[MOVED]

So called "Abandonware" can never be legalized nor should it.

i guess we can't modify the concept of copyright...

I don't think we should abolish it entirely, but adjusting some of the ridiculous time frames that protects old software is in order.

With the "abandoned" games starting to show up for sale on legitimate sites, I think we can see why copyrights exist. I wonder if any of that new profit goes to the original developers though. It's probably just a little extra on the side for the publishers, which is less warm and fuzzy, but it's just as acceptable. They either funded original development and own the rights, or acquired a license to sell it so it is their property.

You have that GOG site. And the Xbox 360 Arcade and Wii's Virtual Console. Etc.

Just because the work is old and "aged looking" doesn't mean it should be free. These companies are figuring out ways to use it again.

Alot of PC software would disappear through neglect if it were not traded illicitly. In order to sell it, there has to be a market of more than a few rabid fans.

The actual petition reads "...legalise the distribution of software for which the creating company has removed support and no longer sells."

I understand what people are saying. These people should not lose the right to make money from their own intellectual property. However, legalising the distribution of software which serves no no profitable purpose harms nobody, and releases that software for wider use.

Take for example Windows 3.1. Will Microsoft ever make any further money from it? Hell no. Is it fun to play with and run old games on? Definitely. As a utility for playing old games, its nearly priceless. As a profitable piece of software, its worthless. This is an example of something that should certainly be called abandonware.

Labrat

No, no software should be called "abandonware".

As for making "abandonware" legal it's more complicated than a Publisher just waving their magic wand and TADA the software is now FREE for EVERYONE!

For one, the legal complications are enormous and usually cost way more than it's worth.

Two, who determines that the software serves no profitable purpose? The users? Don't make me laugh.

As for your example of Microsoft not making any money from Windows 3.1 you may want to read the news a little bit more often. Microsoft just last month stopped selling licenses for Windows 3.1. They've been selling it all this time and IT'S BEEN USED AND STILL IS.

MS no longer issuing licenses for Windows 3.1

Ya it will be more trouble than its worth. No matter what Country its from. The deal with sierra games like KQ PQ, LSL and SQ is that Vivendi dropped those titles which is different.

I want to sign a petition to end suffering, 'cause petitions can do that kind of thing, right?

I think there are more pressing matters in this world besides "legalizing" Abandonware, aren't there? Online petitions mean sh*t, anyway. Anyone who thinks these petitions will actually change anything is a hopeless dreamer. There's hundreds of reasons why online petitions won't work at all. For example, there is no way of verifying the identity of the person that did the online signing. One could simply sign multiple times, choosing addresses (sp?) from the phonebook. Even if UK copyright law would be changed (which is highly unlikely), there's still lots of countries in which Abandonware would be illegal. I think this attempt is futile.

To aquire such software is currently illegal, even though the copywrite owners make no profit from the software, and there is a genuine market for it.

Can you spot the mistake in this sentence? (;

EDIT: i was referring to the "there is a genuine market" part, which i thought should read "no genuine market". But the current form makes sense, too, i think.

Downloading abandonware is still illegal but besides it being a legal choice and its also a moral and ethical choice. If someone wants to take the chance and break the law thats their business. But this site doesn't have to condone it. We can advise but everyone has a choice in what they do. We are not the ESA Police. This site does not support any abandonware because it does not want to be shut down. An illegal website can be fined and shut down and also its domain provider can get into trouble. If you want to support abandonware thats your business not ours

catchaserguns wrote:

This site does not support any abandonware because it does not want to be shut down.

Since when are you the official spokesperson of VOGONS? If you want to state your opinion then do so, but don't talk about stuff you obviously don't understand.

Copyright terms are way too long these days. I think the original term was for 12 years. The main problem is that there are only a few that benefit from the increased length. For every Mario or Mickey Mouse franchise that is continuing to make money decade after decade, there are hundreds if not thousands of works that should have entered the public domain but are locked up due to the copyright, even when they are not commercially viable.

What I think should be done is to charge a nominal yearly fee to maintain the copyright. If your work is important enough to warrant a copyright then continue to pay the yearly fee and it remains under copyright until the term was going to expire, but if it isn't worth it to you to pay the fee then it goes into the public domain then, not decades in the future. This would legalize a lot of abandonware, why keep paying a yearly copyright fee if you are not making any money on your creation?

ADDiCT wrote:

To aquire such software is currently illegal, even though the copywrite owners make no profit from the software, and there is a genuine market for it.

Can you spot the mistake in this sentence? (;

EDIT: i was referring to the "there is a genuine market" part, which i thought should read "no genuine market". But the current form makes sense, too, i think.

The word "copywrite" is misspelled. Copyright refers to the intellectual property concept, "to copywrite" is to write copy for a newspaper or an advertisement.

Emulation proves that there is a still a valid market for games and other software whose original target platforms and markets have faded into the distance. Software copyright statutes do not need to be mucked with via those who wish to legitimise 'abandonware', it's perfectly fine as it is. It is up to publishers and vendors to decide which of their legally owned products they wish to to be put into the public domain. Petitioning for the law to change in favour of piracy is just stupid.

Personally I don't see any real problem if an abandonment amendment were added to the existing copyright laws. Well, problem refering to the rights of thy copyright holders, that is. By stopping production and support for a program, they are essentially saying they don't care any more. There would have to be some sort of time period applied though. Such as a game goes pd if the copyright holder has stopped production and support for 1 year, 18 months, 5 years, whatever. In this case, the only people that could be injured are those on eBay selling vintage games for ungodly amounts of money. Even so, they wouldn't be hit that bad, as the die-hard collectors would still want original boxes, manuals, disks, ect... They are the ones paying those ungodly amounts now. The only people such an amendment would really help are those that cannot pay those huge sums anyways.

Now, as it stands, there is no such amendment in the US (there isn't even any planned AFAIK.) So, "abandonware" is currently illegal, and as such should not, in any way be supported on this board (IMHO.) Does that mean that nobody on this board takes part? Probably not, but they should leave such activities behind when they visit here. If, for whatever reason, such an amendment comes about in the US, then I'm still not sure if it should be supported here. One of the big problems with abandonware right now (asside from the legality,) is that there is no way to tell if a problem is created by the engine (VDMSound or DOSBox for example.) Or if it is because there is something wrong with the copied software (the setup.exe wasn't included, drivers were accidently left out, etc...)

FeedingDragon wrote:

One of the big problems with abandonware right now (asside from the legality,) is that there is no way to tell if a problem is created by the engine (VDMSound or DOSBox for example.) Or if it is because there is something wrong with the copied software (the setup.exe wasn't included, drivers were accidently left out, etc...)

That particular problem could easily be solved, it was legal to distribute works that had fallen out of copyright protection after X number of years. I bet, that it if was legal, the big sites would be quick to acquire and publish complete disc images made from the original media.

FeedingDragon wrote:

Even so, they wouldn't be hit that bad, as the die-hard collectors would still want original boxes, manuals, disks, ect... They are the ones paying those ungodly amounts now.

*whistles innocently*