PDA

View Full Version : Copyright confusion clarified


Saladwood
Nov 1, 2003, 12:49 AM
http://www.gamespot.com/all/news/news_6078006.html

read read read
martian_man
Nov 1, 2003, 06:39 AM
sorry but i dont see th point in tht lol
NKOTB
Nov 1, 2003, 12:14 PM
In my opinion that would make anyhting from the Sega Genesis/SNES era and older obsolete and therefore legal.
Basically that law says it is onlt illegal trading if the manufacturers of products you are trading stand to suffer financial loss in the next three years.
Since the makers of games on Genesis have not sold those games in over 10 years, I think we're ok trading them.
I don't have time to read all 27 pages of that act but there is no way in hell anyone would be sued for having old NES games. Nintendo suffers no loss by people trading those games. If Nintendo re-released the system or the games, then they could sue and say people did not buy it because it was vailable for free on the net.
I would therefore say they (developers) could sue for certain games being dl'd. Examples are old games that are re-released with their new counterparts or available as unlockables in new games. All the NES games in Animal Crossing I would say are illegal to trade. All games featured in those "Arcade Collection" games would be illegal (like galaga and dig-dug and Marble Madness).
Basically, if it is still produced in any fashion by designers, it is illegal.
_Ted_
Nov 2, 2003, 03:56 AM
What defines a system as obsolete? It not being produced/sold anymore? No more new games for it? Only a certain number of the machines remain in working order? What!?
polishedweasel
Nov 2, 2003, 08:58 AM
On 2003-11-02 00:56, _Ted_ wrote:
What defines a system as obsolete? It not being produced/sold anymore? No more new games for it? Only a certain number of the machines remain in working order? What!?



Did you read the article or did you skim over it? Obsolete= No longer in circulation or is not on a console that you can buy new in the store. Well, that's what I got from it.