Things that should be done to break the piracy debate.

[bluestarultor]

Originally Posted by synkr0nized

Oh, this is a good place for me to ask you, Blues, since I didn't want to tard up that other thread with this discussion.

Do you have references - that aren't Abandonia's pages - that prove the legality of "abandonware"? I found none today when I went poking about, and most of what I came across affirmed the illegality of it regardless of the very positive and good intentions of the people running such sites. I ask this not to argue with you, but because I really want to know what legal standing these sites are sitting on.

I saw provisions for public/library archives and free reign for software that has fallen out of copyright, but for most software it appears that the copyright should still be protecting it. Not being able to purchase something and/or lack of action on the part of the copyright holders wasn't meant to be construed as a green light to go.

Here's some stuff I came across:

Gamespot article that interviews game developers, abandonware site owners, and some gamers

US copyright law allows an exemption for places, such as the Internet Archive [who pushed for this], to have non-infringing uses of such software to be able to preserve software without the copy protection schemes it may have once had (eg: requiring a dongle to be attached to the machine, obsolete source media). This is not claiming it is OK for users to download free copies of the software.

On the other hand, the Orphan Works Act of 2006 seems to provide provisions for "infringers" to be fine if they conduct a "reasonable search" for the correct information and original copyright holder, etc. Technically speaking, though I am no lawyer, it doesn't appear to count "hey we can't buy this in a store" as a reasonable search.

more info overall, including the 2008 update to the same act; not much different



e: I forgot to note that I agree with you that it's much easier, on all sides, to recognize that people like older software and to release it in some fashion, either as a free download [hey, some companies are doing this -- see our C&C discussion, Sim City, etc.] or, like you suggested, for some nominal fee. The legal fees and unnecessary trouble of going through the rig-amoral is likely one of the reasons abandonware sites don't get bugged too much, especially when the original software company doesn't exist any more.

Well, it's a lot more complicated than "not being able to buy it." See, abandonware, in the definition I'm most familiar with and personally use, is software which has been either intentionally abandoned by the parent or which doesn't fall under any other legal ownership. This is software which no longer has any existing rights-holders, including an absence of an existing parent company, ESA protection, and inherited owner of the property. If ANYONE owns rights to it, it's not abandonware, and actual abandonware sites will conduct research, in some cases above and beyond simply "reasonable," to make sure they can't find anyone who can speak for it legally. The one I frequent even has a policy whereby contact from an previously unknown rights-holder means an instant removal of the download. The problem with abandonware is that there's currently no law regulating it, which means business sources want to be able to make it off limits for obvious business reasons. It's the difference between legalization and decriminalization. Abandonware has no legal protections one way or another.

Now, a lot of "abandonware" is what's more appropriately termed "oldwarez," where the game is old and not being sold anymore, or in some cases IS still being sold, but still has someone to legally speak for it despite its age. THAT is illegal, because it's still under protection. I personally do not deal in oldwarez and do not support them or anyone connected to them. This is where the term "abandonware" is either intentionally or unintentionally fuzzed, and where businesses like to put their focus to blanket real abandonware with it.

There actually HAS been legal action against sites with oldwarez claiming to be abandonware sites, for instance, Home of the Underdogs, which instituted policy changes to ensure the reputable sites stay within the law. So it's not that the sites haven't been bugged as much as they have and have fixed themselves. They're not doing anything wrong at this point and businesses, if they wanted to delve into the legal gray area, have infinitely better resources and could easily clean house if there were a solid case for it. Most abandonware sites struggle to scrape by on page ads and donations, and like HOTU, sometimes just can't stay afloat WITHOUT the threat of legal action piling on. On the other hand, delving into that legal gray area would set a precedent, which no one seems to have done yet. If there were a solid case against abandonware, places like Abandonia would be squashed like bugs, and businesses have shown this on oldwarez sites previously.


For an incredibly generalist and slightly business-skewed view, Wikipedia has an article, in which you can see bits and pieces of the definition Abandonia uses and which I hold to. HOTU had a similar policy to Abandonia after its legal action to the point Abandonia considered them equivocal, but with the dissolution and multiple rebirths, I can't be sure on the policies any of them use anymore. The stance could technically be considered a combination of orphaned works and a lack of legislation or legal precedent concerning the matter, with a healthy dose of being willing to work with anyone who comes to challenge it so as to stay within the law.

Really, finding any sources on abandonware's legality outside of abandonware sites without a business bias is pretty much impossible because there aren't any laws regulating it as of yet. So you have abandonware sites' words against businesses' in that regard. There isn't a legal concept of abandonware as of yet, which is why there's a question of whether or not it's actually legal. That's why I stick to Abandonia, because they have a policy closest in line with current law, i.e. orphaned works.





TL;DR: Abandonware by the definition I use and am most familiar with is legal because it relies on orphaned works law as the closest legal precedent, but you have a lot of definitions bumping around and detractors like to latch onto the worst of them. This may all change with future legislation or legal precedent, but companies don't seem to be in a hurry to try to squash abandonware sites like bugs because of the legal gray area.

[Jagos]

Originally Posted by Ryong

You mean when games cost twice their original price, but everyone is about twice as poor as in the place the game was made. Crazy pricing, not sure if crazy copyright.

True:

Brazil wasn't always a haven for piracy. After all, up until the mid-'90s, the games market in Brazil was overwhelmingly legal; companies would officially launch and provide support for consoles, such as Tectoy (Sega) and Gradiente (Nintendo). The piracy epidemic only came about with the combination of exceptionally high taxes (EGM Brazil estimated in their March 2005 edition that at least 45 percent of the price of a PC game consisted of taxes), the low income of most Brazilians, the lack of an effective government anti-piracy program and, ironically, the very factor that helped make games more mass-market: the change of media from cartridges to CDs, making it much easier to copy games.

But it hurts just the same. If Brazil lowered its tax rate, I'm sure more people would work in the games industry on the legal side of the fence. As it stands, they're just biding time trying to make ends meet with the little money they have.

-edit- Also, these guys seem to understand.

[synkr0nized]

@Bluez: Yeah, I read the Wikipedia entry, too. But that's not really a source, so I went on to the copyright law entries and some of their references. I get the relevant terms and definitions and how the communities create distinctions among them; I wanted to know if there were rulings I didn't know about or hadn't come across (eg: if Orphan Works law had been applied directly to "abandonware" or similar). I guess not**. Until then, it will remain, as you say, a gray area to most people / the sites involved should continue to distance themselves from "oldwarez" and avoiding copyright law issues.

Oh well. Back to the DRM piracy discussion.



** some of the comments and responses to the US Orphan Works bill, which you can read in that last link I had, are interesting, as they try to directly address this topic; doesn't seem to have made it into the bill

[Aerozord]

Piracy is wrong as it hurts developers, makes it harder for new games to be made, and is a real insult to their hard work. Producers, typically the ones that put in DRMs do have a right to do so

however, piracy cannot be stopped. Its actually like my arguement on airline security. You cannot prevent it without doing something so extreme no one will want to go through the hassel. DRM discurages those taht want it legitly. All you can do is trust that the consumer will want to support you

not saying that because of optimism, but because it really is the only option

[Loyal]

While there are plenty of people who are just too cheap to buy the software, the fact of the matter is that these days, there's a strong enough argument for pirating just to get past the DRM, which hurts the consumer and will never slow down the pirates for very long. Is it 'right'? No, but it's still a valid argument. When we get to the point that pirated software is absolutely superior to its legal counterpart, the motivation for staying legal grows thin.

At this point, the consumer can either
a) buy the software and deal with the DRM that does nothing but hurt the consumer who paid for it,
b) pirate the software, which has been cracked to do without the DRM, thus allowing you to play the game unhindered and for free,
c) Not buy the game, and not play the game.

While morally and legally your choices are limited to a) and c), as far as the company's assets are concerned there is no difference between b) and c).

Unlike stealing a loaf of bread from the grocery store, a game's data will always exist and can be copied an infinite number of times at no cost. Whether the consumer pirated the game or simply ignored it, the company gains nothing and loses nothing from that particular consumer. What's more, the company has no way to track the difference between the two.

Conclusion: Do away with DRM, or at least anything more complicated than a CD-Key. Pirates who steal to save money will be unaffected either way, but at least the legal consumers won't feel inclined to follow their example.

[Eltargrim]

My 0.02$:

I tried to pirate Superpower 2. It appeared to have a virus. So I bought Superpower 2.

It turns out AVG false-flagged the patched .exe that you need to get around the DRM and play the game you bought as a virus.

So, indirectly, DRM made me buy the game, but it later made me spend about 3 hours trying to actually play the fucking game.

Fuck DRM.

[DFM]

Came in to say what Loyal said and that I've purposefully misread every instance of "DRM" and that because of it this is my favorite thread.

[EVILNess]

I think the DLC code in the package thing is a step in the right direction. I also remember a time when you got actual swag in with your purchase. A cloth map or a piece of DLC might not seem like much, but I think its better than online locking your stuff.

Hell, a good alternative to ALWAYS having an internet connection would just be locking out the multiplayer without a valid CD-key.

Or password protecting a CD key. When you authenticate to the server you associate that CD key with YOUR account and you gotta have YOUR credentials to install the game, effectively locking out the CD from other users. Sure it would require an internet connection to install, but once again its better than having one be required all the time.

[Loyal]

I've purposefully misread every instance of "DRM" and that because of it this is my favorite thread.

Happy to be of service.

I also remember a time when you got actual swag in with your purchase. A cloth map or a piece of DLC might not seem like much, but I think its better than online locking your stuff.

Hell yeah. I love swag. I have this big ol' Age of Empires III poster hanging up over my bed. Trinkets, posters and so on would slightly help encourage less piracy due to the nature of not being piratable... or not without some specialized equipment or DIY know-how.

[Eltargrim]

Originally Posted by EVILNess

I think the DLC code in the package thing is a step in the right direction. I also remember a time when you got actual swag in with your purchase. A cloth map or a piece of DLC might not seem like much, but I think its better than online locking your stuff.

So far all of the DA:O and ME2 DLC has been cracked. DLC codes in the package aren't really doing their job so far.