Nintendo Sues Console ROM Sites for “Mass” Copyright Infringement

[Mazzspeed]

The license you get, when you purchase a piece of software, generally does not include making copies or redistribution or resale.

No one's disputing this fact. I'm saying that after 30+ years you should be able to.

Morally, I agree with some licensing is overly restrictive. If I buy a dvd and effectively own 1 copy of a DVD, for my own personal use at home, it makes sense to back it up as a lossless file on a HD. However, if then I'm adding it to a Plex server and family members are streaming it...at that point, I feel like I'm violating the license, morally and legally, as it clearly forbids public exhibitions of the work. Especially if two simultaneously stream it.

Why? Technically that's no different to two of you watching the movie together?

 

[M76]

You'd need to change the law first. Under copyright law, there's no such thing as abandonware. There's no distinction of their rights to shut down a game they haven't sold in 30 years v. one they released yesterday.

Still stuck with "this is the law" I see. Something being legal doesn't automatically make it right, or ethical. This is a big middle finger to abandonware enthusiast. And an even bigger fuck you to the people running these sites on their own dime, in their free time, out of a love for these games and consoles.

They could choose to ignore it, or if they really have a chip on their shoulder, send them a cease and desist. But no, they sue them for millions, encumbering the court system, for what? A giant charade. Because there is no way in hell they can collect the amount they sue them for, so this is not about going after ill-gained wealth. This is about proving to the world what swell guys are in charge at nintendo.

So are they within their rights? Yes. Are they still giant assholes for doing so? Absolutely!

And nintendo has a history of this kind of abuse, remember the "let's play's are ours" bullshit? So fuck nintendo, they should burn in the middle of an exploding star as far as I'm concerned. And this is the reason I'm not touching any of their games or products with a pole the length of the moon-earth distance.

 

[M76]

None of Nintendo's IPs are abandonware. Even games from companies that have gone out of buissness decades are not abandonware. Some one still owns the rights still. It is not like they can stop emulation and roms. Shit been out there for decades and will continue.

Abandonware is not just software nobody owns the rights for. It is all the games and hardware that you can no longer purchase trough normal channels. I support the prosecution against emulators and piracy while that product is still commercially available. But as soon as it is off the shelves, they have no moral right to pursue enthusiasts trying to play these games by other means.
i don't care what the law says. it's just not right. I was found unsuitable for conscription for having a "heightened sense of justice", so these things really piss me off.

 

[tetris42]

I hope someone will shut down nintendo and other companies like it, who treats abandonware the same as any copyright infringement.

Still stuck with "this is the law" I see.

Pray tell, how is someone going to "shut down" Nintendo without the law?

You said they treat abandonware the same as any other copyright infringement. So I said you need to change the law first, because under the law, there is no distinction of abandonware.

I'm not saying it's right, I'm explaining what you're asking for can't happen under current copyright law. You claim I'm "stuck" on it, well yeah, I imagine a lot of judges would be "stuck" on the law too. This is critical thinking 101.

 

[M76]

Pray tell, how is someone going to "shut down" Nintendo without the law?

You said they treat abandonware the same as any other copyright infringement. So I said you need to change the law first, because under the law, there is no distinction of abandonware.

I'm not saying it's right, I'm explaining what you're asking for can't happen under current copyright law. You claim I'm "stuck" on it, well yeah, I imagine a lot of judges would be "stuck" on the law too. This is critical thinking 101.

Oh you thought I really meant that someone could shut down nintendo over this? I assumed the part with the giant pole in their anuses would've given away that I wasn't serious.

I said it is a choice. They could choose to ignore abandonware, but they don't, therefore I think they're a-holes. They could make a distinction even if the law doesn't. Even if they changed the law and created a legal status for abandonware for copyrighted work preventing this type of legal action, I'd still continue to hate nintendo. Since the cat has been out of the bag for a long time.

 

[Mazzspeed]

The license you get, when you purchase a piece of software, generally does not include making copies or redistribution or resale.

I'm not making anything for distribution of resale.

The fact is, the product is 30 years old and is no longer sold in retail channels, I doubt that Nintendo themselves can even supply it anymore. Therefore, I own a license for the software, if someone else makes the software available for license holders to make use of when their own product fails due to it's ridiculous age and Nintendo sues someone for making an obsolete and no longer supported or manufactured product available to license holders than the copyright system is outdated and massively flawed.

Also, as stated, some of this software is so old that it's impossible to even find the legitimate copyright holder as the companies went out of business back when solid state was still a pretty nifty idea.

Retro gaming is a thing, it's growing and people want to be able to use their old products.

 

[Meeho]

What you want doesn't matter. It's not in the public domain yet, and thus making copies without the express permission of the copyright owner is not allowed.

I am allowed to make a copy of the software I purchased.

If you had an album and its grooves wore to the point you couldn't listen to it, you do not have the right to get a new copy pressed from anyone the producer has not authorized to make copies.

I can do it myself.

The license you get, when you purchase a piece of software, generally does not include making copies or redistribution or resale. Some will even say, if the product is damaged, tough luck and almost all prohibit reverse engineering too.

Tough luck for them as I may and will make a copy.

 

[Factum]

I thought promoting piracy was against the forum rules?
Lots of "I want the cake, eat it, keep it...and not pay for it" scrubs in this thread...

 

[Mazzspeed]

I thought promoting piracy was against the forum rules?
Lots of "I want the cake, eat it, keep it...and not pay for it" scrubs in this thread...

Well, at 30 years of age and no longer sold in retail channels, such software can't be bought legitimately brand new. I don't see any discussion of piracy, I see discussion regarding the stupidity of certain aspects regarding copyright.

 

[Nukester]

Courage

 

[dreadcthulhu]

The fundamental problem here is that copyright is simply too long. Patents are only 20 years long; it is just strange that things that require heavy amounts of R&D, and are as important to society as new medicines, improved engines, and novel crop varieties get less protection than trivial stuff like video games & movies. Unfortunately there are not any organized political groups pushing hard to reduce copyright length, while the media companies lobby heavily in the other direction. I guess if anyone wants to get a political lobbying group going, that is a niche that hasn't been occupied.

 

[BinarySynapse]

Well, at 30 years of age and no longer sold in retail channels, such software can't be bought legitimately brand new. I don't see any discussion of piracy, I see discussion regarding the stupidity of certain aspects regarding copyright.

Until it's in the public domain, making a copy without permission is piracy. I'm not saying I haven't worn my black eyepatch a time or few, but I knew full well it was what it was and didnt try to justify myself by saying I had rights I didnt have.

 

[tetris42]

What you want doesn't matter. It's not in the public domain yet, and thus making copies without the express permission of the copyright owner is not allowed.

I imagine you were speaking generally, but that's not actually true. You are allowed to make personal copies as backups of any medium you want until the cows come home. What you can't do legally is distribute them with others.

Until it's in the public domain, making a copy without permission is piracy.

No it's not. Making a copy without permission and DISTRIBUTING it is piracy.

The only thing they cannot do is demand existing legitimately distributed copies be destroyed or prevent anyone from redistributing them (i.e. first sale doctrine).

Out of curiosity, do you know what specific part of copyright law refers to this? I'm sure it's covered under law, but say I bought a game digitally that has to connect to the company server to run, then they shut it down, so my copy of the game is now completely unplayable. In effect, they've destroyed the game I paid for. Again, I'm sure the wording allows for skirting around this, but I was wondering what the exact language used is to enable them to do that.

 

[steakman1971]

Not only that but suddenly now it's a problem because they want to capitalize on the NES / SNES Classic.

I think you nailed it. I've seen plenty of posts (possibly some from me) when we wanted to buy the NES/SNES hardware, but there was not inventory available. Our Pi's served up more ROMs than were offered by licensed products we couldn't buy (but wanted to).
I did eventually buy the SNES and thought it was pretty good. However, you are still limited to what they provide with you. There are hundreds of other roms out there - without emulation, these would be lost.
Same with MAME, Amiga, C64, ... look at all the content that was made back in the day. Some people might want to go back and play a few of these. If you don't have the original hardware and software, you would be out of luck. Emulation makes it possible. (I'll be honest, there are only a handful of games from the past I revisit.)

 

[M76]

I thought promoting piracy was against the forum rules?
Lots of "I want the cake, eat it, keep it...and not pay for it" scrubs in this thread...

Yeah, all those scrubs building classic cars from scratch as well. They should be sued out of existence for keeping something alive that the owner of the IP has no interest in selling anymore.

 

[Factum]

Yeah, all those scrubs building classic cars from scratch as well. They should be sued out of existence for keeping something alive that the owner of the IP has no interest in selling anymore.

Nice red herring...it's really simple...are you in favour of piracy or not.

I'm not in favour of leeching of other peoples works...other people are...but those people still want their full paycheck...aka one-way street egoism.

 

[MickeyBailey]

I hope someone will shut down nintendo and other companies like it, who treats abandonware the same as any copyright infringement. Someone please pluck a giant pole up their anus.

Considering Nintendo is rereleasing their old games on “mini” consoles, it’s not exactly abandonware, is it?

 

[tetris42]

Nice red herring...it's really simple...are you in favour of piracy or not.

Nice black and white thinking.

I'm not in favor of piracy under most circumstances. If the company is still selling the game, it shouldn't be pirated.

I am in favor of piracy when it's literally the only way to play a game OR to play it legitimately would costs hundreds of dollars from a 3rd party reseller since it's been decades since the company sold the game.

Since it's so simple, which one am I?

 

[acidrain97]

This is such bullshit. If nintendo is on the warpath then explain why the released NES classic is still hackable? Same with the SNES. I'm pretty sure they are aware of such a thing. To make it unhackable all they had to do was change the power input instead of making it a USB data/power input. I was selling modded SNES consoles and EBAY took it the ad down because of copyright infringement. Which is pure bullshit. Why did I get singled out and yet there are several other people doing the same thing. Let see them close down archive.org. good luck with that. Fuck Nintendo.

 

[Nobu]

Considering Nintendo is rereleasing their old games on “mini” consoles, it’s not exactly abandonware, is it?

Depends on which games you're talking about...Live-a-Live, Home Alone, Hook, dozens of Gundam games, they re-release any of those? There's plenty more than just those.

And a lot of those games weren't even licensed Nintendo games–they were unlicensed 3rd party, NES or SNES compatible games, which Nintendo has no copyright claim. That doesn't make pirating them any more legal, of course.

 

[MickeyBailey]

Depends on which games you're talking about...Live-a-Live, Home Alone, Hook, dozens of Gundam games, they re-release any of those? There's plenty more than just those.

And a lot of those games weren't even licensed Nintendo games–they were unlicensed 3rd party, NES or SNES compatible games, which Nintendo has no copyright claim. That doesn't make pirating them any more legal, of course.

Nintendo isn’t going after all NES games, only “their” games

 

[NeghVar]

Hail Hydra! Cut off a limb, two more will take its place.

One thing I have mentioned numerous times is a use it a lose it clause in copyright law. If you do not market, support, provide, or commercially exploit something you own, then after X number of years, it falls into public domain. In reality, this would almost 100% apply to digital entertainment in which the original equipment it was designed to run on is long gone and not manufactured.

A recent decision by Blizzard was to release the original Star Craft as freeware now that the remastered edition is released.

 

[DukenukemX]

I thought promoting piracy was against the forum rules?
Lots of "I want the cake, eat it, keep it...and not pay for it" scrubs in this thread...

The problem is that 30 years is more than enough time for these games to enter the public domain. The only reason Nintendo can get away with this is because of Disney's obsession with Steamboat Willie.

 

[Derangel]

Well, at 30 years of age and no longer sold in retail channels, such software can't be bought legitimately brand new. I don't see any discussion of piracy, I see discussion regarding the stupidity of certain aspects regarding copyright.

And what of the several NES and SNES games that companies have been releasing in different formats over the years? You can't argue that those can't be bought anymore. Then there's sequels, remakes, and so on. For games and IPs that have gone unused for decades I agree with you, but things get a bit less clear when that is not the case.

 

[NeghVar]

I thought promoting piracy was against the forum rules?
Lots of "I want the cake, eat it, keep it...and not pay for it" scrubs in this thread...

I believe the fine line lies between discussion about it and expressing one's opinion vs. How-tos and where to find.

 

[Nobu]

I believe the fine line lies between discussion about it and expressing one's opinion vs. How-tos and where to find.

No specific mention of piracy in the rules that I could find, just this:

(18) You will not discuss, suggest, engage, or encourage any ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. Links provided to locations that deal with any such activity are also expressly forbidden.

I might assume that if it relates to the OP of a thread in the news section it's fair game, but then you know what they say about assuming... To be on the safe side, you certainly shouldn't direct link any legally dubious sites, even here, imho.

 

[oldmanbal]

If there had never been emulators and essentially mass availability of all of nintendos back catalogue, I'd hate to think how expensive the original consoles and games would be today

 

[Exavior]

Every time something about ROMs come out it is the same argument from people. ROMs aren't illegal because you can make copies of games you own... yet I can promise you that 90% of the people with ROMs don't own the original game on a cartridge. So they are being used to pirate a game that the person doesn't own the right to play. ROMs should be legal because you can't buy the game anymore.. you can still buy older games at various places and can buy new hardware that can play old games. There is that new console that can play both NES and SNES games due to the hardware for those systems no longer being covered under copyright. So you can use that system which is legal to buy, then get old cartridges and play them. Although in most cases you can get the games through other digital means for a cost as they release the games over and over for most of the popular ones. Especially with Nintendo. They are good at selling you the same game 10 times over. You want the original Super Mario Bros? you can guy that on the NES, then in Super Mario All-Stairs on the SNES or the Wii. It was rereleased on the GBA, its has been released on all 3 virtual consoles, and on the NES classic. It all comes down to most people here don't think piracy is wrong for games, music or movies and will bitch, whine and moan any time anyone tries to say that they should pay for stuff and try to justify their actions.

No one's disputing this fact. I'm saying that after 30+ years you should be able to.



Why? Technically that's no different to two of you watching the movie together?

Yes that is very different. If watching the movie together you both are in the same room, at the same time, watching the exact same physical copy. By your logic if I pay for a movie ticket and live stream a movie to 1 million people that is no different than 1 million people buying a ticket and watching it in the theater with me.

Also where is your 30 year gap on Nintendo games? Most Nintendo IPs have either been rereleased at some point as a remake or as a virtual console game on the Wii, Wii U or 3DS.

 

[Factum]

Nice black and white thinking.

I'm not in favor of piracy under most circumstances. If the company is still selling the game, it shouldn't be pirated.

I am in favor of piracy when it's literally the only way to play a game OR to play it legitimately would costs hundreds of dollars from a 3rd party reseller since it's been decades since the company sold the game.

Since it's so simple, which one am I?

You entitlement is funny...but misplaced.
Pay...or don't use the software.
Simple as that.

 

[Simmonz]

Nintendo is just another scumbag company. I already knew that. No news here for me.

 

[Cyraxx]

Abandonware is not just software nobody owns the rights for. It is all the games and hardware that you can no longer purchase trough normal channels. I support the prosecution against emulators and piracy while that product is still commercially available. But as soon as it is off the shelves, they have no moral right to pursue enthusiasts trying to play these games by other means.
i don't care what the law says. it's just not right. I was found unsuitable for conscription for having a "heightened sense of justice", so these things really piss me off.

I agree. I think the tricky part is when they start re-releasing like they did with the NES/SNES classics. Though, they only featured certain games.

But people should honestly be embracing this - if anything it might expose people to what Nintendo was (and is) - which may result in them purchasing more things from the brand such as action figures, t-shirts, etc.. that ARE still available.

 

[chenw]

Most likely a PR move for the publishers that's supplying their games. They need to show that they are willing to protect their IPs before any of the bigger publishers will continue to do business with them (EA, Activision, Bethsda, etc etc), especially with the whole Tegra exploit running around on the currently available Switches.

 

[DukenukemX]

Every time something about ROMs come out it is the same argument from people. ROMs aren't illegal because you can make copies of games you own... yet I can promise you that 90% of the people with ROMs don't own the original game on a cartridge. So they are being used to pirate a game that the person doesn't own the right to play.

That shouldn't matter today. Holding onto copyright for 30 years should be criminal. Doesn't matter if you still use the characters from the game or whatever, 30 years later and you made your money. That's the point of copyright, to give you a window of time to make money. Nintendo has more than profited from the games they made 30 years ago.

You want the original Super Mario Bros? you can guy that on the NES, then in Super Mario All-Stairs on the SNES or the Wii. It was rereleased on the GBA, its has been released on all 3 virtual consoles, and on the NES classic. It all comes down to most people here don't think piracy is wrong for games, music or movies and will bitch, whine and moan any time anyone tries to say that they should pay for stuff and try to justify their actions.

You would be right with new games, but we're not talking about new games here. We're talking about games that belong to museums, not something on a store shelf. Like books in a library, todays generation should be able to play these games freely on any hardware they choose. If anything to educate them on game evolution and what makes a good game good. How are we going to educate todays generation when we put a pay wall in front of them?

This is why we have libraries because we feel books are something everyone is entitled to read for free. The same should be true for old games.

Also where is your 30 year gap on Nintendo games? Most Nintendo IPs have either been rereleased at some point as a remake or as a virtual console game on the Wii, Wii U or 3DS.

Remakes are one thing, but re-releasing the same game with no difference does not entitle you to continue your copyright. It does nothing to move the industry forward or promote the creation of new games. It's just a quick and dirty money grab.

 

[tetris42]

You entitlement is funny...but misplaced.
Pay...or don't use the software.
Simple as that.

Nice, so in the case of a game where the company that made it doesn't exist anymore, it's not obvious if anyone owns the rights, and no copies are sold, but "abandonware" copies exist online (there are cases like this), you are still against anyone playing the game, because literally the only way to play it would be technically piracy. Again, we're talking cases where you literally cannot buy the game anymore. That's blind adherence to the law. If that's all you can understand, so be it.

 

[scojer]

If Nintendo is going to go after ROM sites, maybe they should, I don't know, sell those ROMs themselves? And not just a handful, but all of them. As someone else mentioned here earlier, you can get a torrent of every rom ever made for the consoles. They exist, they're out there. Nintendo should just download the ROM & re-sell 'em on their store.

 

[Crackinjahcs]

Companies that don't take steps to protect their IP and let people infringe on their TM's and material for years and then suddenly act all hot and bothered by suing for tens of millions piss me off.

If your IP was that important send cease and desist notices and bring litigation when needed to protect your IP at the time of infraction - don't wait so long it's obvious you just want a payday and protecting your IP is just an excuse to get paid.

 

[chenw]

They did send C&D to ROM sites, one of the sites that I used to use had certain ROMS (Nintendo owned games) taken down due to C&D.

And this was over a year ago at this stage.

I am of the opinion that Nintendo MUST know that going after ROM sites is going to be an extremely futile effort, because there will be many more people out there that will double their efforts to spread the ROMs in the name of preservation, so if anything, they'll make matters worse. They have to know that.

Thus, I believe this is purely a PR move, and PR to the publishers, not to the consumers, because majority of us won't care, and most of the rest will just have an extremely negative view of Nintendo as a whole, the ones that will see this as a positive thing is going to be so small that it's not worth the paper that the lawsuits are written on.

 

[M76]

Nice red herring...it's really simple...are you in favour of piracy or not.

I'm not in favour of leeching of other peoples works...other people are...but those people still want their full paycheck...aka one-way street egoism.

What red herring? A car's likeness is an IP. Are you against companies who build and sell classic cars or not?

I'm in favour of piracy of software that is not available to purchase commercially. Is that clear enough for you? The people who created these games are likely retired by now, so if anyone is leeching other people's work it is the corporations. Yes I'm against that law too which says that whatever intellectual product you create is owned by the company you work for, and not by you.

This is not about getting things without paying for it. This is about things that you can't get despite willing to pay for it. But feel free to continue revelling in your ad-hominems.

 

[The Mad Atheist]

Glad I used a ROM burner for all cart/arcade games countless years ago, minis DS era

 

[MickeyBailey]

First of all, copyright infringement is not a crime, it is a civil matter.

Nintendo is just another scumbag company. I already knew that. No news here for me.

"A company that tries to protect it's assets is a scumbag company"

If Nintendo is going to go after ROM sites, maybe they should, I don't know, sell those ROMs themselves? And not just a handful, but all of them. As someone else mentioned here earlier, you can get a torrent of every rom ever made for the consoles. They exist, they're out there. Nintendo should just download the ROM & re-sell 'em on their store.

They do - they rerelease older games and the virtual console on their past systems were very popular. They have a vested financial interest in enforcing their copyrights.

They did send C&D to ROM sites, one of the sites that I used to use had certain ROMS (Nintendo owned games) taken down due to C&D.

And this was over a year ago at this stage.

I am of the opinion that Nintendo MUST know that going after ROM sites is going to be an extremely futile effort, because there will be many more people out there that will double their efforts to spread the ROMs in the name of preservation, so if anything, they'll make matters worse. They have to know that.

Thus, I believe this is purely a PR move, and PR to the publishers, not to the consumers, because majority of us won't care, and most of the rest will just have an extremely negative view of Nintendo as a whole, the ones that will see this as a positive thing is going to be so small that it's not worth the paper that the lawsuits are written on.

Maybe; I know I prefer to play the original Final Fantasy games over the 3D remakes taking away from potential revenue for partners.