EverDrive Forum

General => EverDrive 64 => Topic started by: Kerr Avon on January 21, 2017, 10:11 PM

Title: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 21, 2017, 10:11 PM
Over the past few years, since Krikzz and others made N64 flash cartridges affordable, N64 game hacks have gone from very rare, to much more commonplace. Whether to make the games easier or harder, to add new levels or weapons, or to alter/improve the game-play, or to fix bugs, or to translate the games to make them accessible to much larger groups of people, or even for other reasons, some really talented people have hacked the games we love, giving their time and skills for no financial reward, and it's been great for us all.

But now the situation has changed slightly. And if we're not careful, then that slight change could lead to the N64 rom hacking scene coming in for heavy fire from Nintendo's/other companies' teams of lawyers. And that won't end well for us.

The problem is, fake (i.e. non-official) N64 game cartridges that contain hacked roms are now starting to become common, and this could bring rom hacking (which is not strictly totally legal, even though it is innocent and harms no-one) into the scrutiny of the games' copyright holders.

Until now, no money was being made with rom hacks, so Nintendo and co. could afford to blind eye to the rom hacking scene. But now that these hacks are being sold on real cartridges, Nintendo or whoever might decide they no longer want to tolerate people hacking their games. Granted even at the highest estimates, the money made from fake N64 cartridges containing hacked roms will still be utterly negligible to a games company, but this could well be the straw that breaks the camel's back, and makes Nintendo and co. want to stamp out the (otherwise totally harmless) N64 rom hacking scene. And we don't have the money or legal skills to stand up to Nintendo, of course.

Ozidual has already spoken out against people putting his work on the Zelda games on cartridge, and Zoinkity has said that he doesn't want his English translation of Last Legion UX to be passed around. Selling a rom hack on a game cartridge might not sound bad, but it does involve money being made on what is still copyrighted material, and if the sellers of those items are prosecuted by Nintendo and co., then it's pretty likely that Nintendo will also try to kill off the hacking scene that made the games hacks possible.

Fortunately, there is something we can do to minimise the chances of Nintendo and co. coming after us, and that's to not pass around the copyrighted roms. Most rom hackers don't distribute the hacked roms, they just release the hack as a patch file (which is totally legal, as it contains no copyright code), and leave it up to the end user to find a working rom of the original game and to patch the rom himself (or herself!). And patching a rom file is not difficult, and it's a useful skill to have, so it's worth learning how to do.

Myself and others have uploaded patched roms to save time for people, and of course we didn't mean to cause trouble or anything. But for the time being, I'm taking down all of the roms I've uploaded, as it's best to be on the safe side. From now on, I'll only be posting links to hack files, and not to roms themselves.

It's not exactly great that we have to do this, but we don't want to give Nintendo or any other N64 game copyright holders any reason to set their lawyers on us. So I advise anyone who wants to post news of a game hack to post the link only to the patch file, and not a link to the patched rom.

Hopefully this will pass, and we can go back to the way it was, but for now we should try to be seen to be free of piracy.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: thecavalry on January 22, 2017, 12:08 AM
Not to be too antagonistic but can you fearmonger any harder? So much melodrama and meaningless speculation.

ROMs have been widely available on the internet for the last 20 years. They aren't going anywhere. Neither are patches. Once something is out in the ethos of the internet, good luck to the man who tries to remove it. It just doesn't work that way.

Who cares if a ROM hacker doesn't want his patch to be put on a cart? Once it's out in the wild, they no longer have ownership of it and we as a society can do whatever we damn well please. No one will be successful in getting them to stop distributing crappy cart versions of the LOZ Master Quest on Aliexpress. Go on and try.

I welcome innovation that ROM hackers bring to the retro scene and shame on you for trying to stifle or subdue it.

Lawyers will always be lawyers. Nintendo will always DMCA fan projects. It has always been this way, and will always be this way. N64 is no different than all the consoles that preceded it. But many of the users and creators are young and are just now being acquainted with how the IP copyright world works. This is not new or unique.


Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 22, 2017, 01:16 AM
I hope I am being too pessimistic, but I don't think that my removing links to downloadable roms is in any way 'fearmongering'. I'm not saying no one should hack games, or that we should all bury our Everdrives in the back garden and pretend they never existed, I'm just saying that at the moment it might be prudent for us N64 fans to not be too conspicuous, since Nintendo are rumoured to be considering bring back old IPs for their new console, in which case they might be inclined to be more draconian about those older IPs, and the possibility that now that N64 fake cartridges are openly available, that Nintendo might, just might, decided to do something about it, and go for an easy target first.

Life goes on as normal, there's no fear-mongering or anything. I'm just saying we should be more discrete where rom files are concerned, so as not to look like 'game hacking' is a synonym for 'piracy'.

And you criticise me, then say "Who cares if a ROM hacker doesn't want his patch to be put on a cart?". What about respect to the author? It's not like you pay the hacker and so have the right to do with it what you like since you paid for it. Mind you, you also say that, because I removed the links I put up (to files that can still be found easily elsewhere), that I am (in your own words) trying to stifle or subdue [innovation], which is a staggering bad assessment by any standard. And you accuse me of being melodramatic!

Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: geriatrix on January 22, 2017, 01:42 AM
Yeah, it think this is a bit dramatic.

Why are N64 repros any more concerning than every other repro currently being sold? Repros have been made for SNES and NES for years now, and nobody has batted an eye. I hardly expect that N64 would be "the straw" like you say. It's a 20+ year old system, and would earn Nintendo literally nothing to waste their time stomping it out.

Current gen of course is a different story, but these old systems...it would take a huge company selling thousands of these things for the big N to even notice, IMO.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: thecavalry on January 22, 2017, 01:46 AM
To use your own argument's logic, Kerr, if they are using Nintendo IP to produce their hack, and not creating anything original from the ground up, the hacker has no ownership. ROM hackers have no ownership if they are utilizing IP they don't own. They don't get to dictate what the community at large does with what they make available online.

And you are attempting to subdue or stifle ROM hacking/innovation by discouraging people from posting and developing for some indeterminate amount of time to avoid the ire of big bad Nintendo.

It's a ridiculous proposition.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: The Renegadist on January 22, 2017, 02:34 AM
Now that you've removed the links it now be harder to track down prototype ROMs, I really REALLY hope you saved the entirety of the post into a Word or Text document so that it can be pasted back in later on because that ROM page was extremely useful.

If you think about it, these guys can simply patch the games themselves and still sell them. Removing the links does nothing but add an extra step to their plans and an extra step for people who want to put these hacks on their Everdrive.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Aroenai on January 22, 2017, 03:14 AM
To use your own argument's logic, Kerr, if they are using Nintendo IP to produce their hack, and not creating anything original from the ground up, the hacker has no ownership. ROM hackers have no ownership if they are utilizing IP they don't own. They don't get to dictate what the community at large does with what they make available online.

Content creators should have some say in what happens to their work once it's posted, just because I post a rom hack that I've spent months on that I've made available for free does not give someone else the right to sell it as a repo cart and make a quick buck.

If you think about it, these guys can simply patch the games themselves and still sell them. Removing the links does nothing but add an extra step to their plans and an extra step for people who want to put these hacks on their Everdrive.

Sure it does, by limiting the download location to the original author's page they can clearly state what can or cannot be done with it. For example, explicitly stating that everyone does not have permission to sell what they create.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: thecavalry on January 22, 2017, 04:13 AM
With all due respect for what you do, you don't own the IP. There isn't any way to make it more clear. You don't own the work. It wasn't your IP.

You can't prevent anyone from uploading it anywhere else. You can't sue them for damages for selling what you created. You don't have any say or actual ownership or rights to the content, despite what you feel is owed from the hours you voluntarily spent creating it.

I mean this sincerely, I love that you all spend so much time making things compatible and crafting patches for broken ROMs and making hacks of existing games. But you don't actually own the IP, and can't dictate anything to the community about what they can and cannot do with it, legally. It's really that simple.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: geriatrix on January 22, 2017, 04:40 AM

Content creators should have some say in what happens to their work once it's posted, just because I post a rom hack that I've spent months on that I've made available for free does not give someone else the right to sell it as a repo cart and make a quick buck.

...by limiting the download location to the original author's page they can clearly state what can or cannot be done with it. For example, explicitly stating that everyone does not have permission to sell what they create.

As great as your patches are, you're sounding awfully entitled on this. You used another companies material, without permission, yet you somehow have the "right" to control permissions on your patch? That's not how it works. A person who does a mod or translation does it out of love for the game, nothing more. You don't get to dictate what people do with it once they've downloaded it, no matter what your rationale is. Especially if it's "they used it without my permission" - because again, you did this patch without Nintendo's permission, so what makes you have any more right to tell people what they can and can't do with it?

Great work, but get off the high horse.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Greg2600 on January 22, 2017, 04:48 AM
Offer patches only, Nintendo won't do anything.  Don't sell anything.  The End.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Sharkbyte on January 22, 2017, 05:00 AM
I think Nintendo is more focused on Wiiu piracy and possibly still the wii piracy and homebrew. I don't think they focus on N64 roms that much anymore.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: ozidual on January 22, 2017, 05:08 AM
I do not own the IP, but I do feel that I own the code I wrote.  Yes, the code doesn't do anything without the ROM.  So what.  People write snippets of code online all the time that may not work on their own.  They also make it freely available online all the time, but ask that others not use it for profit.

I do this because I am passionate about Nintendo games.  I respect the company and truly hope that they continue to release amazing games.  If they feel that stopping me will help them in any way shape or form, I will gladly hand over my code and close up shop.  Honestly, it would probably make my life a lot easier if I did.

Do I have the right to ask people not to release repro carts with my patches?  Yes.  It's my opinion and this is the internet where opinions are expressed freely.  Can I dictate to them what they can and cannot do with my patches?  That's between me and the website owners of places that sell repros with my patch on them.

Does all of this hurt hackers?  Well, maybe it makes some of them less likely to want to work on/release hacks.  As I said, my life would probably be easier if I stopped (I'm not threatening to stop by the way).  The N64 seems to have very few hackers as is.

As for Nintendo not focusing on N64 roms, check out the zelda64.net forums.  More than enough Zelda 64 hacks have been brought down by big-N.

EDIT: As for Aroenai sounding entitled.  He wouldn't have spent months working on this if he weren't passionate about it.  Aroenai did some damned fine work and he should feel entitled.  Zoinkity likewise.  He single-handedly brought 64dd games to the masses not to mention his amazing work on other patches.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: The Renegadist on January 22, 2017, 06:28 AM
Prototypes are not ROM hacks, why have they been removed too?
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Asaki on January 22, 2017, 02:17 PM
He's right, though, ROM hacks should be left as patch files. Most sites have a policy against distributing ROM files, I'm surprised that this site, of all places, doesn't take the same precautions.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 22, 2017, 04:49 PM
I didn't expect this much response, but it's great to see so much discussion.

First of all, I'm personally not happy about removing the links to the patched files. Apart from anything else, by downloading and patching the roms, then uploading them to mega.nz (where I hope they'll be safely available for years), and then posting the links to the download thread, I was actually doing something for this community. It was very little, true, but I have no skills that are transferable to hacking an N64 rom - I'm not smart enough to reprogram it, for example, and I don't speak Japanese so I can't help with translations, I can't use a modelling program so I can't help add weapon or player animations to Goldeneye X, etc.

So maintaining that thread, utterly trivial though that task was, was my way of doing something for our small but fantastic community. Making the downloads available in one place, and keeping a copy of each download (so that, say, in mega.nz goes down, then I could upload them all to a different site and post up the new links) was a job anyone could do, and I was grateful to be able to do it, as there aren't many other ways I could help others out on the forum.

But the situation has changed now. Only slightly, as I've said, but now that fake N64 cartridges are changing hands for money (which to a company with a legal team as large as Nintendo's is *much* less acceptable than the totally free rom patches we've had until now) then N64 hacking can easily become a target for Nintendo's infamous Cease and Desist campaigns. It's true that N64 hacking would never be eradicated totally, but cease and desist orders would do a lot of damage, as many people wouldn't want to risk a court case, and would instead rather abandon N64 hacking totally.

I am probably being over-cautious (and I really hope I am), and my decision might well have been influenced by a suddern spike of sciatica (it's horrible, but don't feel sorry for me, it's my own fault for mistreating my body when I was young  :-[), and I'm surprised by the depth of feeling in this thread. So I am rethinking my decision, but would be glad to hear any more reasons for or against the rom download thread.

I have kept a copy of the thread, of course, and can restore it easily if that's the right thing to do. The truth is, there's no answer that will please everyone, so I want to do what's best for most of us. If I do restore the thread, then I won't be including links to the patched roms of any authors who forbid it of course, as that, at least would clearly be wrong. So far that's only Ozidual and Zoinkity, but they have good reason for their decision, and we have to respect that. And we also have to respect the fact that they have done so much for us without asking for a penny in return, and that they are happy for us to enjoy the results of their hard work, and all they ask is that we don't distribute the patched roms, that we instead keep the whole thing legal by applying the patches ourselves.

Greg2600 and Asaki are right that we should keep things legal and above board, but against that we're talking about twenty year old games for a long obsolete console, with a small player base, which involves no money changing hands (aside from the fake cartridges), so we're probably OK if we go on as before. We're not hurting anyone, after all.

So does anyone have any more arguments for or against restoration of the thread, please?





Prototypes are not ROM hacks, why have they been removed too?

But the prototypes are still copyrighted. So providing a link to a prototype or beta, such as Glover 2, or an unreleased game, such as 40 Winks, is no different to providing a link to a released game such as Super Mario 64.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 22, 2017, 05:11 PM
To use your own argument's logic, Kerr, if they are using Nintendo IP to produce their hack, and not creating anything original from the ground up, the hacker has no ownership. ROM hackers have no ownership if they are utilizing IP they don't own. They don't get to dictate what the community at large does with what they make available online.

The hacker does own the code they make (assuming it doesn't used other copyrighted stuff, such as putting Batman into a Zelda game), though legally the code might be classed as being dependant on the original rom, and so the hacker wouldn't be allowed to make money from the modification.

And they do get to say what they do and don't wish to see done with the patch. They might not be legally able to enforce it, but they are entitled to make their wishes known.




Quote
And you are attempting to subdue or stifle ROM hacking/innovation by discouraging people from posting and developing for some indeterminate amount of time to avoid the ire of big bad Nintendo.

It's a ridiculous proposition.

No, I'm saying that I won't be linking to the patched roms. I'll still link to the patches themselves, and I won't (and can't) stop anyone else from linking to the patched roms. So I'm not discouraging anyone from anything, and people are still free to hack and release the hacks however they choose. And I hope that they do, as game hacks can be fantastic.






Now that you've removed the links it now be harder to track down prototype ROMs, I really REALLY hope you saved the entirety of the post into a Word or Text document so that it can be pasted back in later on because that ROM page was extremely useful.

Don't worry, mate, I have copied the thread, just in case.


Quote
If you think about it, these guys can simply patch the games themselves and still sell them. Removing the links does nothing but add an extra step to their plans and an extra step for people who want to put these hacks on their Everdrive.

I know, the people who make the fake cartridges are likely people who know how to patch a rom, so it's only some real gamers who'll suffer from the removal of the thread. But this way the forum is seen to be more legal and intolerant of piracy.



Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: ConkerGuru on January 22, 2017, 05:28 PM
The hacker does own the code they make (assuming it doesn't used other copyrighted stuff, such as putting Batman into a Zelda game), though legally the code might be classed as being dependant on the original rom, and so the hacker wouldn't be allowed to make money from the modification.

And they do get to say what they do and don't wish to see done with the patch. They might not be legally able to enforce it, but they are entitled to make their wishes known.
Agreed. I also wouldn't be too happy if I started seeing other people distribute and sell my Conker hacks in the form of fake n64 repro carts. As minor in changes as my hacks might be right now, I don't think they are relatively well known since I barely spread any word about my efforts and work. I have yet to see repros of my hacks surfacing, but I highly doubt my hacks are ever being taken notice of.

Also, to the guys who apparantly keep bothering kerr and the makers of the rom patches, and doesn't even give a damn about it all; If you guys keep having this view of Nintendo not caring about hacks of their games being sold on repro carts, then you really have no idea of how serious this can turn out to be, and if ROMs, patched or not, keep being posted here, then this place could be shut down much quicker than you think.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: thecavalry on January 22, 2017, 08:16 PM
The hacker does own the code they make (assuming it doesn't used other copyrighted stuff, such as putting Batman into a Zelda game), though legally the code might be classed as being dependant on the original rom, and so the hacker wouldn't be allowed to make money from the modification.

And they do get to say what they do and don't wish to see done with the patch. They might not be legally able to enforce it, but they are entitled to make their wishes known.
Agreed. I also wouldn't be too happy if I started seeing other people distribute and sell my Conker hacks in the form of fake n64 repro carts. As minor in changes as my hacks might be right now, I don't think they are relatively well known since I barely spread any word about my efforts and work. I have yet to see repros of my hacks surfacing, but I highly doubt my hacks are ever being taken notice of.

Also, to the guys who apparantly keep bothering kerr and the makers of the rom patches, and doesn't even give a damn about it all; If you guys keep having this view of Nintendo not caring about hacks of their games being sold on repro carts, then you really have no idea of how serious this can turn out to be, and if ROMs, patched or not, keep being posted here, then this place could be shut down much quicker than you think.

Here's the rub. I'm not "bothering" anyone. I am speaking true information about how IP copyrights work. If you create something using someone else's IP, the IP owner owns that work - because they own the IP. No matter how much any ROM hacker will say otherwise. If Nintendo or Rare or Electronic Arts etc...wanted to seek damages against your content, they could and they would win or you would be forced to settle, relinquish any claim to ownership, and hand over all of the code you wrote to them. This is because you don't have claim of ownership of the content, legally they can claim ownership.

It's a position that you all are obviously passionately defending, but there isn't any foundation to support your claims. Only the opposite.

The reality is that the work is voluntary and not owned by the hacker. And once it is online the internet will do with it what it always has - whatever it wants. The author can request for things to not be done - like post in certain forums or not distribute physical copies - but can't stop anyone who ignores the request. There is no "Fair Use" at play in ROM hacking.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: geriatrix on January 22, 2017, 09:42 PM

It's a position that you all are obviously passionately defending, but there isn't any foundation to support your claims. Only the opposite.

The reality is that the work is voluntary and not owned by the hacker. And once it is online the internet will do with it what it always has - whatever it wants. The author can request for things to not be done - like post in certain forums or not distribute physical copies - but can't stop anyone who ignores the request. There is no "Fair Use" at play in ROM hacking.

Looks like someone here may have been doing just that already - policing "their work". http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=170523 (http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=170523)
Apparently someone got this persons website shut down for selling copies of Master Quest that allegedly used one of the patches from this site.

Have to say, that's a bit drastic. And definitely gives a bad vibe if this trend were to continue between hardware vendors and patch makers.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 22, 2017, 10:11 PM
Here's the rub. I'm not "bothering" anyone. I am speaking true information about how IP copyrights work. If you create something using someone else's IP, the IP owner owns that work - because they own the IP. No matter how much any ROM hacker will say otherwise. If Nintendo or Rare or Electronic Arts etc...wanted to seek damages against your content, they could and they would win or you would be forced to settle, relinquish any claim to ownership, and hand over all of the code you wrote to them. This is because you don't have claim of ownership of the content, legally they can claim ownership.

You're totally off the mark. But go on then, prove me wrong. Prove that you are right. Name me one unofficial piece of work that became, simply because it was based on an official work, the property of the copyright holder and not the property of the person who made it. If you're right, then companies who made the original IP would always be claiming that the (good) fan made products actually belonged to them, so it would be easy for you to prove that you were right. Just google for some instances of this, and post the results here.

Show me all the fan made hacks of the Metroid games or the Super Mario games that are now being sold by Nintendo, since (according to you) when one of these hacks is made, it instantly becomes the property of Nintendo. There are lots of hacks of Metroid, Super Mario World, Super Mario 64, etc, and some of them are supposed to be very good. Yet I've never seen Nintendo say "That hack belongs to us", and then sell the hack without the hacker's permission.

And Portal, Team Fortress, etc don't count, as they were sold by their creators to Valve and co. Name me one. And I'm not talking about a few changes to the game's loader, or a few isolated bug fixes, I mean where the hack makes a significant change to the game.

Look, Zoinkity unofficially translated Sin and Punishment to English, right? But that doesn't mean that whoever made S & P now owns the translation code that Zoinkity wrote, it's still Zoinkity's code and he owns the copyright to it. S & P's creators can't just use Zoinkity's code on a S & P rom, and sell it as the English version, since that would be infringing Zoinkity's copyright.

If, say, I wrote a Harry Potter story and it was really good (I wish!), then I wouldn't be allowed to sell it, as J. K. Rowling has the copyright for Harry Potter, and I'd be infringing on her copyright. But the story I wrote is still my copyright, even though it uses (without permission) J. K. Rowlings characters. By your logic, J. K. Rowling would also own the copyright of my story, and be able to sell it herself, but that's not correct.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: ConkerGuru on January 22, 2017, 10:27 PM
Here's the rub. I'm not "bothering" anyone. I am speaking true information about how IP copyrights work. If you create something using someone else's IP, the IP owner owns that work - because they own the IP. No matter how much any ROM hacker will say otherwise. If Nintendo or Rare or Electronic Arts etc...wanted to seek damages against your content, they could and they would win or you would be forced to settle, relinquish any claim to ownership, and hand over all of the code you wrote to them. This is because you don't have claim of ownership of the content, legally they can claim ownership.

It's a position that you all are obviously passionately defending, but there isn't any foundation to support your claims. Only the opposite.

The reality is that the work is voluntary and not owned by the hacker. And once it is online the internet will do with it what it always has - whatever it wants. The author can request for things to not be done - like post in certain forums or not distribute physical copies - but can't stop anyone who ignores the request. There is no "Fair Use" at play in ROM hacking.
I now realize why I never should have taken part in this topic... -_-;

I'm not policing my work in any way, no matter how small or big it might be. And yes, I probably don't own any of the code I wrote, even if I wrote it myself.

Besides, I'm not the right person to mess with or talk legal matters with, so don't even think about trying.

Anyway, even if there weren't much of any damage done, I still find it appropriate that the ROM links have been removed. It really shouldn't have happened in the first place. I often post my hacks as patches, and posting patches should be preferred over posting roms.

For now we're safe, and we all can carry on as normal. But in the future Nintendo could very well take action if ROMs keep being posted. Just saying.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: fille1976 on January 22, 2017, 11:11 PM
hahaha,that stupid nintendo cares about game hacks,they better cared about the wiiu and switch.
they promise much,and each time its a big disappointment.
better care about us and your hardware stupid nintendo,or its game over for you.
probably they going after it because they still sell those games on their store as vc ect...
im so curious what the switch will bring for games,like i readed its not much...
but we known that from the wiiu,apart from the exclusives,its not good enough.
i hope those hacks keeps coming,its nice.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: ConkerGuru on January 22, 2017, 11:45 PM
Just to clarify; I'm not one of those guys that feels entitled about his/her own hacks(from the posts I've read in the topic on the nintendoage forums). I just hack video games because I find this activity interesting, and in my case it is more of a hobby than a job or being passionate. Sorry if I seemed to be acting in a ridiculous manner, nor was I trying to be rude. I was only trying to say that the best thing to do for now is to avoid posting ROMs until we know if the big N or any other company decides to take action or not.

I don't always hack video games every single day. I also have other interests besides that, and a life of my own to dedicate to(which you probably don't care much about). Anyhow, I'm sorry if I sort of lit up the flame again. I won't ever do that again.

If you think that I'm feeling entitled to my rom hacks or patches, fine. I might as well never come back here again in that case. (apparantly "bother" seems to be a very strong word these days...)
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: thecavalry on January 22, 2017, 11:51 PM

You're totally off the mark. But go on then, prove me wrong. Prove that you are right. Name me one unofficial piece of work that became, simply because it was based on an official work, the property of the copyright holder and not the property of the person who made it. If you're right, then companies who made the original IP would always be claiming that the (good) fan made products actually belonged to them, so it would be easy for you to prove that you were right. Just google for some instances of this, and post the results here.

Show me all the fan made hacks of the Metroid games or the Super Mario games that are now being sold by Nintendo, since (according to you) when one of these hacks is made, it instantly becomes the property of Nintendo. There are lots of hacks of Metroid, Super Mario World, Super Mario 64, etc, and some of them are supposed to be very good. Yet I've never seen Nintendo say "That hack belongs to us", and then sell the hack without the hacker's permission.

And Portal, Team Fortress, etc don't count, as they were sold by their creators to Valve and co. Name me one. And I'm not talking about a few changes to the game's loader, or a few isolated bug fixes, I mean where the hack makes a significant change to the game.

Look, Zoinkity unofficially translated Sin and Punishment to English, right? But that doesn't mean that whoever made S & P now owns the translation code that Zoinkity wrote, it's still Zoinkity's code and he owns the copyright to it. S & P's creators can't just use Zoinkity's code on a S & P rom, and sell it as the English version, since that would be infringing Zoinkity's copyright.

If, say, I wrote a Harry Potter story and it was really good (I wish!), then I wouldn't be allowed to sell it, as J. K. Rowling has the copyright for Harry Potter, and I'd be infringing on her copyright. But the story I wrote is still my copyright, even though it uses (without permission) J. K. Rowlings characters. By your logic, J. K. Rowling would also own the copyright of my story, and be able to sell it herself, but that's not correct.

You are correct, she might be able to. She wouldn't do so because it would legitimize your art as equivalent to her brand and thereby devalue her own IP, not to mention the bad publicity that would come with such an act.

You're looking at this the wrong way. Five seconds to google "Nintendo DMCA fan project" produces 391,000 results and some of the top are reports on how 500+ projects were targeted recently by Nintendo. They wouldn't turn around and sell the fan projects for reasons including the above example with J.K. Rowling and your straw man argument, but they would force the access/distribution to be removed and all code be handed over if not deleted voluntarily by the infringing parties, and all continued development to cease, and seek damages if warranted.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 23, 2017, 12:44 AM
Just to clarify; I'm not one of those guys that feels entitled about his/her own hacks(from the posts I've read in the topic on the nintendoage forums). I just hack video games because I find this activity interesting, and in my case it is more of a hobby than a job or being passionate. Sorry if I seemed to be acting in a ridiculous manner, nor was I trying to be rude. I was only trying to say that the best thing to do for now is to avoid posting ROMs until we know if the big N or any other company decides to take action or not.

I don't always hack video games every single day. I also have other interests besides that, and a life of my own to dedicate to(which you probably don't care much about). Anyhow, I'm sorry if I sort of lit up the flame again. I won't ever do that again.

If you think that I'm feeling entitled to my rom hacks or patches, fine. I might as well never come back here again in that case. (apparantly "bother" seems to be a very strong word these days...)

You certainly don't come across to me as 'entitled'. And please don't feel that you have to leave this forum or the N64 hacking community. There will always be a few percent of people in any group who are happy to misrepresent or ruin things; TheCavalry is trying to pass off his warped and un-provable view of things as fact in that thread about the Zelda fake cartridge, and he ends his (deluded) post with the unbelievable sentence:

It's like [the game hackers] are actively trying to engineer their own destruction [by denying the rights to distribute the hack via fake cartridges].

Source: http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=170523 (so you can check that I'm not making this up).

Seriously, according to him/her, not only do you not own the code you write, but if you limit the ways to spread your code, then you're making it more likely for Nintendo to want to close you down. If that's so then there'd be plenty of precident to prevent as truth to back up his claims, but as usual for fantasists like him, he doesn't prevent anything like proof.

Meanwhile, in that same thread, Aroenai catches all the flack even though he'd done nothing actually wrong. And since  TheCavalry doesn't see fit to try to correct this, then I assume he's in agreement (I can't claim to be surprised by that). So, ConkerGuru, please don't be put off by people like The Cavalry. Most people on these forums are reasonable and helpful, and hopefully neither you nor anyone else will feel the need to move on.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 23, 2017, 12:59 AM

You are correct, she might be able to. She wouldn't do so because it would legitimize your art as equivalent to her brand and thereby devalue her own IP, not to mention the bad publicity that would come with such an act.

No, she COULD NOT DO SO LEGALLY. Go on, post proof of how she could do so legally.


Quote
You're looking at this the wrong way. Five seconds to google "Nintendo DMCA fan project" produces 391,000 results and some of the top are reports on how 500+ projects were targeted recently by Nintendo. They wouldn't turn around and sell the fan projects for reasons including the above example with J.K. Rowling and your straw man argument, but they would force the access/distribution to be removed and all code be handed over if not deleted voluntarily by the infringing parties, and all continued development to cease, and seek damages if warranted.

You're avoiding giving me the proof I asked for, and instead using conjecture to answer a point I never made. And as for my "straw man" argument, it's you who're refusing to give a straight answer, which I can only assume is because you know you can't back up the drivel you're posting. I'm not going to give up, either you provide the proof, or admit that you posted without knowing what you were talking about, or just stop posting in this thread.

GO ON. POST PROOF OF WHAT YOU SAY. I'm not asking you to find Atlantis, or anything even remotely difficult (if you were right). You say that work by a fan automatically becomes the property of the original IP's owner, which is NOT the case. But you say it is, so prove it. If you were right then in the last century that situation would have arisen thousands of times, concerning the book industry, the film industry, the TV industry, and now the games industry. So put you hand into the decades upon decades of legal history, and put out the easily available cases where the original creator was given ownership and use of the fan made material.

You can't do it, of course. But prove me wrong, it's not difficult if you're right.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 23, 2017, 01:09 AM
Sorry, double post (I'm typing this whilst I'm (supposed to be :-[) finishing off a report for work).
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: ConkerGuru on January 23, 2017, 01:42 AM
Well, the topic seems to have been locked by the mods now. Still, that last sentence of his does seem rather unbelievable.

@kerr avon; Sorry for that response of mine. I don't think I'll ever leave the everdrive forums or the N64 hacking community. I have a tendency to be sensitive or taking things too personally, which sometimes can't be a good thing, mainly for myself. I need to really practice more on that bit.

Besides that, I hope this discussion gets settled soon and we can keep doing whatever stuff we did before this topic came to be. I'm not going to involve myself with this thread any further from now on, because I've got a couple patches of mine that I have to post here at some point.(don't know when that'll be, maybe tomorrow or later. I'll see when I can find time for it.)
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: ozidual on January 23, 2017, 02:52 AM
I've said my piece about this topic, but since the NA topic was brought over here too, I wanted to add a bit about that specific case:

I agree, Retrostage made some nice carts.  If he was going to put that kind of money down, the least he could do was to ask the patch owners about it first.  He's now blaming the patch owners for shutting it down without PMing him when he should have done the first contact before manufacturing.  The fact he didn't contact the owners of the patch shows that he was trying to do an end run around them.  Either he was worried that they would want a portion of the profits or that they would tell him no.  Welp, the latter happened.  I'm sorry he lost money, but he was clearly doing something risky to begin with.

As for the website and eBay takedown?  He upped the ante thinking he could.  The patch owners upped the ante too.  Ultimately, eBay and his hosting company decided he was in the wrong.  He took a further risk, it didn't pay off.  It happens all the time with business. 

I'm sorry that there are people out there who want to buy these patches on carts and that they are not available.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: thecavalry on January 23, 2017, 02:58 AM
Like Conker, this will be my last post in this thread. Even after posting proof I doubt that you will ever change your perspective and opinion.

It's a straw man argument because the topic for debate was who has ownership of the work, not right of sale.

Nevertheless:

Here is an essay, full of citations of actual court cases supporting the content detailing how derivative work rights have changed over the last 185 years. (the decades of legal history you asked for)
http://digitalcommons.law.wne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1046&context=facschol

And to make it easier to digest, here is an actual law firm's explanation of how derivative work rights are active today:
http://www.wagenmakerlaw.com/blog/nonprofit%E2%80%99s-guide-copyright-law-derivative-works

Specifically the section called "The Right to Create Derivative Works"
-Copyright law vests the original work’s copyright owner with the exclusive right to prepare derivative works.  Therefore, the owner in the preexisting work must authorize the creation of a derivative work in order for it to be separately owned by another.  If not authorized, the preparation of a derivative work constitutes copyright infringement of the preexisting work and is not copyrightable.  But if authorized, and an absent an agreement otherwise, the owner of the preexisting work will not have any copyright ownership in the derivative work.-

Should this hack even constitute being a derivative work, which is does not - as it does not create any new story, it was never authorized and the author would have no copyright claim. They don't have any right to dictate reproduction, distribution, etc... Rather, the Copyright Act of 1976 outlines that the owner of the original copyright retains all ownership and rights automatically. (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106)


I will reiterate that I, personally, fully support ROM hacking and use hacks regularly. There is just a lot of misinformation being thrown around about ownership and what they can and can't do. Nintendo, like many copyright owners, will often not pursue fan made projects because it does not generate any new income for them and often creates stronger fanbases for original productions. However that does not mean they cannot or will not. But drawing unnecessary attention to unauthorized works can only have a negative impact on the ability to keep them available as it increases the likelihood that Nintendo will be aware of them - hence what I said on the NintendoAge forum.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: The Renegadist on January 23, 2017, 05:59 AM
It's really too bad things are going down this way, really turns me off for wanting to have anything to do with the ED community now that people are too afraid to post anything. When you look at this entire dilemma it's all a slippery slope, Nintendo hasn't touched the N64 community before because as many have said it's fans making new content for fans for free. Now we have a few people selling these things and everyone throws everything away and runs for the hills leaving everyone else in the dust wondering why people are panicking. I know I already said this and someone already responded but by removing these links to ROMs it only adds an extra step for these people who are selling these hacks. In the end they will continue to sell the hacks, we will continue to lose because people will have to patch everything on their own, and in the end Nintendo can still come in and shut it all down ROMs or No ROMs.

Bottom line is people need to learn to not fear something that has a chance of happening whether or not precautions are taken. Unfortunately as much as I wanted to be part of this community I will be stepping back for awhile until this is resolved. I know that people have it set that Nintendo is going to get them no matter what so no matter what anyone says they will never change their minds but it all seems irrational when you think about it.

I really hope this all turns around because I was looking forward to making this my second home community but after this I don't know anymore.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 23, 2017, 01:59 PM
Like Conker, this will be my last post in this thread. Even after posting proof I doubt that you will ever change your perspective and opinion.

No, you're leaving because I am right, and you're not willing to admit it.

Posting links to things that are not proof of your assertions does not absolve you of the onus of proving your (untrue) assertions.

All I ask is for one (one!) example of what you suggest. Yet you can't even provide that one example to back up your ludicrous claims. If you were right then the last decade would be littered with famous examples, but you're wrong, so the examples don't exist, and you can't bring yourself to admit it. Hence the "I'm the injured party, and I'm out of here" attitude.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 23, 2017, 02:28 PM
It's really too bad things are going down this way, really turns me off for wanting to have anything to do with the ED community now that people are too afraid to post anything. When you look at this entire dilemma it's all a slippery slope, Nintendo hasn't touched the N64 community before because as many have said it's fans making new content for fans for free. Now we have a few people selling these things and everyone throws everything away and runs for the hills leaving everyone else in the dust wondering why people are panicking. I know I already said this and someone already responded but by removing these links to ROMs it only adds an extra step for these people who are selling these hacks. In the end they will continue to sell the hacks, we will continue to lose because people will have to patch everything on their own, and in the end Nintendo can still come in and shut it all down ROMs or No ROMs.

Bottom line is people need to learn to not fear something that has a chance of happening whether or not precautions are taken. Unfortunately as much as I wanted to be part of this community I will be stepping back for awhile until this is resolved. I know that people have it set that Nintendo is going to get them no matter what so no matter what anyone says they will never change their minds but it all seems irrational when you think about it.

I really hope this all turns around because I was looking forward to making this my second home community but after this I don't know anymore.

Thanks.

I'm still not sure what is for the best, whether to bring back the download thread, or to not do so (and even if I don't, there's nothing to stop someone else from starting such a thread). I agree that not having the thread hurts legitimate people more than the (presumably more technical) people who want to make money by making fake cartridges), but against that we have to balance the risks of Nintendo coming down on fake cartridges (since fake cartridges make money) and then quite probably deciding that while they're at it they'll come after the people who hack the games in the first place. Just because it hasn't happened before doesn't mean it won't happen now. And now that money is involved, then it's *much* more likely that Nintendo will want to get involved. It's still very unlikely that they would do more than throw around a few cease and desist orders (since anything else would cost far more money than they could ever hope to get back from the people hacking the games or the people making the fake cartridges) but it's still a risk we'd be taking. And if we were seen to not be (publicly) passing around the roms, then we'd be less likely to have Nintendo bother us.

I've pm'd Krikzz to see what he thinks. If he's OK with the thread coming back (it is his forum, after all) then unless anyone has any serious objections then I will bring it back, since most people seem to want it. If anyone wants their work to not appear in the thread (which is very understandable, and is your right) then please let me know in this thread, or via pm, and I won't post your work there (and I'll remove any that is already there, of course).
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: ozidual on January 23, 2017, 04:56 PM
As for posting ROMs, you could split the difference.  If you keep a list of searchable names, that might be a way around it.  It's not like the ROMs aren't all over the internet.  Knowing that the US Zelda 64 Gamecube ROM is usually called 'Legend of Zelda, The - Ocarina of Time (USA) (GameCube Edition)' helps people find it quickly and easily.  For patches, a list of links to the patches themselves is almost better since they'll get the most up-to-date version.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 23, 2017, 08:14 PM
As for posting ROMs, you could split the difference.  If you keep a list of searchable names, that might be a way around it.  It's not like the ROMs aren't all over the internet.  Knowing that the US Zelda 64 Gamecube ROM is usually called 'Legend of Zelda, The - Ocarina of Time (USA) (GameCube Edition)' helps people find it quickly and easily.  For patches, a list of links to the patches themselves is almost better since they'll get the most up-to-date version.

That's a good idea. But if we did go with that, then the forum would need a good guide (with screenshots) to show new users how to patch roms. I'd make it myself, but I'm away from home (and my N64) until a week on Friday, and I know that if I patch a rom without then testing it on my N64 that it would be corrupt or mispatched somehow, so I don't want to write a guide until I can test the patched rom.

Would you or someone else be willing to write a detailed guide to finding and downloading the right rom, then patching it, please? It wouldn't be extensive, but it would have to easy to follow, as some users might be totally new to unzipping a .zip file, let alone running a patch program.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Aroenai on January 23, 2017, 09:46 PM
I've been meaning to change the formatting of my topic for a while now anyway. I can write up a guide for patching with screenshots, does anyone care if it's a pdf or does it have to take up space on the actual post? (I wish we had spoiler tags) Ozidual already has a lot of good information on his topic about extracting them from disc. BPS patches prevent you from accidentally applying to the wrong file or making a corrupt/wrong file, unlike IPS which doesn't perform any checks. So you wouldn't have to worry about that.

I agree, Google-fu is easy if the actual rom name and hash value are in the post.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Hexatendo on January 24, 2017, 07:04 PM
All I can say is that, I started it.
No, not selling Hacked Roms, but distributing prototypes on this site. I'm sorry that this had to be done, Kerr. I am honestly so speechless that this is all I had to say. No harm intended, just I can't believe this is happening.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 24, 2017, 08:43 PM
All I can say is that, I started it.
No, not selling Hacked Roms, but distributing prototypes on this site. I'm sorry that this had to be done, Kerr. I am honestly so speechless that this is all I had to say. No harm intended, just I can't believe this is happening.

It's not your fault. Distributing N64 roms isn't exactly legal, but it's as close to harmless as can be, and Nintendo so far haven't seemed too bothered, so we've all just kept our heads down and enjoyed hacked/translated N64 games.

All that's changed is that recently money has started to change hands over N64 roms (albeit only for a few fake cartridges), so we're all wondering if the big N will decide to stomp on the fake cartridge sellers, and if so, will they also try to come down hard on the people who hack the N64 roms. Probably they won't, as there's no way they'll get back even a fraction of the money they'll have to spend on lawyers, so we're almost certainly OK. Almost. Companies can act irrationally though,

I'm still waiting for a reply from Krikzz, to see which way he'd prefer us to act, whether he'd like to see the forums become %200 percent legal by us only posting patches and not actual patched roms, or if he's happy for things to continue as they are, with us posting links to patched roms (unless the particular patched rom is forbidden by the hacker, of course).
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Linx on January 26, 2017, 12:14 AM
Like Conker, this will be my last post in this thread. Even after posting proof I doubt that you will ever change your perspective and opinion.

No, you're leaving because I am right, and you're not willing to admit it.

Posting links to things that are not proof of your assertions does not absolve you of the onus of proving your (untrue) assertions.

All I ask is for one (one!) example of what you suggest. Yet you can't even provide that one example to back up your ludicrous claims. If you were right then the last decade would be littered with famous examples, but you're wrong, so the examples don't exist, and you can't bring yourself to admit it. Hence the "I'm the injured party, and I'm out of here" attitude.

Uh...I hate to jump in on this but why exactly are you arguing with thecavalry on this?  The links he gave, while not examples, outline what would happen in such a case.  I'm not even sure why you're so fixated on an example in the first place when the law is right in front of you.  If you demand one so badly, here it is:

Jr. Pac-man.  Midway created a game based on and using code from Namco's Pac-man without permission in 1983.  Namco then cancelled their licensing agreement with them in 1984 because of that.  Midway had the license to sell Pac-man but not create any new games or characters. It was no different than a simple ROM hack created without permission of the parent company.   Namco then took Jr. Pac-man, ported it to the Atari 2600 in 1986, after their relationship with Midway ended, and made cash off of it without Midway's involvement.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 26, 2017, 01:44 AM
Like Conker, this will be my last post in this thread. Even after posting proof I doubt that you will ever change your perspective and opinion.

No, you're leaving because I am right, and you're not willing to admit it.

Posting links to things that are not proof of your assertions does not absolve you of the onus of proving your (untrue) assertions.

All I ask is for one (one!) example of what you suggest. Yet you can't even provide that one example to back up your ludicrous claims. If you were right then the last decade would be littered with famous examples, but you're wrong, so the examples don't exist, and you can't bring yourself to admit it. Hence the "I'm the injured party, and I'm out of here" attitude.

Uh...I hate to jump in on this but why exactly are you arguing with thecavalry on this?  The links he gave, while not examples, outline what would happen in such a case.  I'm not even sure why you're so fixated on an example in the first place when the law is right in front of you.  If you demand one so badly, here it is:

Jr. Pac-man.  Midway created a game based on and using code from Namco's Pac-man without permission in 1983.  Namco then cancelled their licensing agreement with them in 1984 because of that.  Midway had the license to sell Pac-man but not create any new games or characters. It was no different than a simple ROM hack created without permission of the parent company.   Namco then took Jr. Pac-man, ported it to the Atari 2600 in 1986, after their relationship with Midway ended, and made cash off of it without Midway's involvement.

OK, I'll assume that you're not an alt account by TheCavalry (despite the huge similarities in posting style between this post and his), but if what you say is true about Jr. Pacman, and that this took place against Midway's wishes, and that no money was paid towards Midway, and the copyright of the Jr. Pacman hack was legally judged to be a separate IP to Pacman, and that that IP and copyright was legally judged to belong to Namco even though Miday had created it, then please post a link to the legal facts of the case. Otherwise, you're simply claiming an urban myth as fact.

Please post the legal proof of what you say, I'll read through it, and if it's as you say, and I'll admit I was wrong, of course.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Linx on January 26, 2017, 04:33 AM
Like Conker, this will be my last post in this thread. Even after posting proof I doubt that you will ever change your perspective and opinion.

No, you're leaving because I am right, and you're not willing to admit it.

Posting links to things that are not proof of your assertions does not absolve you of the onus of proving your (untrue) assertions.

All I ask is for one (one!) example of what you suggest. Yet you can't even provide that one example to back up your ludicrous claims. If you were right then the last decade would be littered with famous examples, but you're wrong, so the examples don't exist, and you can't bring yourself to admit it. Hence the "I'm the injured party, and I'm out of here" attitude.

Uh...I hate to jump in on this but why exactly are you arguing with thecavalry on this?  The links he gave, while not examples, outline what would happen in such a case.  I'm not even sure why you're so fixated on an example in the first place when the law is right in front of you.  If you demand one so badly, here it is:

Jr. Pac-man.  Midway created a game based on and using code from Namco's Pac-man without permission in 1983.  Namco then cancelled their licensing agreement with them in 1984 because of that.  Midway had the license to sell Pac-man but not create any new games or characters. It was no different than a simple ROM hack created without permission of the parent company.   Namco then took Jr. Pac-man, ported it to the Atari 2600 in 1986, after their relationship with Midway ended, and made cash off of it without Midway's involvement.

OK, I'll assume that you're not an alt account by TheCavalry (despite the huge similarities in posting style between this post and his), but if what you say is true about Jr. Pacman, and that this took place against Midway's wishes, and that no money was paid towards Midway, and the copyright of the Jr. Pacman hack was legally judged to be a separate IP to Pacman, and that that IP and copyright was legally judged to belong to Namco even though Miday had created it, then please post a link to the legal facts of the case. Otherwise, you're simply claiming an urban myth as fact.

Please post the legal proof of what you say, I'll read through it, and if it's as you say, and I'll admit I was wrong, of course.

No need for personal attacks to discredit me now.  I've been on this board as a lurker and occasional poster for years.  I'm not some alternate account created in the off chance that there would be an argument about publishing rights 4 years after I joined.  Honestly, I'm not all that interested in the legality of rom hacks anyway.  I just thought I'd give a famous example since you didn't seem to know of it and your last few posts seemed to be very aggressive about finding this example.

As for the case in question:  Of course there are no public legal records.  Why would there be?  Jr. Pac-man is a rom hack of Pac-man.  The character is simply Pac-man wearing a hat.  Midway had no case and they settled without legal interventions.  No company would share private legal documents showing off their behind-the-scenes ugliness to the public.  Especially in the pre-internet days.  In 1984, Namco terminated Midway's license to distribute Namco's IPs.  There is no 'urban legend' about it.  Before 1984, Midway released Namco games in the USA, after this date, Namco did.  Midway is the company that created Jr. Pac-Man (and a few other games that I didn't feel the need to mention).  Jr. Pac-Man only has Bally-Midway's licensing on the original arcade release, without any credit to Namco (unlike every other Namco arcade game), and was only released in Midway's territory, never in Japan.  Despite the separation of Midway and Namco, Namco self-published Jr. Pac-Man a few years later.  This again is no 'urban legend' as we can easily read the release dates and publisher on the Atari box.  So the only question that exists is whether Namco paid any money to Midway for this unauthorized and obviously unwanted creation.  Jr. Pacman bombed in the arcade and had an overall negative reception.  The truth is we will never truly know, but with the information of Namco cutting all ties with their international distributor over this rehash of Pac-Man and the game not being worth anything in the eyes of the public, it seems fairly obvious that Namco wanted nothing to do with it.  But lo and behold, a few years later, when Namco of America was desperate for funds after the video game crash, out comes Jr. Pac-Man to make a quick buck with no credit to Midway whatsoever.

I know that's not enough to convince you.  Simply put, there never will be enough to convince you.  TheCavalry linked you the official laws regarding this situation and I gave you your much demanded example.  So let's just agree to disagree.  I love video game history so I enjoyed typing this and I'd be happy to talk more on it but the legal complexities of this specific topic are things I'm just not that into.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Linx on January 26, 2017, 04:35 AM
I also do agree with you regarding removing links to roms/hacks by the way.  It is the safer option and more appropriate option.  Just thought I'd throw that out there.  Sorry about derailing your topic further.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: StarDust4Ever on January 26, 2017, 02:00 PM
You're totally off the mark. But go on then, prove me wrong. Prove that you are right. Name me one unofficial piece of work that became, simply because it was based on an official work, the property of the copyright holder and not the property of the person who made it. If you're right, then companies who made the original IP would always be claiming that the (good) fan made products actually belonged to them, so it would be easy for you to prove that you were right. Just google for some instances of this, and post the results here.
Ms Pacman started life as an unofficial hack of Pacman, originally distributed by General Computing Corp as an expansion board that created a derivative work known as Crazy Otto. Midway, the current distributor of Namco arcade games in the United States, caught wind of the expansion packs GCC were creating and brokered a deal and rebranded it as Ms Pacman. Ms Pacman came to American Arcades in 1981, without permission or blessing of Namco of Japan. And Ms Pacman went on to outsell the original Pacman. Well guess who owns that property now? You guessed it: Namco owns the rights to Ms Pacman. Just look at all those Class of '81 Reunion cabs they got everywhere. ;D
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ms._Pac-Man#History

Just one of many examples where the original rights holder usurps control over a derivative work, and profited off of it.

Like Conker, this will be my last post in this thread. Even after posting proof I doubt that you will ever change your perspective and opinion.

No, you're leaving because I am right, and you're not willing to admit it.

Posting links to things that are not proof of your assertions does not absolve you of the onus of proving your (untrue) assertions.

All I ask is for one (one!) example of what you suggest. Yet you can't even provide that one example to back up your ludicrous claims. If you were right then the last decade would be littered with famous examples, but you're wrong, so the examples don't exist, and you can't bring yourself to admit it. Hence the "I'm the injured party, and I'm out of here" attitude.

Jr. Pac-man.  Midway created a game based on and using code from Namco's Pac-man without permission in 1983.  Namco then cancelled their licensing agreement with them in 1984 because of that.  Midway had the license to sell Pac-man but not create any new games or characters. It was no different than a simple ROM hack created without permission of the parent company.   Namco then took Jr. Pac-man, ported it to the Atari 2600 in 1986, after their relationship with Midway ended, and made cash off of it without Midway's involvement.
LOL, great minds think alike! ;)
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 26, 2017, 03:58 PM
No need for personal attacks to discredit me now.  I've been on this board as a lurker and occasional poster for years.  I'm not some alternate account created in the off chance that there would be an argument about publishing rights 4 years after I joined.

If I'm wrong about you being him, then I apologise. But it is strange that he says he's not posting any more, then you appear out of the blue (the only person supporting his point), you post in his style (using such stupid and untrue expressions as " I'm not even sure why you're so fixated on an example in the first place" and " If you demand one so badly, here it is" when I'm clearly not fixated (any intelligent adult would demand proof if he were to be converted in a given believe) or demanding (I was asking simply for proof of TheCavalry's assertion), and then you post 'proof' without a source and expect me to believe it.

If you're posting down at TheCavalry's level, then you can hardly blame me for thinking the obvious, can you?



Quote
  Honestly, I'm not all that interested in the legality of rom hacks anyway.  I just thought I'd give a famous example since you didn't seem to know of it and your last few posts seemed to be very aggressive about finding this example.

As for the case in question:  Of course there are no public legal records.  Why would there be?

Because legal records are kept of all court cases, and in a case such as this (if it did take place) it would set an important legal precedent, and be cited in countless other cases since, when company x was suing person or company y over copyright infringement via new or modded material and company x wanted to gain legal control over this material, this could well be the deciding factor.



Quote
Jr. Pac-man is a rom hack of Pac-man.  The character is simply Pac-man wearing a hat.  Midway had no case and they settled without legal interventions.

Then it's not what The Calvalry was talking about. Midway settled out of court, so it's not a case of them being force by law to do something. Anything could have happened 'behind the scenes'. It might even have been that the contract between Namco and Midway said, explicitly or obliquely, that any alterations to the code became Namco's property, and that Midway didn't understand this when the contract was drawn-up.

Either way, the situation whatever it was, was NOT dictated by a court, so it doesn't prove your, or TheCavalry's contention.



Quote
No company would share private legal documents showing off their behind-the-scenes ugliness to the public.  Especially in the pre-internet days.  In 1984, Namco terminated Midway's license to distribute Namco's IPs.  There is no 'urban legend' about it.

I see. So there's no 'urban legend' about it, but you can't provide legal proof. Understood.

Can you see now why I think you're TheCavalry? You're arguing at precisely his level, with neither proof nor logic to your posts, plus you're the only one who has maintained the same (to me) ridiculous point as him (no one else has argued it), and you don't provide any proof yet expect me to be totally convinced by some random stranger on the internet.



Quote
  Before 1984, Midway released Namco games in the USA, after this date, Namco did.  Midway is the company that created Jr. Pac-Man (and a few other games that I didn't feel the need to mention).  Jr. Pac-Man only has Bally-Midway's licensing on the original arcade release, without any credit to Namco (unlike every other Namco arcade game), and was only released in Midway's territory, never in Japan.  Despite the separation of Midway and Namco, Namco self-published Jr. Pac-Man a few years later.  This again is no 'urban legend' as we can easily read the release dates and publisher on the Atari box.  So the only question that exists is whether Namco paid any money to Midway for this unauthorized and obviously unwanted creation.

And if they did get money for it, then it disproves your point. If it wasn't already totally disproven by the fact that even you admit that there's no legal proof a court case took place.



Quote
Jr. Pacman bombed in the arcade and had an overall negative reception.  The truth is we will never truly know, but with the information of Namco cutting all ties with their international distributor over this rehash of Pac-Man and the game not being worth anything in the eyes of the public, it seems fairly obvious that Namco wanted nothing to do with it.  But lo and behold, a few years later, when Namco of America was desperate for funds after the video game crash, out comes Jr. Pac-Man to make a quick buck with no credit to Midway whatsoever.

Which proves nothing. Other than the fact that the concept of proof is beyond both you and TheCavalry. Look, whether you and him are the same person, or not, can one of you simply provide the proof I've asked for? If not, then stop posting rubbish and expecting people to think that you're somehow right simply because you type a few tangentially-related but unproven sentences.


Quote
I know that's not enough to convince you.  Simply put, there never will be enough to convince you.

Ah, a personal attack. The last refuge of those who know they've lost an argument and aren't big enough to admit it.

And no, my making the logical assumption that you and TheCavalry are the same person was not a personal attack, it was a natural conclusion given how similar your posts, your attitudes, and your lack of proof are.

And why would I be convinced, when even you admit that there's no proof of what you say?


Quote
  TheCavalry linked you the official laws regarding this situation and I gave you your much demanded example.  So let's just agree to disagree.  I love video game history so I enjoyed typing this and I'd be happy to talk more on it but the legal complexities of this specific topic are things I'm just not that into.

You did not give me an example, as you gave no proof. Or if I said that vampires existed, you (according to your logic) would then believe me, since you expect me to believe everything you post even if it sounds totally wrong.

And TheCavalry's links proved nothing, or there'd be hundreds of cases judged on this law, and you could post links to their legal records. But you don't. Why is that?
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 26, 2017, 04:20 PM

Ms Pacman started life as an unofficial hack of Pacman, originally distributed by General Computing Corp as an expansion board that created a derivative work known as Crazy Otto. Midway, the current distributor of Namco arcade games in the United States, caught wind of the expansion packs GCC were creating and brokered a deal and rebranded it as Ms Pacman. Ms Pacman came to American Arcades in 1981, without permission or blessing of Namco of Japan.

And Ms Pacman went on to outsell the original Pacman. Well guess who owns that property now? You guessed it: Namco owns the rights to Ms Pacman. Just look at all those Class of '81 Reunion cabs they got everywhere. ;D
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ms._Pac-Man#History


So you're saying that GCC made the hack, sold it to Midway, and Namco eventually took it from them without paying them a penny?

Would you please re-read what you wrote? If Midway did buy the hack, then they were paying money for something that was illegal to sell (the hack). Therefore Midway was breaking the law, and perhaps (I don't know) the copryight would then be judged to go to Namco by default.

If you'd post proof (which none of you "the law is this way" people seem capable of) then we could following the court case's ruling and see the reasoning and the ultimate decision.

But either way, your example is totally different from the original argument, which is that NON-PROFIT game hacks, such as those by Aroenai and ozidual don't belong to Nintendo.

BTW, posting a link to Wikipedia does NOT constitute proof.

Quote
Just one of many examples where the original rights holder usurps control over a derivative work, and profited off of it.

No, it's a bad example made to prove a point, which isn't backed up with proof. You've provided no link to prove that it happened how you said it did, and even if it did, the fact that Midway illegally bought it from GCC means it's a totally different situation to the one we're discussing
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 26, 2017, 04:45 PM
Look, neither side here is going to be convinced by the other, so let's drop it and move on, eh?

We're all here because we care about the N64, it's games, the Everdrive 64, and rom-hacks, so let's keep the discussions to topics about those and related topics, and not waste time in acrimonious arguments that won't result in anything but bad feelings. I'm not always as patient as I should be (especially when the ****ing sciatica is flaring up (look after your back, or you WILL regret it in later life) so I'm as guilty as anyone, I admit. So let's get back on topic, and discuss the wondrous 64bit console that we all love.

Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: Kerr Avon on January 26, 2017, 05:05 PM
Krikzz has just pm'd me to say he'd prefer that I not link to the patched rom downloads. He was very polite, but his word is law here (it's his forum, of course) so even if I disagreed then I'd abide by his decision. But I think he's right, especially since he makes his living by creating and selling the Everdrives which use these roms, so it's in his best interests (and all of ours) if he's not seen to be encouraging piracy by allowing illegal downloads from this site.

I'll start a new thread, linking instead to the patches (pre-existing patches, and any that come along, day by day), unless anyone else wants to make the thread?

Also, to any patch authors, if possible, when you release a patch, could you please mention the exact filename of the original rom that is required for your patch? If you say, for example:

Super Mario 64 (USA).zip

then people can copy and paste that into google, to find the right rom, whereas if you say "Use an unpatched NTSC version of Super Mario 64" then newer users might be a little confused.
Title: Re: Bad news (please read)
Post by: goombakid on January 27, 2017, 05:22 AM
Make a new thread.

I have no idea what just happened, but whatever it was, the thread got flagged.

Consider this thread dead, start a new one, follow KRIKzz's guideline (No links to ROMs, patches should be OK).

Everyone be nice to everyone.