Re: What about an Apple Gamebase ?

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Sean Fahey writes ...
> 
 ....
> 
> For the sake of accuracy, let's establish some facts:
> 
> 1.) Current copyright laws grant holders amazing lengths of time to protect
> their assets, and guarantees avenues of remedy when their rights
> (entitlements) are violated.
> 
> 2.) Copying copyrighted media without the publisher's/author's permission is
> theft, unless a license or agreement states it's OK to do so.

     To legally qualify as "theft", something of value must be taken. Oldie
software is generally considered to have no significant market value to the
rights holder. Freely distributing or downloading oldie software does not meet
the tests for loss established by statute relating to copyrights. There is no
crime.

     If your claim is that any legally defined "software piracy" is happening,
you can forget it.

     The main "theft" concern is ethical-- i.e. is it right to offer oldie
commercial software for download? And, is it right/okay to download the
software? For bunches of reasons discussed may times, the answer to both
questions is "Yes".


> 
> 3.) Most of the software that is downloaded, was at one time, commercially
> sold product, with copyrights intact. Also, the anti-copying protections
> originally placed on said software were circumvented specifically for the
> purpose of illegally distibuting the "cracked" version of the product.

     15-20 years ago, when the software was being sold by SSI, Origin, etc.,
illegal distribution was only one reason for cracking. 

     Another reason was for purchasers of originals to have a backup (which is
allowed by law). Some copy protection schemes which are critical about things
like alignment and timing eventually lead to disk failure.

     Most software has bugs. Having a deprotected copy allows patching to fix
important bugs which may never be fixed via an update from the company which
released the software.


> 
> 4.) Due to the obvious current market realities, it is not practical or cost
> effective for a company such as the ones you mentioned to investigate and
> pursue legal action

     Check the news.answers ("USENET") FAQs. Every known Apple II source for
oldie commercial software is listed along with links. For sure, finding the
FAQs is a snap. Once there, it would take, maybe, a couple hours for a company
rep to track down any listings of the company's A2 software and fire off
"Please remove ..." messages to archive admins.

     Any software rights owner who wants software removed from A2 archives can
do it easily and cheaply.



> - there is no benefit or cost reduction in reducing
> Apple II piracy,

     There may be a few guys swapping copies of currently sold IIgs software;
don't know. Otherwise, in 2004, there's no such thing as "Apple II piracy".



> nor is there much benefit in protecting their
> (intellectual) assets unless they can be sold, rejuvenated or otherwise
> made profitable again.

     Your premise is false. A company which keeps silent on free distribution
of its oldie A2 software does not give up its rights.

     And, if there is any rejuvenation of some oldie game on another platform,
the company will benefit from years of exposure of the product via playing by
Apple II (C64, Atari, ...) users.



> This is partially the same reason why long-time companies
> may not "free" their software. Examples: resurgence in retro-style arcades,
> old video games being reinvented and modernized (Prince of Persia) create
> new licensing and revenue opportunites. The reality is that companies don't
> like to give things away for free (generally speaking).

     Depends. Companies are often willing to move oldies to public domain-- so
long as someone in a company can guarantee that it still owns the oldie product
and the status change is not too much of a hassle.

     On the other hand, it's unlikely that a company would risk losing control
of any brand names, etc. relating to current releases. For instance, Origin
would probably not want to place the original "Ultima I" in public domain.

     In general, the best stance for a company is to have no stated stance
about free distribution of its oldie wares. It derives the benefits of having
its name and the name of some game series, etc. promoted; and, it retains all
of its rights.


> 
> For the sake of convenience, lets establish at least one belief:
> 
> 1.) Because the original publishers (assuming they're still in business)
> aren't actively investigating, suing or otherwise protecting their brands
> and intellectual property, it might be interpreted that they have
> "abandoned" their product to the public domain.

     That is a popular argument in some places. The "abondonware" idea never
made much headway here, at least in the sense of affecting ownership. There
seems to be no strong legal grounds for asserting that doing nothing equates to
giving up ownership. 

     The Apple II community is pretty consistent about supporting ownership
rights. If anything, owners and developers here probably have more say about
where and under what conditions software may be listed than anywhere else.



> Who out there supports 20 year-old software?
 ....

     Well, I do. So do some other developers. Companies? Not likely, at least
not officially. (Doesn't mean you might not find someone at Origin, Sir-Tech,
... who will try to help with a problem.)


 ....

> 
> I think some of the existing developers who still support the II are
> concerned with the casual attitude some people may have about copying. It's
> not like fortunes are being made or lost anymore - some guys are lucky to
> get pizza money. Silvern Castle is an example - a LOT of people played it,
> it was a VERY popular download - but except for a tiny few, no one
> registered their copy or paid the modest shareware fee. Today it's free only
> due to the generosity of Jeff Fink.
 ....

     Tried the game a couple years ago and enjoyed several hours of playing.
But, then, there was another update with all sorts of directions for
continuing. So, at least part of the problem with SC was the confusing barrage
of updates and new releases. A lot of players probably wondered when the thing
was going to be finished.



Rubywand