Hatta wrote:The purpose of copyright is to encourage the creation of new works.
Not... really. The purpose of copyright is to give exclusive rights to the creator of a property for a certain time.
No, that's the definition of copyright. The reason we give exclusive rights to the creator is "to promote the progress of science and useful arts".
It might not be a bad idea to split the discussion of the nature of copyright into a separate thread, as that topic alone has potential to generate a lot of discourse independent of legality of emulation.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
Hatta wrote:No, that's the definition of copyright. The reason we give exclusive rights to the creator is "to promote the progress of science and useful arts".
Looks like you decided to leave the other half of that out.
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
I can make a copyright with no intention to promote the progress of things, I can just do it to protect my rights to what I've created. Purpose in this case is subjective.
jp1 wrote:
4. There is far too much whining about issues like piracy of games/movies/music the industries are doing just fine and earning far more money than a lot of other people who work harder and work in worse conditions. I just can't feel sorry for rich people when it comes to finances. Independent games/movies/music on the other hand is a different story.
By that logic, it's wrong to steal from ma and pa stores but its hunky dory to steal from bigger stores like Wall-mart. Stealing is the wrong no matter who you steal from. Big companies like Nintendo and Sony employ people just like the small ones. They have stockholders who feel the loss from piracy. Just because someone or something (like a corporation) is big doesn't give make it any more morally just to pirate them then the little guy.
Emulating games that are for consoles still on the market or games that can be purchased via download is bad. (I do however emulate through the first few minutes of retro games to see how they are before buying them. Kinda like demos.) Emulating games that cannot be bought directly from the company that released it is NOT bad. Emulating games that you own a physical copy of is NOT bad.
My use of emulation goes as far as burning all my Sega CD games, playing SMS games, and playing "demos". Yes, I do own a flash cart for my DS, but I stopped emulating DS games with it a long time ago. Now I just use it as a media player, and playing "demos". I also emulate games on my laptop that I already own physical copies of, along with older PC games.
Systems: SNES, PS1, GBA SP, Gamecube, DS Lite, Wii, PS3 (Fully Backwards Compatible), Dreamcast, Nintendo 64, Sega Genesis, a Sega CD, and a Sega Saturn.
Dylan wrote:The one problem I've personally had with emulation is that it devalues gaming for me. A while after I started, I really stopped enjoying games, simply moving from one to the next without much discretion. Somewhat recently I got a PS2 and have rediscovered the satisfaction of purchasing and beating new games, rather than just downloading romsets and wandering around them. This is largely a personal matter, though I've heard others say similar things.
samesies. Sometimes I find a GB cart that I've been hunting for for years (like how I just got Final Fantasy Adventure on Saturday... a game I LOVED like 15 yrs ago!) and it's just such an amazing feeling to start playing it. Now I could have emulated it easily all this time. But it just would not have been the same.
If someone dies do i have the right to take the $20 bill out of his pocket? He doesn't need the $20 anymore. He'll never know if it was there or if it goes missing. So if the Dreamcast is no more and I steal one of their games by way of downloading then what does it matter? It doesn't hurt ANYONE except maybe the person selling it on ebay, whom I don't care about one way or the other.
Making copies of wii, 360 games, etc when you don't own the original just ain't right. It's like punching an eight year old and taking the lemonade from his lemonade stand.
Yes, its bad (to download ROMs/ISOs) for a modern console because developers/publishers are still making a profit.
No, its not bad for a reasonably older console because they are becoming harder to find and maintain each day due to age, and developers/publishers are not making money on them any more.
Here's a different view on the subject. Lets say you buy GameX. Its for the latest console, and you have downloaded it. That is bad, because the flow of money is like this:
You -> retailer -> publisher/developer
The retailer buys lots (as in a set quantity, not in the sense of a really large quantity) of GameX to sell from the publisher/developer. The retailer marks up the unit price of GameX, and you pay the marked up price. As GameX sells, the retailer buys more lots of GameX. Thus, 2 groups make money - developers/publishers and retailers
Lets say GameX was released a while back for an old console. Lets say you buy GameX. Now the flow of money is:
You -> Third party
Where third party is the last person who has GameX, either sealed new or damaged - keep in mind that this GameX is DONE with the former above cycle. This means the developer doesn't get any more money for GameX - after that person got it from the retailer, the developer makes NO money off of GameX
So, to quickly wrap up, emulation can be seen as "not morally wrong" as well, even if you got an official copy of GameX or got a ROM/ISO of it, the developer/publisher makes not one cent off of any transaction after "retailer"
Please, if I am off, feel free to correct/elaborate.
