POLL: legalize Abandonware?

[Borealis7]

in case you don't know, Abandonware is a term for old games and software that were published many years ago, they are no longer supported by their publishers and are generally not used by many people.

i think that if some day i would like to show my kids what games i used to play i should be able to find them online for free since the publishers cant really expect to keep making money off them, plus they don't offer support, multiplayer service and so on...

personally, i think old music should be public domain as well. but thats just my opinion...

vote naaaaaauuuuu!

 

[sonoma1993]

I would like to play some old games I used to play as a kid as well.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

I think it's fine the way it is being "illegal" but unenforced because nobody cares. If it was legal you'd have people pushing the boundries of what "unsupported" is. Where's the option for don't care vodka good?

 

[Golgatha]

I think it's fine the way it is being "illegal" but unenforced because nobody cares. If it was legal you'd have people pushing the boundries of what "unsupported" is. Where's the option for don't care vodka good?

Personally I think anything 20 years or older should be public domain and free to distribute over the Internet. The fact that nearly century old things like Snow White and the 7 Dwarves are still under copyright protection is an abomination of what copyright law was supposed to do for consumers. Namely provide for copyrighted works to make their money for a set period of time, and then let that work enter the public domain for all of humanity to enjoy at some point at no cost.

If you're willing to wait 20 years, you ought to get to enjoy something for free. If you don't want to wait 20 years, then you'll buy it to enjoy it while it's still fresh.

 

[Aikouka]

Personally I think anything 20 years or older should be public domain and free to distribute over the Internet. The fact that nearly century old things like Snow White and the 7 Dwarves are still under copyright protection is an abomination of what copyright law was supposed to do for consumers. Namely provide for copyrighted works to make their money for a set period of time, and then let that work enter the public domain for all of humanity to enjoy at some point at no cost.

If you're willing to wait 20 years, you ought to get to enjoy something for free. If you don't want to wait 20 years, then you'll buy it to enjoy it while it's still fresh.

You could be like Blizzard and sell your old games for $20-30 .

 

[TheVrolok]

You could be like Blizzard and sell your old games for $20-30 .

Can't blame Blizzard for their older games still selling well.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Can't blame Blizzard for their older games still selling well.

and are still being supported pretty decently.

 

[Genx87]

Code falls under copyright laws.

 

[Arglebargle]

'Copyright Laws' are a wholly owned subsidiary of Disney.....

Original intent would probably support some sort of Abandonware legality.

 

[SunnyD]

Personally I think anything 20 years or older should be public domain and free to distribute over the Internet. The fact that nearly century old things like Snow White and the 7 Dwarves are still under copyright protection is an abomination of what copyright law was supposed to do for consumers. Namely provide for copyrighted works to make their money for a set period of time, and then let that work enter the public domain for all of humanity to enjoy at some point at no cost.

If you're willing to wait 20 years, you ought to get to enjoy something for free. If you don't want to wait 20 years, then you'll buy it to enjoy it while it's still fresh.

Unfortunately content rights holders will disagree with you for just this very reason. How many times has Snow White and the Seven Dwarves been re-released? Lets see, every time there's been a new media format, so at least about a dozen times not including the anniversary editions, collector's editions, etc., etc. Rights holders are making money every time this happens, and the same thing happens with software as well. Old games are getting re-released all the time as compilations or collector's editions, etc. The rights holders have a vested interest in copyright laws (cash, plain and simple).

Tangent: Personally, I've waited 32 years now. I'd like my free car, free house, and free groceries for the rest of my life. (That's the argument content is going to come back with)

 

[Golgatha]

Unfortunately content rights holders will disagree with you for just this very reason. How many times has Snow White and the Seven Dwarves been re-released? Lets see, every time there's been a new media format, so at least about a dozen times not including the anniversary editions, collector's editions, etc., etc. Rights holders are making money every time this happens, and the same thing happens with software as well. Old games are getting re-released all the time as compilations or collector's editions, etc. The rights holders have a vested interest in copyright laws (cash, plain and simple).

Tangent: Personally, I've waited 32 years now. I'd like my free car, free house, and free groceries for the rest of my life. (That's the argument content is going to come back with)

Tangent: Games, movies, and music are all digital and have infinite stock and near zero distribution cost. I will gladly pay what they're worth to produce after 20 years or pay someone a fair price to produce a physical copy for me. I'll also pay a fair value for a 20 year old house, car, and (eww...) groceries (seriously, where did this example come from?). The main problem with the content industry is that they want the original purchase price + equity gained for the 20 year old house 20 years after it was built.

 

[flashbacck]

Tangent: Games, movies, and music are all digital and have infinite stock and near zero distribution cost. I will gladly pay what they're worth to produce after 20 years or pay someone a fair price to produce a physical copy for me. I'll also pay a fair value for a 20 year old house, car, and (eww...) groceries (seriously, where did this example come from?). The main problem with the content industry is that they want the original purchase price + equity gained for the 20 year old house 20 years after it was built.

The capitalist's argument is that the content is worth whatever people will pay for it. I might balk at paying $30 for Snow White in BluRay, but if ten other people are willing to pay that, then why shouldn't they charge that much?

 

[GaryJohnson]

The root question really is: are ideas a form of capital? I don't think they should be.

That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.

 

[lord_emperor]

Unfortunately content rights holders will disagree with you for just this very reason. How many times has Snow White and the Seven Dwarves been re-released? Lets see, every time there's been a new media format, so at least about a dozen times not including the anniversary editions, collector's editions, etc., etc. Rights holders are making money every time this happens, and the same thing happens with software as well. Old games are getting re-released all the time as compilations or collector's editions, etc. The rights holders have a vested interest in copyright laws (cash, plain and simple).

Tangent: Personally, I've waited 32 years now. I'd like my free car, free house, and free groceries for the rest of my life. (That's the argument content is going to come back with)

Here's the thing. Snow White and the Seven Dwarves is based on a fairy tale by the Brothers Grim, who died in 1859 and 1863:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brothers_Grimm

It was adapted to film in 1937, I clicked through every person linked in the Wiki article, they're all passed away:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_White_and_the_Seven_Dwarfs_%281937_film%29

Given that the film itself is 72 years old it's not too far fetched that everyone who contributed to its creation is dead.

I think the fact that the Copyright is still held by what is basically an immortal corporation goes beyond the intent of Copyrights, which is to allow creators to benefit from their work as an incentive to improve the well being of society. However it is well within the law:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Duration_of_copyright

I don't knoquite who would be considered the "author" of Snow White, but the most recent death I found was 1997 which would put the Copyright expiring in 2087. Sad thought that something created before I was born will still be protected well after I die.

 

[BladeVenom]

The copyright laws need to be fixed so they are what the founding fathers intended. Our current laws are the result of corrupt politicians and bribery from the media MAFIAA.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I say all warez should be legalized, but that's a whole other topic. Yes abandonware should be legalized, there's no reason to enforce it. For example nintendo emulators and such should be legal. Who today, would actually go out and buy a nes and super mario for example? Can you even buy it? lol (not counting 2nd hand)

 

[flashbacck]

The root question really is: are ideas a form of capital? I don't think they should be.

Are you saying there shouldn't be any copyright or patent laws?

 

[Kalessian]

"He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me." - Another good Jefferson quote.

 

[Fox5]

I think that all content should enter the public domain after 5 years without production. New formats and updates don't count.
IE: The original Star Wars VHS copy would be public domain, but a blu-ray rerelease would not. 5 years after the DVD has stopped being produced, the DVD copy would be public domain. I think 5 years without being utilized is sufficient time to consider something abandoned.

However, if a company can continue publishing a book, and it continues to sell for 50 years, I'd say it shouldn't be abandonware. I only look at it as a way to prevent things from being lost to history or technological obsolescence, not that the value of the item has disappeared after a certain time limit.

 

[Firsttime]

The capitalist's argument is that the content is worth whatever people will pay for it. I might balk at paying $30 for Snow White in BluRay, but if ten other people are willing to pay that, then why shouldn't they charge that much?

And they would be able to sell their blu ray edition. However so would anyone else who wanted to release a blu ray edition. Something entering the public domain doesn't stop people from making money on it, it stops them from being the exclusive people who can make money on it. There is no reason old movies and music and stuff shouldn't enter the public domain like books do.

 

[Zenoth]

Abandonware games are legal to "find" and "download" as far as I know unless they are still subject of commercial activity and/or are still protected by copyright holder(s), or if the holder in question is a member of an anti-piracy organization like ESA. At worst, if the conditions are proper, the law "ignores" them and the people/web-sites allowing access to the software. If it's still copyrighted and distributed then yes it's illegal for sure.

A web-site like Abandonia.com for instance, which I myself visit occasionally, allows everyone to freely download all truly abandoned games. So, to directly answer your question Borealis7 what really is abandoned software is already legal. If it's copyrighted it shouldn't be considered abandoned even if the product/assets/codes haven't been tempered with in any way, shape or form since a decade.

 

[gszx1337]

I think it'd be great since it's a pain in the ass to find older games.It's ridiculous to expect me to find a legitimate copy of I have No Mouth and I Must Scream or Bloodwings: Pumpkinhead's Revenge when I can just download them. No one'll even profit off of these games.

 

[WildW]

I'm starting to think copyright laws should work the other way around. Once I've paid out for something, I should get to keep it. They keep saying how I've not bought and do not own the physical media, I only bought a licence to the material. Now that everything has gone or is going to digital distribution I look forward to being able to register my vast library of licences with my online digital account. All my DVDs, VHS tapes, CDs, vinyl records, NES cartridges, and so on.

That is, assuming its not all a big con designed to make us pay for everything again.

 

[GaryJohnson]

Are you saying there shouldn't be any copyright or patent laws?

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

 

[Absolution75]

I think that its pretty easy to jump on this bandwagon. . . I mean, who wouldn't want free old games (I certainly wouldn't mind it) - but the fact is I doubt very many of the people who want free stuff have produced something of substance by themselves that could be marketable and sellable. If you have a great idea, and great execution of the idea, you're not going to be happy about someone coming along and telling you that you should offer it for free.