Re: n...

["joshua fraim" <joshf@efn.org>]

    the law that i read is that if something hasn't been supported for more
than 2 years it's public domain.  c64 and all the old non macintosh
computers fall in the catagory.  if companies try to shut you down by trying
to tell you otherwise then you can sue for harrasment.

    there have been games for those computers that have been rereleased into
other computers or game consoles but those aren't the same as the original.
for example even though pacman has been released a uncountable amount of
times on just about every platform, that doesn't mean that pacman for a
commadore 64 or apple should not be free.

    unfortunately the one thing that is bringing emulation into the eyes of
the law is the emulating of the newer systems like the super nintendo and
genesis and worse of all playstation and other new systems.  what really
ticks me off is the idiots that charge for their emulators.  the biggest
idiots are the ones that made that playstation emulator and then released it
to the public for sale.  that is gonna be the downfall for all emulation not
just the new ones.

    i only hope that a year or two from now we will still be able to enjoy
classic arcade and computer games lawfully AND find them as easily as we can
now.

"bill_h" <bill_h@sunsouthwest.com> wrote in message
384B57B0.822@sunsouthwest.com">news:384B57B0.822@sunsouthwest.com...
> Jeff Blakeney wrote:
>
> > I've been trying to stay out of this round of idiocy but, to take
> > things to an extreme for a moment, by your argument, someone who
> > murders another person and doesn't get caught and/or charged did not
> > actually do something illegal.
>
> That pretty well sums up the concept of ''assumption of innocence''.
>
> The Courts decide what's legal and illegal. And, by and large, they
> are more influenced by money and show than truth and logic.
>
> Just reflect back to the Simpson trial.
>
> Justice, in a system like that, is an illusion.
>
> Bill
> Tucson
>