. If I like the game I'll eventually buy it on cart because I like having the actual physical cartridge and because I like supporting people who make things I like.

Edited September 13, 2015 by KaeruYojimbo

[Papa]

 

That's not the same though. If someone is playing your music in the privacy of their own bedroom, are you really going to care? If they release an album and sell it for major monies, then that's messed up.

 

If I was selling my music I would definitely care regardless of where it was being played. In fact most of those works are not meant to be played in public so they are intended for home use. If I was letting people listen to it for free on the internet then, of course, I wouldn't care.

 

I just think that piracy has gone overboard and is starting to be accepted as commonplace. Much of the older software that has gone beyond it's own protection is something that is sold used and bought by collectors and so it affects the people who make money selling used software. The counterpoint here would be that reproduction carts actually identify and raise the prices on original rare software and thus could have a positive affect in some cases. People who rip movies/games/software hurt not only the industry, but the manufacturing side as well with profits regulating employment and therefore leading to the firing/laying off of more lower income workers involved. The rampant downloading of software that involves characters that are being rehashed and rebooted into newer titles may introduce those characters to people who otherwise may have never heard of them and could be like free advertising, but it could also keep someone from buying the newer titles and that is negative for the industry.

 

I think companies do enough to shoot themselves in the foot and reduce their own profits without piracy branching the possible targeted consumer off into the used game market. I think the Wii U was released too early and sucked Nintendo down into a dark place. The lack of backwards compatibility for the PS4 made Sony seem disconnected from it's loyalist base. The XBOX One seems to have very little to offer so far in numbers of titles available and has garnered some guff for it's spy-ish camera. They all offer older software to download to help old schoolers have a reason to buy into the newer hardware. Of course people downloading illegal roms is going to reduce profits for these companies.

 

 

I don't quite understand the question? Who says what games you're allowed or not allowed to play? You look like a grown man to me. Who says you can't play whatever game you want?

 

...and you can go to a grown man prison like a big boy and get butt pirated like a big boy and toss the salad like a full grown man!

[+DrVenkman]

 

...and you can go to a grown man prison like a big boy and get butt pirated like a big boy and toss the salad like a full grown man!

 

"... butt pirated" and "toss the salad," huh? Is that how you big boys learned to say it prison?

 

Get over yourself. If the original poster had asked clearly, "Hey, what is the current status copyright with regard to retro-game titles for [insert name of system] in my home nation of [insert name of legal jurisdiction], the question would've been much clearer, much more succinct, and be more easily addressed.

 

Of course, addressing it is not the same thing as "answering" it, because as noted above, the entirety of the legal situation is anything but settled. Copyright in the U.S., for instance, is damn near effectively forever thanks to absurd lobbying by the likes of Disney ... Yet in many cases the copyright holders are dead without estates or legal representation, defunct companies or simply cannot be determined thanks to mergers, acquisitions, bankruptcies, sales and divestitures during which some IP and other assets were transferred but not others, et cetera.

 

So my suggestion to the OP, now that the real nature of his question has been determined, is to do some in-depth research on the laws in his jurisdiction, then make his big boy decision about what to do like everyone else.

[Mord]

Just to point out, there's no legal definition or status of for "abandonware". People just made it up. Such things are still technically under full copyright with all the complications that implies. The question is simply whether or not the original creator still exists, and if they'll notice. Of course, the probability of anything happening from downloading such things are generally very low. The question ends up being how legit are you trying to be, and I'm assuming the op is trying to be 100% legit since he's asking about it all.

[Mord]

I just think that piracy has gone overboard and is starting to be accepted as commonplace.

 

Personally I tend to find that this is due to the fact that copyright has grown too strict, extended WAY too long, and punished too severely that people realize that it's impossible to avoid infringement. Literally, it is impossible. You could doodle up a scribble and if someone else thinks it looks too much like what they already did, you're guilty of infringement. ("accidental infringement" is just as punishable, although typically you'll get off a little easier - might still bankrupt you though.)

 

And it's gone so overboard that it's starting to be accepted as logical by those who want to protect everything they've ever done until their great grandkids die of old age. (Kidding of course. The way copyright is expanding copyrights won't ever expire again.)

 

The net result is that people see there's no point in waiting for a copyright to expire. Copyright doesn't respect them, why should they respect it?

 

Finally, the damage done by piracy is nowhere near as large as what companies like to claim. Their claims are based on 1 lost full-priced sale per download. And even then they make shit up (They've claimed the loss to piracy exceeded the GDP of the entire planet - not possible, until you realize they're counting maximum US statutory damages for every single download as the "lost sale".) A person that downloads 1000 albums for instance would not have bought every single album if that was what he was forced to do. But that's what they'll assume the loss to piracy was.

 

But hey, this is what you get when you apply punishments originally intended against commercial -companies- that tried to infringe on your copyrights against individuals.

[+KaeruYojimbo]

 

If I was selling my music I would definitely care regardless of where it was being played. In fact most of those works are not meant to be played in public so they are intended for home use. If I was letting people listen to it for free on the internet then, of course, I wouldn't care.

 

This isn't quite an apples to apples example. You're comparing a creator/copyright holder who is actively protecting/supporting/selling their work to a company that may no longer exist. So far, as far as I know, only Activision and Intellivision Productions have come forward and made any effort to protect their copyrights. (David Crane saying he isn't worried about it is meaningless. He may still get Pitfall royalties, but the doesn't own the copyright so the decision isn't his to make.)

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that downloading Telesys ROMs is legal, but until someone comes forward saying the hold the rights and don't want the ROMs distributed, then I don't see a problem with those files being out there. Even the effect on the used software market is pretty minimal. Most of these sellers are either thrift stores or pawn shops who don't care and sell games for a buck a piece or specialty shops selling to collectors who want the actual physical game, regardless of whether or not they can just play the ROM with an emulator.

 

In the case of super rare games, emulation is the only realistic option for those who want to play these games. I don't foresee anyone putting out an official re-release these games and I'm not going to pay the 4-digit prices some of them command.

[Andromeda Stardust]

Nice discussion so far, although the exact wording of the title sounds like a kid inquiring as to whether he/she can play restricted or "M" rated games. Like when I was a teen, my mom got me a minor Blockbuster card which carried with it a restriction on renting "R" movies.

 

I don't quite understand the question? Who says what games you're allowed or not allowed to play? You look like a grown man to me. Who says you can't play whatever game you want?

 

...and you can go to a grown man prison like a big boy and get butt pirated like a big boy and toss the salad like a full grown man!

Interesting point. As a free citizen, I can sell crack on a street corner if I want, or purchase a fire arm and attempt to rob a bank with it. I am also free to go to jail for my crimes and rot in prison if caught.

 

That said, nobody's going to jail for downloading 20-30+ year old ROMs off the Internet. But selling fakes or distributing data, especially for profit, could get you into legal trouble. Still, a C&D or slap on the wrist is the most you're likely to get. If extremely unlucky, you may go to court, but facing jail time is a bit extreme for the crime.

Edited September 13, 2015 by stardust4ever

[sloth-machine]

I was just curious which games are protected by a copyright. I mean I would like to play all those 2600 games on my newly acquired 7800 through a multicart, but I don't want to infringe on any copyright laws though.

 

 

 

You never understand me!

 

 

"Multicart" & "I don't want to infringe on any copyright laws" in the same sentence? That is like saying I want to take a shower but don't want to get wet