So, I wake up to a link sent to me yesterday even by a mate of mine:
TL;DR: Court holds up copyright laws on old games being lent out / made available online by libraries/archiving sites.
Quick Disclaimer:
All cleared up? Good. So I'm curious about how many people actually support this messed up idea that I can't legally download and play a 1980s Famicom(NES) game even if I'm staring at the cartridge on my shelf. Personally, I play old games because I don't want to play new ones, I don't not play new games because I have access to older ones.
I think copyrights should be media-specific in that games and software lose a lot of relevance/availability/compatibility fairly quickly. Each media has a shelf life (outside of classics / cult stuff) for new audiences: Motion pictures expire within 40-50 years, music generally doesn't easily expire (outside bubblegum shite), books are usually are forever, but games are lucky to get 15 years. I'd say a period of 60 years on motion pictures, music, and and 25-30 years for games is fair play (no pun intended), all regardless of author's lifespan, ie moment of publication.
*Important nuance here: I'm talking about the work itself, not the IPs/TMs/etc. because I think it's only right an author own their characters/worlds/titles/etc. within reason (ie, don't blast fanfics/parodies).
So, as a South African coming from a fairly liberal view of copyright (it's barely enforced here), I'm curious to see what the global community thinks, especially in an OSS/FOSS space. So, vote and comment (and if you feel comfortable, let's know where you live in the world and how it shapes your view).
TL;DR: Court holds up copyright laws on old games being lent out / made available online by libraries/archiving sites.
Quick Disclaimer:
I'm not advocating piracy. Emulating new releases (only if you don't also buy them online) is a lousy thing to do for 3 reasons:
1. For indie devs, it really hurts. It takes a lot of time, even with this weird drag 'n drop "visual programming" (BS, my opinion) to make a good game. Aside from music, graphics, etc., you have to pay the platform you sell them on, sometimes both a license fee and royalties. On top of that, you probably are gonna need to coerce or hire someone for something. Very few people can do everything well. And AI-generated content is pure turd.
2. You're harming people like myself -- and possibly you -- who legitimately believe in preservation because you are literally giving corpo a justification to attack sites like Vimm's Lair.
3. While IDGAF as I don't care for new games as they're mostly garbage, rehashed IPs or near-clones of other titles, you're de-incentivizing innovation and feeding the "machine" of slapped-together, buggy, unoriginal content because it's easy to spit out and make a quick buck than pouring effort into regarding point #1.
1. For indie devs, it really hurts. It takes a lot of time, even with this weird drag 'n drop "visual programming" (BS, my opinion) to make a good game. Aside from music, graphics, etc., you have to pay the platform you sell them on, sometimes both a license fee and royalties. On top of that, you probably are gonna need to coerce or hire someone for something. Very few people can do everything well. And AI-generated content is pure turd.
2. You're harming people like myself -- and possibly you -- who legitimately believe in preservation because you are literally giving corpo a justification to attack sites like Vimm's Lair.
3. While IDGAF as I don't care for new games as they're mostly garbage, rehashed IPs or near-clones of other titles, you're de-incentivizing innovation and feeding the "machine" of slapped-together, buggy, unoriginal content because it's easy to spit out and make a quick buck than pouring effort into regarding point #1.
I think copyrights should be media-specific in that games and software lose a lot of relevance/availability/compatibility fairly quickly. Each media has a shelf life (outside of classics / cult stuff) for new audiences: Motion pictures expire within 40-50 years, music generally doesn't easily expire (outside bubblegum shite), books are usually are forever, but games are lucky to get 15 years. I'd say a period of 60 years on motion pictures, music, and and 25-30 years for games is fair play (no pun intended), all regardless of author's lifespan, ie moment of publication.
*Important nuance here: I'm talking about the work itself, not the IPs/TMs/etc. because I think it's only right an author own their characters/worlds/titles/etc. within reason (ie, don't blast fanfics/parodies).
So, as a South African coming from a fairly liberal view of copyright (it's barely enforced here), I'm curious to see what the global community thinks, especially in an OSS/FOSS space. So, vote and comment (and if you feel comfortable, let's know where you live in the world and how it shapes your view).
Last edited by a moderator: