Digging in the crates

[SomeNaiveChump]

Where do you draw the line between the unacceptable and the acceptable face of it? That's my point.

acceptable - old game now unavailable - 99.999999% of cases

unacceptable - game is available in perfect form for current hardware and is currently on legitimate sale - 0.000001% of cases

I figured if you couldn't work this out for yourself then you could easily have genuinely missed the sarcasm

[K]

Trouble is, emulation (or piracy) is one activity. Where do you draw the line between the unacceptable and the acceptable face of it? That's my point.

I think you draw the line at the point where your activities actually begin to harm other people. Playing Outfoxies obviously hurts nobody, and arguably does a lot of good.

[Dude Ranch]

if I could pay a few quid for each of these games, I would

God, out of respect for a fellow forum member I totally believe you on this.

But how many people who freely download ROMS would suddenly start paying for the same ones, say, tomorrow? Fuck all, that's how many.

Anyway, I don't care. Bye.

[kamrantaz]

I cant see the harm in Dl'ing ROMS for arcade machines that no one will ever see again. I dont think NAMCO lost any cash from K's 'illegal' activities... not really.

[lancashirebambaata]

Faced with some unscheduled free time this weekend, (due to my housemates going to Camden market and NOT EVEN TELLING ME ABOUT IT) I decided to go fishing for unplayed gems in the MAME romset. And I discovered one particular classic that I'd never heard of.

It's Outfoxies, by Namco. I don't know if it's particularly well-known (I've certainly never heard of it), but it's completely bloody amazing. For those who don't know, it's basically a 2D version of Powerstone, where two international assassins are pitted against one another. Technically, it's pretty cool - the screen zooms in and out, so that both players are in view at any one time - and in terms of gameplay, it's full of brilliant touches.

Like, you can fire rockets to destroy parts of the scenery, so that you can drop through into new parts of the level, or knock holes in the walls so that the level slowly fills with water. Which then overflows into shark or piranha tanks, meaning that you can knock people into pits of writhing piscine death. Or the way you can kick weapons out of people's hands, so that you can jump down from a higher level, disarm your opponent, grab their flame thrower, and send them to a burning death off the back of a moving train.

It's brilliantly charming, too- the translation is hilariously poor, which combines with the eccentric character design (one of the assassins is a chimp, another is a pair of siamese twins) to make a totally unique game that has the vibe of a cross between 'Assassins' (the film) and 'Takeshi's Castle' (the bonkers Japanese game show). Plus, your score is measured in Swiss Francs for some mad reason, which just makes me love it even more.

It's ace. You haven't lived until you've experienced a swordfight between a man in a wheelchair and a jewel thief assisted by a "highly trained lizard". On the top of a rapidly plummeting cargo plane. With guns to follow.

Play it at first opportunity. I COMMAND YOU.

i first played this last week, it's pretty coooL!

[Ebisumaru]

Anyway, I don't care. Bye.

Well, you spent a lot of time telling us that!

[Dude Ranch]

Where do you draw the line between the unacceptable and the acceptable face of it? That's my point.

acceptable - old game now unavailable - 99.999999% of cases

unacceptable - game is available in perfect form for current hardware and is currently on legitimate sale - 0.000001% of cases

OK, so define 'unavailable'. If you mean none physically exist, which is probably impossible to prove either way, then you might have a point. But just plain difficult to find or expensive (eg Radiant Silvergun) is no excuse and the line gets blurred too easily. So it's better for me to rant about all emulation (or piracy) and be done with it.

[Dude Ranch]

Anyway, I don't care. Bye.

Well, you spent a lot of time telling us that!

Yeah, but you know I do care really. Passionately. I lost a brother to piracy.

[Ebisumaru]

Anyway, I don't care. Bye.

Well, you spent a lot of time telling us that!

Yeah, but you know I do care really. Passionately. I lost a brother to piracy.

Evidently.

[K]

I cant see the harm in Dl'ing ROMS for arcade machines that no one will ever see again. I dont think NAMCO lost any cash from K's 'illegal' activities... not really.

I dunno... I got the ROMs by kicking the shit out of a passing Namco employee and stealing his laptop. Perhaps that was what Dude Ranch was referring to.

[Luke]

and if you think pirating any game WHICH CANNOT CURRENTLY BE PURCHASED FROM ITS MANUFACTURER FOR THEIR BENEFIT is wrong, you're a loon.

What if it becomes available?

it won't. get over it.

This particular game - no, it probably wont.

(and vastly overpriced relative to second hand originals).

Why not buy the second hand originals then?

And no, that doesn't benefit the developers/publishers either, but in that case they have made one sale for one copy of the game to exist in circulation.

[SomeNaiveChump]

Why not buy the second hand originals then?

and this is better for the developers than downloading it why?

it's not. which is the point.

[Luke]

and this is better for the developers than downloading it why?

well I pretty sure I gave the reason why, did you miss it, or just not understand?

[SomeNaiveChump]

and this is better for the developers than downloading it why?

well I pretty sure I gave the reason why, did you miss it, or just not understand?

the reason you gave makes no sense.

buying a second hand game benefits the dev/publisher in no way whatsoever. exactly the same as piracy. in fact, in Japan games come with NO RESALE stamps on them, as used games are frowned upon.

[Luke]

They have already benefitted from the sale of game you are buying secondhand when the first person bought it.

The rights of ownership of the game are transferred to you when you buy it second hand. Someone else owned it, they no longer do. You didn't own it, you now do. One copy was sold, one copy is owned. If you don't want to buy the new version because a secondhand one is cheaper, that doesn't make piracy right. You're depriving the developer/publisher of a sale, buying a secondhand copy isn't depriving them of a sale in the same way, as they have already made a sale for the copy you are obtaining.

With piracy, loads of people could own a copy for every copy sold. I agree there isn't as much of an issue with this if the game isn't available, however, if it becomes available again, then I see this as a big issue. It then means that rather than buying the game - you are still just pirating it. It contradicts people's arguments that the game isn't available.

Also, you can argue that the people who should be getting the money for a sale of a re-release arcade classic (ie. the developers) probably aren't getting the money, however the fact is, the people who have the right to make the money off the sale are making the money off the sale.

[Burai]

http://search.ebay.co.uk/ws/search/SaleSea...cordsperpage=50

According to that, nobody in the whole wide world has a copy of Outfoxies PCB they'd like to sell to the UK. There is also no home conversion. Thusly I think we can all play via emulation AND go to heaven.

[Luke]

Yes, personally I see no problem with you pirating this game, and never said I did.

I was merely questioning God's stance of the old "if it's not available lets pirate it" argument, and whether if the game then became available again, would he stop using the illegal ROM?

It was a general question, not applying to this game in particular.

[Unofficial Who]

and if you think pirating any game WHICH CANNOT CURRENTLY BE PURCHASED FROM ITS MANUFACTURER FOR THEIR BENEFIT is wrong, you're a loon.

What if it becomes available? would you then delete it?

Lots of companies release old arcade games on compilations from time to time, do you delete the ROMs for these games as soon as the compilations are released?

If it became available and I was playing it a lot then I would open up the old piggy bank and buy it.

Which is why I own almost every single classic game compilation that has been released.

[Dude Ranch]

in fact, in Japan games come with NO RESALE stamps on them, as used games are frowned upon.

Don't games have notices saying they shouldn't be copied and distributed for free too? Doesn't stop people doing it.

My problem is that too many people think if they can't get what they want cheaply and/or easily enough then it's OK to just take it. This might be easier to defend in the case of Outfoxies but where do you draw the line? Are we saying that a billionaire couldn't buy an original Outfoxies arcade cabinet if he really wanted it? I bet he could find one and buy it, somewhere. So that just means buying Outfoxies is not within your/our means. And by your rationale that means it's OK to have an illegal copy. Do you extend that to someone on benefit who can't afford Prince of Persia? Is it OK for that person to take it? Just because they don't have the means to buy it?

[Luke]

and if a man cannot afford the bread to feed his family, is it all right for him to steal it? ;-)

[Dude Ranch]

and if a man cannot afford the bread to feed his family, is it all right for him to steal it?  ;-)

"Every time a debate on piracy or file-sharing or anything of a similar nature arises, some whiny-voiced illiterate will pop up posing the boneheadedly facile rhetorical question, "But you wouldn't just walk into a cake shop and run out with a cake without paying for it, would you?" This is, of course, an excellent point. If you're a fucking idiot.

Whether you're talking in legal, moral or grammatical terms, copyright infringement and stealing are NOT the same thing. For a start, legally it simply isn't possible to "steal" someone's copyright. When someone owns copyright in something - which they do automatically the instant they create it, whether they attach a copyright symbol to it or not - there is no possible way that that copyright can ever be owned by someone else, unless the original owner deliberately and willingly signs it over.

The words on this page are my copyright. If you copy the page and put it up somewhere else as your own work, it's still my copyright. You haven't stolen the copyright from me, because it still belongs to me. You CAN'T steal it from me - in legal terms, it simply isn't possible. Copyright cannot be "stolen". What you've done if you copy the words is infringe my copyright, for which I can take action against you in a civil court. It's not a matter of law (in the commonly-understood sense of the word). If I tell a policeman, he won't be interested, because it's not a crime, it's a civil offence.

Stealing, on the other hand, IS a criminal offence. If I see you walking out of the cake shop with a stolen cake and I tell a policeman, he WILL be interested, because you're committing a crime. He'll run over to you, whomp you with his truncheon and read you your rights on the spot, because you're a thief and that's his job. Theft is taking away someone else's property and hence depriving them of the ownership and use of it. If you copy my article, it doesn't suddenly disappear from this page. It's still mine. I still own it. It's still here. It hasn't been stolen.

The only way you can turn your infringement of my copyright into a criminal offence is if you start selling this article to people for money. But then you're not guilty of the crime of theft, you're guilty of trading standards offences, and it's the trading standards people who will come after you.

Copyright infringement/piracy is wrong, but it's not theft. Buy yourself a dictionary and get over it."

From http://www.worldofstuart.co.uk/

(He may have gone, but we can still quote him )

The world of Stuart is a world where everything is black and white and the dictionary definition is king, particularly when it suits him. Theft, copyright infringement, whatever. We all know we're saying, we don't need to hide behind big words and legal mumbo jumbo. I'm afraid that much in life is based on principles rather than rules.

I tell you what my problem is. Reading about the latest Neo Geo games being chucked around the net and dowloaded without a second thought. There are gamers out there who pay top dollar for those games and good for them. They're expensive for a reason and that reason is that they're limited in numbers and a specialist market. Don't want to pay the money? Then fuck off. Why should someone get something for free when his neighbour has to pay for it? And this makes me bloody annoyed and I end up having a pop at someone playing Outfoxies. I mean, Outfoxies! WTF?

[Kryptonian]

I'm in the "it's bad if the game is still commercially available" camp, ie, I don't have a problem with playing games on Mame at all. Infact I played Bubble Bobble on it so much (and nothing else really) I did buy the arcade machine.

What is annoying though is when your mate asks you to hurry up and buy the Indiana Jones DVD boxset so that he can copy it! Cheeky bastard

[Venice Cull]

There are gamers out there who pay top dollar for those games and good for them. They're expensive for a reason and that reason is that they're limited in numbers and a specialist market. Don't want to pay the money? Then fuck off. Why should someone get something for free when his neighbour has to pay for it?

He doesn't have to pay for it, he could also download the ROM instead of paying over the odds for a second hand copy of a 15 year old obscure Japanese shoot 'em up (of which the developers don't see a single penny anyway).

Thing is, he WANTS an 'original' copy - he's a collector. That's his business, and nothing to do with us lot getting MAME roms.

Turn it round if you believe that a ROM is the same thing as an original copy to collectors, and there is some sort of 'moral' argument against the people who flog and sell old PCB boards.

"Some people are holding monopolys on old videogames and charging over the odds prices for them because they aren't available anyhere. THEY are making money that the Developer will never see, and only a few people will get to play a little piece of history"

[Dude Ranch]

Fair enough. I understand your point of view, but as we both agree, your reaction over Outfoxies was a little OTT, to say the least.

Brand new games available to download over the net for free is obviously not right.

As far as theft & copyright goes, we SHOULD all understand what we mean, but when the theft of bread gets mentioned, it just prevents any real discussion about the issues.

A winky smilie clearly followed the bread comment, I saw it as a lighthearted reply to my post. It's a valid point made in a cryptic way. Or something .

Yes, Outfoxies would seem to be a more legitimate and forgivable target for emulation than 2003 Neo Geo games. Is there an age or a price or a number of copies left in the world that justifies emulation or 'piracy' though? Are Panzer Dragoon Saga and Radiant Silvergun fair game just like Outfoxies? If not when will they be, if ever? And why?

[Ste Pickford]

OK, so define 'unavailable'. If you mean none physically exist, which is probably impossible to prove either way, then you might have a point. But just plain difficult to find or expensive (eg Radiant Silvergun) is no excuse and the line gets blurred too easily. So it's better for me to rant about all emulation (or piracy) and be done with it.

I define 'unavailable' as 'commercially unavailable' - ie the manufacturer or publisher is no longer manufacturing new copies, and the copies they did make are all sold.

The ability to track down a second hand copy of some obscure game on ebay is irrelevant in this context - don't most games have warnings on them prohibiting resale? - there's certainly no financial benefit to the copyright owners / creators from such sales.

The fact is that very, very few video games are available for sale. Publishers are in the habit (in the west at least) of only making new games available for a very short time, maybe just a couple of months, after which they are, in record business terminology, 'deleted'. They are no longer available for sale, and no longer part of the catalogue.

Old roms and emulators for non available hardware are downloaded by video game fans and enthusiasts. The very same people who buy the most video games and keep the business alive. The people who love video games so much they want to keep playing the games they remember as a kid, or play obscure japanese games that were never deemed worthy of release in the west. These are the people that generatre interest in new games and are right at the heart of the industry. Playing old games on emulators is good for the games industry!

The only argument I would accept that downloading and playing old games does any harm at all, is that it could possibly be something done INSTEAD of buying new games, but I don't think that's the case. The kind of people who can be bothered with emulation are the kind of people who buy games and magazines and keep the industry ticking over.

I got an email from a stranger yesterday (this is absolutely true) of just one line, which I will quote:

"Would like to buy wetrix, but do not know where. Please reply."

Wetrix is no longer available. The publisher stopped manufacturing and supplying copies as little as a month after release, about four or five years ago now.

What should I tell this guy? "Sorry, its not available. Keep your eyes peeled for the day Infogrames decide to re-release it", or "Its been posted for download from an 'abandonware' site, so get it there for free".

As the creator of this game I would much rather somebody who was interested played the game now, rather than it rotting in the Infogrames archive, and I'm sure the creators of Outfoxies feel the same.

If we ever do another sequel to Wetrix, or Namco update Outfoxies, then the interest generated by some internet geeks playing the old game on a free download could be of significant commercial value to ourselves or Namco. And if no further products or re-releases are ever planned, then no harm is done.

[SomeNaiveChump]

Are Panzer Dragoon Saga and Radiant Silvergun fair game just like Outfoxies?

they are commercially unavailable. simple as.

next time Jim Miles comes round my house, I might just copy myself a bit if Radiant Silvergun, as its commercial use is over and my conscience would be completely clean.

as Ste says, I'm sure Treasure would rather me play the game any way I can, as buying second hand is completely irrelevant and of no use to them.

[Luke]

Fair enough.  I understand your point of view, but as we both agree, your reaction over Outfoxies was a little OTT, to say the least.

Brand new games available to download over the net for free is obviously not right.

As far as theft & copyright goes, we SHOULD all understand what we mean, but when the theft of bread gets mentioned, it just prevents any real discussion about the issues.

A winky smilie clearly followed the bread comment, I saw it as a lighthearted reply to my post. It's a valid point made in a cryptic way. Or something .

ha ha - yeah - way to go and completely miss the point Wiggly!

The bread joke was actually a joke pro-pirating argument spun twice round and stood on it's head. It is generally accepted that it is OK to steal a loaf of bread. It was more a joke about how DR's post sounded something along the lines of the standard moral question of whether it was all right to steal bread to feed your starving family.

I wasn't asking if people would happily go and steal a loaf of bread, or cake, as in Stuart's warbling (which, though I happen to agree with, I also find it quite redundant, and get annoyed when people use it as a pro-piracy argument).

I was going to give the Fat Tony quote of something along the lines of "and what if your family doesn't like bread, and instead they like cigarettes" but I couldn't remember it any couldn't be bothered to look it up.

But yes, anyway, you were all too keen to jump in and miss the point of my post, and now you look silly - ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!

I'm not suggesting piracy is the same as stealing bread to feed your family - in my opinion, it's a lot worse!

[SomeNaiveChump]

who is harmed when I download an obsolete game, which is not longer commercially available? pray tell.

[Luke]

who is harmed when I download an obsolete game, which is not longer commercially available? pray tell.

If you're asking me, then nobody. I'm pretty sure I've said/implied several times in this thread that I have no problem with that.

It's when they become available again that I have the problem with it, and am just curious as to whether people who go along with the "no longer commercially available" argument would then buy it.

[kilroy attack pattern]

HI.

Bringing up morality or piracy concerns over something like MAME is fucking ridiculous. If people are selling disks of roms for profit, then fuck em, but come on... playing games through MAME is so fucking inconsequential, it baffles me that anyone could get het up about it.