I would stay away from it. I would not even call what they have as proper archives given that not only is much what they have of questionable legality, it is often of warez origins; ripped, cracked and or hacked with all of the bugs that adds. Many things that they offer have been setup using my installers and those contain extra helper files that I include with my installers for troubleshooting and configuration. I am not pleased to be associated with something so dubious, even if unwillingly.

I say go for it. I know that most folks around here are strictly anti-warez but if you're satisfied that this guy is doing the right thing then what's the harm? You'll be making it easier for people to access content that might bring a smile to their dial, and for me that outweighs the risk that they'll go on to access pirated content from yesteryear. We need more people walking around with smiles on their dials in this complicated, weary world 😀

Gemini000, you probably know that the maintainer of the Classic PC Games collection at archive.org still has his own site - it's only that the files themselves are hosted at archive.org's servers. So he could give you completely legit links to his own site's pages which, in turn, only have links to the specific legally distributable files hosted at archive.org. I think that would be a reasonable solution for your problem.

don't

Sure people will excuse it as "checking out" from a "library"...maybe if it were a library full of questionable home-printer'd books

I'd do it. Are you not going to link to Google just because you can search for torrents there? You're not directly linking to the "questionable" content. It would require active searching by the user, making it no different than linking to Google or other search engines.

Put the links up! Anyone who wants to download the games knows how to find them anyway. Archive.org is a reputable outfit doing extremely important work. Their DOS game library was big news when it went up, everyone who'd be interested in it already knows about it.

ALSO ... the "rights holder" perpetual copyright regime needs to die before we lose a shit-ton of history to it and throw a ton of people into prison who have no need to be there because of it. I am "strictly" pro-warez(*) in cases where the original creators who made the work have no chance of seeing another dollar from it. I'm going to bet a ton of old shovelware falls into that category (and most of those distributions were of dubious legality themselves, back in the day.)

(* but not on this site because it's against the site policy, of course!)

vetz wrote:

I'd do it. Are you not going to link to Google just because you can search for torrents there? You're not directly linking to the "questionable" content. It would require active searching by the user, making it no different than linking to Google or other search engines.

archive.org is hosting the illegal content under the thin guise of a "lending library". As questionable as it is, it becomes an even more lame excuse when the content is directly downloadable from their site, not just online play via a Javascript port of DOSBox.

To clarify, it is my understanding that Gemini000 was contacted by the owner of a site called Demu.org (formerly DOS Museum). I've been in contact with that site's owner before he made a decision to host all its content at archive.org for the sake of better preservation.

DOS Museum/Demu.org has never ever uploaded or distributed any outright warez/"abandonware" games - only legitimately freeware/"liberated" games, as well as demo and shareware versions. The site also aims to collect tons of related files such as patches, cheats, trainers etc. for old games.

In its current state, a user can browse Demu.org to read about the games and view screenshots, and the download is a direct link straight to the file hosted by archive.org. Here, as an example, is a random page picked by the random page function at the site:
http://demu.org/resource/BattleQbert

It's up to you to decide, but the interface of Demu.org in no way invites a user to browse other collections found at archive.org - in fact, some users might even remain oblivious to the fact that they actually download files from a different website.

MrFlibble wrote:

To clarify, it is my understanding that Gemini000 was contacted by the owner of a site called Demu.org (formerly DOS Museum). I' […]
Show full quote

To clarify, it is my understanding that Gemini000 was contacted by the owner of a site called Demu.org (formerly DOS Museum). I've been in contact with that site's owner before he made a decision to host all its content at archive.org for the sake of better preservation.

DOS Museum/Demu.org has never ever uploaded or distributed any outright warez/"abandonware" games - only legitimately freeware/"liberated" games, as well as demo and shareware versions. The site also aims to collect tons of related files such as patches, cheats, trainers etc. for old games.

In its current state, a user can browse Demu.org to read about the games and view screenshots, and the download is a direct link straight to the file hosted by archive.org. Here, as an example, is a random page picked by the random page function at the site:
http://demu.org/resource/BattleQbert

It's up to you to decide, but the interface of Demu.org in no way invites a user to browse other collections found at archive.org - in fact, some users might even remain oblivious to the fact that they actually download files from a different website.

Except what he wants to do is take advantage of the in-browser DOSBox functionality of archive.org so that players can immediately try the games, not just download them.

Gemini000 wrote:

Except what he wants to do is take advantage of the in-browser DOSBox functionality of archive.org so that players can immediately try the games, not just download them.

That would be the deal-breaker for me personally, since a disingenuous project that pretends to 'curate' and 'preserve' and yet actively undermines those goals for attention and social affirmation (because mass-uploading incorrectly-configured, poorly-presented material with mined metadata brings more boys to the yard than doing it right) isn't something I'd willingly funnel people towards, whether things are fully legal or not. 😉

In addition to what VR just said, archive.org's organization of its "library" is horrible. With so many games, the tile approach just does not work. It is even worse when the tiles are not even lined properly on a grid. Yes, you can get to to a list, but it is extra work and the interface is one of those annoying "scroll down to see more entries." Also, to look by letter, you have to click on a letter, then click the x above the letter, then click on a different letter.

It is not a proper digital archive, if it was there would be scans of documentation to accompany each game. Nor is it particularly reliable in what it does contain, It simply throws up a version of the game and you hope that it will work.

In terms of legality, I wouldn't be too worried.

Archive.org is a big vacuum cleaner sucking up everything and anything, legal or not. In that way, it compares with file upload sites like megaupload, rapidshare, etc.

Linking to a specific file on there is just that, linking to a specific file. Other content on the same site might be illegal, but not the file you're linking to, so from that perspective you're fine. (At the very worst you have plausible deniability).

OTOH, linking to them is kinda-sorta implicitly endorsing them, so you gotta make a decision about whether or not you're happy with that.