Adobe **anything** is far from 'abandonware'.

A new member posts a few threads in the space of a few days relating to Take down notices. Anyone else seeing the theme happening. I'm sure members are well aware of the the consequences.

Not surprising considering how far adobe has their head up their ass

They pay people that look for illegal usage of Adobe software, even if its decades old and should be free for usage any way.
Its pretty dumb, but you should expect something like this.

Not sure I see the problem.

You thought it would be abandonware, in fact - Adobe told you - it isn't. 😵

Wouldn't encrypting your material strongly prevent further takedown notices?

What killed the abandonware scene, at least for games, was the advent of cheap smartphones a decade ago. A lot of old games can be made to run on low power portable devices, and companies suddenly realised they could make money by repackaging and reselling them.

What killed the abandonware scene is when they thought it was a nice speakeasy smokescreen term for oldwarez over a decade ago

such as, you know, the OP, trying to put a very commercially successful piece of software up under the guise

Abandonware used to refer to little old unknown games like Terep, Spyder, Arena (not Elder Scrolls), VGAPlanets, etc. and not 'cool big thing i wish i grew up on man 90s were best by my judgment as a 2000 child i declare DooM 2 an abandonware's', and eventually it's what many sites had to resort to, to keep the ad revenue coming in.

leileilol wrote:

What killed the abandonware scene is when they thought it was a nice speakeasy smokescreen term for oldwarez over a decade ago

such as, you know, the OP, trying to put a very commercially successful piece of software up under the guise

Abandonware used to refer to little old unknown games like Terep, Spyder, Arena (not Elder Scrolls), VGAPlanets, etc. and not 'cool big thing i wish i grew up on man 90s were best by my judgment as a 2000 child i declare DooM 2 an abandonware's', and eventually it's what many sites had to resort to, to keep the ad revenue coming in.

You're right. Definitions of sites like B***A******, W**W****P* and S***H****** are, in Vogons' and the law's eyes, total bullshod. It's their decisions to call certain softwares "abandoned" usually after ten years and no support or if it's prerelease software but Vogons' definition is not until the copyright expires. This means playing with the first ever version of Windows is no more or no less illegal than pirating Game of Thrones. That time frame is different between jurisdictions. And the BSA, ESA, and other anti-piracy companies have succeeded in sending DMCA notices on behalf of rightsholders to these sites as well as raiding/shutting them down.

A problem here is the popular stereotype of video game programmers: overpaid, oversexed, underworked, and living basically rock star lifestyles. Think John Romero in his prime. Kids don't feel guilty about stealing from them any more than they feel guilty about stealing from actual rock stars.

The subject of what is "Abandonware" isn't so straight forward though. Sure, legally, the copyright has to expire, but how about this scenario:
A game is 15 years old, it hasn't been sold new from the publisher in 9 years, and you've trawled shops both physically and online for 3 years trying to find a copy. You can't even find a copy second hand.
You've emailed the publisher and the developers asking if it would be possible to buy a copy directly from them, and they say "No, sorry, this game has passed it's EOL, and we don't sell it anymore".
Normally this would result in this person having to legally give up on ever playing this game again. But, it turns out that there are some people who still own it, and one of them has uploaded it to a website, calling it "abandonware". The publisher and developer would not lose any money from people downloading it, because they no longer sell it, and doesn't currently have any intention of doing so, even when approached about it.
Even a second hand copy wouldn't provide any more revenue to the publisher or developer, so you could argue that this isn't legal either.
So, is a game such as this abandonware, even though the publisher still owns the copyright?

I'm not saying I support downloading games illegally, but it's generally the publishers/developers fault that this happens. They don't want to sell it anymore themselves, hence they have pretty much given up the rights to complain if somebody wants to give it away for free.

Point being... This isn't as straight forward as "It's illegal, end of story".

Fortunately, we have a retro boom at the moment, with GOG continuously re-releasing oldies 😀

LunarG wrote:

The subject of what is "Abandonware" isn't so straight forward though. Sure, legally, the copyright has to expire, but how about […]
Show full quote

The subject of what is "Abandonware" isn't so straight forward though. Sure, legally, the copyright has to expire, but how about this scenario:
A game is 15 years old, it hasn't been sold new from the publisher in 9 years, and you've trawled shops both physically and online for 3 years trying to find a copy. You can't even find a copy second hand.
You've emailed the publisher and the developers asking if it would be possible to buy a copy directly from them, and they say "No, sorry, this game has passed it's EOL, and we don't sell it anymore".
Normally this would result in this person having to legally give up on ever playing this game again. But, it turns out that there are some people who still own it, and one of them has uploaded it to a website, calling it "abandonware". The publisher and developer would not lose any money from people downloading it, because they no longer sell it, and doesn't currently have any intention of doing so, even when approached about it.
Even a second hand copy wouldn't provide any more revenue to the publisher or developer, so you could argue that this isn't legal either.
So, is a game such as this abandonware, even though the publisher still owns the copyright?

I'm not saying I support downloading games illegally, but it's generally the publishers/developers fault that this happens. They don't want to sell it anymore themselves, hence they have pretty much given up the rights to complain if somebody wants to give it away for free.

Point being... This isn't as straight forward as "It's illegal, end of story".

I agree with you 100%
If you can't buy it, I see nothing wrong with downloading it even if technically illegal. Law should be flexible to meet the need.
That's pretty much what I abide by. I don't pirate anything that you can buy new but stuff that is no longer sold, well...

smeezekitty wrote:

I agree with you 100%
If you can't buy it, I see nothing wrong with downloading it even if technically illegal. Law should be flexible to meet the need.
That's pretty much what I abide by. I don't pirate anything that you can buy new but stuff that is no longer sold, well...

I like that view. I keep buying DOS games on GOG, even though I could just download them. But many games you simply cannot purchase legally.

2fort5r wrote:

A problem here is the popular stereotype of video game programmers: overpaid, oversexed, underworked, and living basically rock star lifestyles. Think John Romero in his prime. Kids don't feel guilty about stealing from them any more than they feel guilty about stealing from actual rock stars.

Thats because they don't fear God, let alone physical punishment. Rock star or not, they have no business stealing from anybody.

Back when I was a kid (and yes, I understand you did not necessarily mean it as in "young child"), if I touched anything that wasn't mine, I'd be immediately hunted down by a leathery tornado of death slashing it's way into the tenderness of my outer flesh. Now it's like "here's internet, have it your way".

Okay, I think everything has been said which can be. Locking thread.