Emulation & Warez

[Kha'alim]

This may sound like a stupid question, but legally what's the difference between a Psx(or other) game on u'r comp., and a warez game on u'r comp.?

[Del_Boy]

The legal difference is nothing, unless you own the game you are emulating, then you could probably claim some sort of justifcation for emulation.

The line blurs though when you have people trading PS2/XBox etc games when no emu is even available. Then that falls into Piracy, which is the same class as Warez... etc

[GundamGuy]

As far as the law go's there is little to no diffrence between Emulation and Warez

How ever in most cases Emulation and Warez are not Piracy due to the fact that the illegal copys are not Sold.

Piracy as defined by Barron's Law Dictionary is as follows. "Piracy is also used to refer to the commercial reproduction and distribution of property protected by copyright, patent, trademark, or trade secret law."

The key word being Commercial hence sence the games/programs are not being reproduced for a profit(in most cases).. they are not Piracy, but they however still constute copyright infringement.

[Back To Zero]

Del_Boy are you against emulation of the PS2 and Xbox?

[Harmony]

Legally? There's really not that much difference, both are breaking the law. But the rules here have been decided as such, perhaps to cut down on the amount of copyrights that are being infringed, I don't know...

[Del_Boy]

Del_Boy are you against emulation of the PS2 and Xbox?

Not now, when they first came out then yes I would have been sternly opposed to it.

[Back To Zero]

I think i remember that.

[Cyberxion]

Originally posted by Del_Boy
Not now, when they first came out then yes I would have been sternly opposed to it.

I'm sorry, but I find that highly rediculous. There is no legal destinction between downloading a twenty year old Atari game, and a two year old XBox game. They are both against the law, and both are considered piracy. I understand that you might be a bit purturbed that pirating games from current systems takes away from revenue that Microsoft and Sony (and perhaps Nintendo if they ever properly crack the GC) would earn had people actually bought the game. I totally understand that. But honestly, you can't really hold the piracy of any one system in a different light then that of the next, because again, it's all illegal.
The way I see it is that if you are going to pirate games, then you really have no moral ground to stand on as far as being against the piracy of XBox and PS2 games. You are engaging in an illegal activity, and you are no better then anyone else who does it, regardless of which era the system you choose to pirate games from originates.

[GundamGuy]

Originally posted by Cyberxion
I'm sorry, but I find that highly rediculous. There is no legal destinction between downloading a twenty year old Atari game, and a two year old XBox game. They are both against the law, and both are considered piracy. I understand that you might be a bit purturbed that pirating games from current systems takes away from revenue that Microsoft and Sony (and perhaps Nintendo if they ever properly crack the GC) would earn had people actually bought the game. I totally understand that. But honestly, you can't really hold the piracy of any one system in a different light then that of the next, because again, it's all illegal.
The way I see it is that if you are going to pirate games, then you really have no moral ground to stand on as far as being against the piracy of XBox and PS2 games. You are engaging in an illegal activity, and you are no better then anyone else who does it, regardless of which era the system you choose to pirate games from originates.

If what you said is true then Driving 36 in a 35mph zone is no diffrent then Murder because they are both illegal..

or if you want to get picky then how about first degree manslaughter is no diffrent then murder because in both someone ends up dead and they are both illegal..

You are engaging in an illegal activity, and you are no better then anyone else who does it, regardless of which era the system you choose to pirate games from originates.

Also i missed the part when he said how he is better then everyone else just because he dose not agree with piracy of XBox and PS2

But other then that you have strong arguments...

[Mason]

Originally posted by GundamGuy
If what you said is true then Driving 36 in a 35mph zone is no diffrent then Murder because they are both illegal..

or if you want to get picky then how about first degree manslaughter is no diffrent then murder because in both someone ends up dead and they are both illegal..

Your example needs some work. You chose completely different crimes. Now if you'd compared murdering some random person off the street compared to murdering a rapist, then you might have a point. But trying to compare speeding with murder is like trying to compare piracy with embezzlement. They aren't the same crime, they aren't even the same category of crime.

[Cyberxion]

Originally posted by GundamGuy
If what you said is true then Driving 36 in a 35mph zone is no diffrent then Murder because they are both illegal..

or if you want to get picky then how about first degree manslaughter is no diffrent then murder because in both someone ends up dead and they are both illegal..



Also i missed the part when he said how he is better then everyone else just because he dose not agree with piracy of XBox and PS2

But other then that you have strong arguments...

Don't be silly Gundam Guy. You are picking nits here. First off, there is absolutely no destinction between pirating a system from twenty years ago, and pirating a current one as far as the law is concerned, while there is a HUGE destinction between murdering someone, and speeding! That analogy, and your first degree manslaughter/murder analogy are poor. They have no relevance to the discussion at hand.

Anyway, my whole point was that piracy is piracy. If a person pirates games, no matter what system or era in gaming they come from, then that person would be a hypocrite for holding any form of piracy in a different light then another. Del_Boy never said in so many words that he's better then those who pirate games from current systems, but the fact that he'd be opposed to it would indicate that he believes his form of piracy to somehow be prefferable, or less wrong. Again, I'll state that piracy is piracy as far as the law is concerned. To them, what he's doing is no less illegal then pirating PS2 or XBox games, so why should Del_Boy be so against it? What makes the piracy of older games more acceptable then pirating newer systems in Del_Boy's eyes? If you are going to engage in piracy of any form, then you have no real right to be bothered morally by any one form of it over another. Do you understand where I'm coming from now?

At any rate, this is irrelevant, as Del_Boy has stated that he's not against it now. His statement just got me thinking of how hypocritical it would be for someone who pirates games of any kind, to be against piracy in any form, no matter how wrong it may be.

My point in a nutshell: The law doesn't distinct between different forms of piracy, so why should he? It's illegal. ALL OF IT. If you are going to engage in it, then you are ingaging in illegal activities. NUFF SAID. There is nothing that makes pirating current games any worse in the laws eyes then pirating old games, so why should pirates create destinctions? That's my point in a nutshell for all those unwilling or unable to read my above post.

[neogeomad]

Another angle to look it from is that companies don't seem to mind really old games being downloaded (hell you can't even buy some of them nowadays, much less the hardware). It's unlikely someone's gonna go to jail downloading commodore and atari games or sega will sue someone over their illegit rips of sega game gear rom set.

[GundamGuy]

Originally posted by Maison Gray
Your example needs some work. You chose completely different crimes. Now if you'd compared murdering some random person off the street compared to murdering a rapist, then you might have a point. But trying to compare speeding with murder is like trying to compare piracy with embezzlement. They aren't the same crime, they aren't even the same category of crime.

Yes the speeding one is a little far fetched thats why i included an better example.. namly first degree manslaughter, and Murder.... there is a very fine line between the two.. and yes i know that even that ex has poor backings..

if your say im picky then i might as well be picky... Emulation is not Priacy... its Copyright Infrengment.. due to the fact that there is no selling of copyright infenging property..however if money were exchanged for roms/iso then that would be Priacy..

Sure the law does not differenate between diffrent forms of Copyright Infrengment.. but that dose not mean that there is no diffrence.. i can prove this through Consequentialism... what are the consequences of downloading and emulation an NES rom... There are very few.. the company that produced the game loses very little money, if any, and thats about it. How ever just for the sake of argument say you download an GCN ISO and can play it.. the company loses a great deal of money that they had ivested in that game, if enought people download it then it could possibly forcing a young company to go bankrupt.(far fetched but possible) however if the same amount of people download the Nes game then the company is not effected to as great as an extent. the diffrence in that case is almost the diffrence between speeding and murder..(though that is far fetched i know.)

So what im saying in a nut shell is that Del_Boy logic (or who ever thinks that emulating one system is less moral or not as good) believes more in Consequentialism or the Consequences of an action determ wether the action is good or bad.. as compared to your more Deontological theory(Means not ends).. however they are both true and should both be valued. Ergo You should not say that its hypricital to value the emulation of one system over another.

[Mason]

All depends which eyes you're looking at it from. From the view of the law, it's illegal, there are no shades of gray. Murdering a rapist, while probably being a good thing in taking a rapist permanently off of the streets, is still murder, and still illegal.

Same thing with emulation. While copying a NES rom likely isn't taking money out of creator's hands, it's still "copyright infringement," and therefore still illegal. You can try and justify it 25 ways to Sunday but at the end of the day it's still illegal.

In the end it comes down to this: Cyberxion and Del_Boy are both right from their points of view. As to which viewpoint is "correct" is a discussion for another day. =)

[Cyberxion]

Originally posted by Maison Gray
While copying a NES rom likely isn't taking money out of creator's hands, it's still "copyright infringement," and therefore still illegal. You can try and justify it 25 ways to Sunday but at the end of the day it's still illegal.

Read this and understand it Gundamguy. That's the point I was trying to make. I actually understand Del_Boy's position. As Maison pointed out, copying an NES rom isn't likely to deprive the development team out of any well earned dollars, whereas the downloading of a PS2 game does. However, from a legal standpoint, what he's doing is no less illegal then what those who are downloading PS2 and XBox games are doing. As it's been pointed out before, it's all copyright infringement. I was merely questioning the rational of attempting to justify one form of copyright infringment over the other. Anyway, I tried to stir up decent conversation, which has happened. I'm completely satisfied.