“Most of the world’s video games from close to 50 years of history are effectively, legally dead. A Video Games History Foundation study found you can’t buy nearly 90% of games from before 2010. Preservationists have been looking for ways to allow people to legally access gaming history, but the U.S. Copyright Office dealt them a heavy blow Friday. Feds declared that you or any researcher has no right to access old games under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA.”

  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    136
    ·
    28 days ago

    That’s cool. Won’t really stop any of the shit that’s been happening though.

    Good luck corpos, for every pirate you take away ten more will take their place.

    hack the planet

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      28 days ago

      Guess I don’t understand, are they saying places Like Vintage Stock that sells old games illegal? Or are they talking about digital backups of these games. Regardless fuck them and the copyright office. This makes me want to pirate more not less.

      • Bazoogle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        28 days ago

        I answered your question on another thread of the same topic, but I’ll answer it here too for anyone else who has the same question: The law is just about digital backups. Vintage stores are still legal, and if anything this would boost sales at a vintage stores. If the game you’d like to play is unavailable at a vintage store or on eBay (or wherever else) then it will be entirely inaccessible for you to play legally.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          28 days ago

          So if I’m understanding what you are saying correctly this is pro “book” burning. Only in this case it is games. If a group or entity wants to make a piece of history more scarce or wipe it from the planet because they disagree with it, buying up or destroying as many physical copies that exist would work because people legally can’t back them up or print more copies essentially?

          • lad@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            28 days ago

            The IP owner can print more, but if the owner is gone or legally unclear, then yes. Although I don’t think this was the real intention, because greed looks like a simpler reason and fits

  • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    130
    ·
    28 days ago

    Read a comment a while ago that if libraries weren’t a thing today and someone would propose them, the FBI would be on their ass and stalk after them for even suggesting such radical views. Copyright law is utterly broken and a disservice to society in it’s current form and execution. Politicians need to get their fat fingers out of the stock market by law.

    • tehn00bi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      28 days ago

      I really feel like the source code needs to be released after 25 years. We need to be able to protect older games.

      • wavebeam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        28 days ago

        I’ve been saying that we need to have a law on the books to require any online components of a game be required to have the source to those features be released upon closure of the online service. I would be fine with them then being except from any security liability for anyone who gets hacked by use of that software and even retaining ownership of the IP, so no one could sell access to the service, but being able to stand up fan-run servers for old Xbox-live games or dead MMOs more easily would be really great. I’m locked out of so many PlayStation trophies simply because online servers have been down for ages now.

  • mPony@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    28 days ago

    FTA

    Industry groups argued that those museums didn’t have “appropriate safeguards” to prevent users from distributing the games once they had them in hand. They also argued that there’s a “substantial market” for older or classic games, and a new, free library to access games would “jeopardize” this market. Perlmutter agreed with the industry groups.

    So as long as someone, somewhere, might make a penny off of them, they can’t be free. Insert your own metaphor here.

    • zarenki@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      28 days ago

      This argument is even more ridiculous than it seems. During the copyright office hearing for this exemption request (back in April), the people arguing in favor of libraries talked about the measures they have in place. They don’t just let people download a ROM to use in any emulator they please. It’s not even one of those browser-based emulators where you can pull the ROM data out of your browser cache if you know how. It’s a video stream of an emulator running on a server managed by the library, with plenty enough latency to make it very clearly a worse gaming experience.

      It’s far easier to find ROMs of these games elsewhere than it is to contact a librarian and ask for access to a protected collection, so there’d be no reason to redistribute the files even if they were offered, which they aren’t.

      On top of that, this exemption request was explicitly limited to old games that have been long unavailable on the market in any form, which seems like an insane limitation to put on libraries, places that have always held collections of books both new and old.

      All of that is still not enough to sate the US Copyright Office, the ESA, AACS, or DVD CSS. Those three were the organizations that fought against this.

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        28 days ago

        There is a difference there in that these are digital copies (easy to make more copies) vs physical books (hard to make more copies).

        That said, the only reason this is an issue is copyright lasts too long on relatively short lived games. If copyright on games was a more reasonable “15 years since their last major revision”, this wouldn’t be a problem.

        • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          28 days ago

          There is a difference there in that these are digital copies (easy to make more copies) vs physical books (hard to make more copies).

          Libraries rent out ebooks too, also easily stripped of DRM and copied if someone wants to so that. But that is seemingly not an issue.

          • Bazoogle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            28 days ago

            As someone who may or may not have stripped DRM from library books, they certainly never seemed to care about that. And it was never even to share, but rather to store for myself so I could read it at my own pace. And the worst part… I read it for RECREATIONAL USE

            • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              28 days ago

              it was never even to share, but rather to store for myself so I could read it at my own pace. And the worst part… I read it for RECREATIONAL USE

              You disgust me…what a sick and exploitive attitude.

          • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            28 days ago

            Libraries rent out ebooks too

            Libraries loan out ebooks and other media.

             

            /pet peeve.

          • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            28 days ago

            What he’s saying is not beyond what Congress has previously laid down though. First sale doctrine should let you do whatever you want, but they actually banned renting phonographs because they thought people were recording them on tape. We’re lucky they didn’t outlaw movie rentals too back in the day. Whole copyright regime needs to die in a fire.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      28 days ago

      They also argued that there’s a “substantial market” for older or classic games, and a new, free library to access games would “jeopardize” this market. Perlmutter

      And if that market demand isn’t being catered to, or is being actively refused to be served, is there any wonder people are finding other ways to get that stuff?

      All they’re doing is hoarding this old software and preventing its use based on the speculation that they might eventually figure out a way to profit from long gone developers work.

    • Bazoogle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      28 days ago

      The most popular games will likely continue to get pirated, all this will do is guarantee that some small vintage games are lost to time.

  • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    28 days ago

    It sounds like the problem is not with the feds but with the DMCA. It needs to be overturned.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    28 days ago

    Feds are wrong, or would be if copyright continued to serve its original purpose (according to the Constitution of the United States) to create a robust public domain.

    All media should be accessible through public libraries, and arguments by federal courts presumes that the public does not have vested interest in content. It presumes the government isn’t there to serve the public, which raises questions as to why we have government in the first place.

    • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      27 days ago

      Correctamundo! Intellectual property law is yet another thing that needs reform. I don’t even like the term “intellectual property”. It’s a modern invention. For thousands of years everybody just repeated what they saw other people do, in a process called “the spread of civilization.” It worked great until inventions like the printing press created opportunities for business people who didn’t create anything to get rich by getting exclusive rights to other people’s ideas. But even then, copyright was always something you held not something you “owned”. The modern IP industry has done a very effective job at converting everybody to think of rights as property and infringement as theft. We need to return to the original concept that creators, who used to be freely imitated, can temporarily have exclusive rights to what they create because the public lets them. There’s nothing evil about this, it’s just a return to sanity.

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        27 days ago

        IMHO, RFK jr is pro environment and anti big phama. He changes his policies based on fashion more than money. He is populist, not corporatist.

        Both the Republican and Democrat parties are corporatist because of lobbying. Nothing to do with Trump. If we voted Hillary and Kamala then the same court outcome would occur.

    • timetraveller@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      27 days ago

      So weird because as a kid, I would rent these video games day 1 from the local library… free of charge.

      What is the issue now that they are retro. Shame.

      Thankful to have all mine… back… up… and running.

  • wavebeam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    28 days ago

    They’re right. I have been using old videos games for recreation. Too bad that they’ve decided to prevent me from paying for the privilege or at least being tracked through library usage and have instead decided it’d be better if I was just an untrackable “criminal”

    Either way, I’m enjoying these old games and living my life guilt free.

    • Bazoogle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      28 days ago

      You’d better not also be reading books for fun. By their logic, any recreational use of books from a library should also be considered illegal.

    • FreakinSteve@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      27 days ago

      The purpose of the US government is to create as many criminals as possible to put in gulags and sell into slavery. That has ALWAYS been the history of the US. There has NEVER been any “freedom” involved. Oh, Bill of Rights, you say?..NONE of them stop what I just laid out, and those rights were reserved for a very limited group of people and you are not one of them

    • seaQueue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      Pearson is trying really fucking hard to write that out of the public consciousness. I took an econ 101 class about 12y ago for funsies and the section of the course on copyright insisted that “the rights of copyright owners” were absolute with no exemptions.

      • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        28 days ago

        Of course, it’s in their best interests to falsely educate.

        IMO when it comes to educational books that are intended to be used within an educational system like a college, first amendment shouldn’t apply. The entire purpose is to educate the public your freedom of speech interferes with facts. Should it be found that your books consciously represented misinformation, the company is automatically found at fault and must recall then replace all books at their own cost and be fined tens of thousands of dollars per book that remains after five years.

        Should they fail to replace 80% of all sold books within those 5 years, the entire chain of command responsible will face prison terms no lower than one year.

        There were so many textbooks I had through my years of education that were blatantly wrong.

        I’m also looking at those schools who want to teach creationism in place of evolution. Can’t misrepresent facts when the books you can use get recalled.

      • desktop_user
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        28 days ago

        how do the rights of the copyright holders interact with CCTV?

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      28 days ago

      Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

      1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
      2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
      3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
      4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

      The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

      I’m no lawyer, but I can’t really find a way that fair use is applicable in this case. Also point 4 is taken into consideration here. And no I obviously don’t agree that games shouldn’t be allowed in libraries. The law should be changed. I just don’t see how fair use is relevant.

      • reddig33@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        28 days ago

        See also first sale doctrine:

        “Lending of physical books held by the library is permitted under the first sale doctrine. In other instances, such as making copies of articles and checking them out to students, libraries may rely on fair use to justify course reserves. A recent landmark case related to electronic reserves is Cambridge v. Patton, in which a group of publishers sued Georgia State University for their liberal e-reserves policy. The courts held GSU to be the prevailing party, finding fair use in the majority of alleged infringements”

        https://guides.library.oregonstate.edu/copyright/libraries#:~:text=to course reserves%3F-,A.,use to justify course reserves.

        See also Ben Franklin:

        https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-ben-franklin-invented-library-as-we-know-it-180983983/

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          28 days ago

          Interesting.

          If you click the first link under :

          Q. How does copyright apply to library lending? What is the “first sale doctrine” and how does it apply to libraries? Why are the rules for lending e-books different than print books? How does copyright relate to used book sales?

          http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#109

          You get a legal text which is almost completely unreadable to me.

          But the law explicitly mentions video games:

          (B) This subsection does not apply to—

          (i) a computer program which is embodied in a machine or product and which cannot be copied during the ordinary operation or use of the machine or product; or

          (ii) a computer program embodied in or used in conjunction with a limited purpose computer that is designed for playing video games and may be designed for other purposes.

          © Nothing in this subsection affects any provision of chapter 9 of this title.

          Do I understand the section above that? Hell no. It’s in a foreign language to me (literally and figuratively).

          I feed the entire section to chatGPT and asked it about libraries and video games. It says that video games generally aren’t allowed to be lend at libraries. It’s AI so take it with a grain of salt but to be fair LLMs are pretty good at analysing large amounts of text like this. But if you can read it, I encourage you to do that instead.