Sony and Nintendo Step Up Anti-Piracy Efforts [Slashdot]

[DP ServBot]

Edge reports that Sony and Nintendo are both expanding their anti-piracy operations in an effort to reduce piracy rates on the PSP and the DS respectively. Nintendo has hired Neil Boyd, who handled anti-piracy operations for Warner Brothers, to help them demonstrate their "willingness to take action against criminals who are making money out of the infringement of games developers' copyright." Sony has taken a more direct approach, choosing to alter the hardware used in the PSP Go so that things like the Pandora battery can no longer be used to alter the firmware.http://games.slashdot.org/slashdot-it.pl?from=rss&op=image&style=h0&sid=09/09/01/044224 (http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/09/01/044224/Sony-and-Nintendo-Step-Up-Anti-Piracy-Efforts?from=rss)
Read more of this story (http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/09/01/044224/Sony-and-Nintendo-Step-Up-Anti-Piracy-Efforts?from=rss) at Slashdot.
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Rr66bK7qTXYoz6uwoXSqzLWExQc/0/di</img> (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Rr66bK7qTXYoz6uwoXSqzLWExQc/0/da)
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Rr66bK7qTXYoz6uwoXSqzLWExQc/1/di</img> (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Rr66bK7qTXYoz6uwoXSqzLWExQc/1/da)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Slashdot/slashdotGames/~4/qrA2on2pSLM

More... (http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdotGames/~3/qrA2on2pSLM/Sony-and-Nintendo-Step-Up-Anti-Piracy-Efforts)

[kaedesdisciple]

Meh, board up the door and hackers will come in through the windows. Board up the windows and hackers will come in through the chimney. Board up the chimney and hackers will figure out a way past the boards in the door that you put up X years ago and thought were safe. This is a never-ending cycle.

[RPG_Fanatic]

Wait till they hack the PSP-GO and people just start loading UMD games and homebrew on it. You know it will happen, they do it every time they update the firmware on the PSP.

[IcBlUsCrN]

Wait till they hack the PSP-GO and people just start loading UMD games and homebrew on it. You know it will happen, they do it every time they update the firmware on the PSP.


and i hope they do it in record time, just like the iphone hack come out before the software.
i dont like piracy but hate the idea of psp go more.

[Ponyone]

There are three things in life you can be sure of... death, taxes and workarounds to anti-piracy efforts.

[Zthun]

Edge reports that Sony and Nintendo are both expanding their anti-piracy operations in an effort to reduce piracy rates on the PSP and the DS respectively. Nintendo has hired Neil Boyd, who handled anti-piracy operations for Warner Brothers, to help them demonstrate their "willingness to take action against criminals who are making money out of the infringement of games developers' copyright." Sony has taken a more direct approach, choosing to alter the hardware used in the PSP Go so that things like the Pandora battery can no longer be used to alter the firmware.

This is what always gets me about anti-piracy. Nobody seems to get the idea that it takes ONE GROUP to crack the game and offer it on the internet. Once that happens, the game is up for grabs to anyone who understands the concept of 'follow instructions.'

I can't disagree with Sony and Nintendo's policies here; but this is just pointless like all anti-piracy operations. It's like kaedesdisciple said, they'll just find a way around it.

[chrisbid]

This is what always gets me about anti-piracy. Nobody seems to get the idea that it takes ONE GROUP to crack the game and offer it on the internet. Once that happens, the game is up for grabs to anyone who understands the concept of 'follow instructions.'

I can't disagree with Sony and Nintendo's policies here; but this is just pointless like all anti-piracy operations. It's like kaedesdisciple said, they'll just find a way around it.

but it seems nintendo is focusing more on going after REAL pirates, you know the people making money selling bootlegs. this should be the focus of anti-piracy efforts, lumping these people in with people that simply want to use their PSPs to their full potential is unfair.

[kedawa]

Nobody has managed to hack the PS3 yet, so I would say Sony's strategy of securing their hardware has at least some chance of success. Nintendo, on the other hand, is screwed.

[The 1 2 P]

Pirates are like a bad rash. No matter how much it clears up over time, eventually it comes back even worse....and a whole lot more itchier.

[Jorpho]

Once that happens, the game is up for grabs to anyone who understands the concept of 'follow instructions.' And yet, if you can make it so that list of instructions just a teensy bit difficult to follow, you can at least severely diminish the range of people for whom the game is up for grabs.

[guitargary75]

They are lucky I'm too stupid to figure it out. I actually have to pay for all of my games.

[kupomogli]

I have downgraded firmware but I don't play pirated games. Except for Dissidia because I wanted to play it without waiting for a US release and didn't want to import a game I knew was going to be released here.

[Ponyone]

I have downgraded firmware but I don't play pirated games. Except for Dissidia because I wanted to play it without waiting for a US release and didn't want to import a game I knew was going to be released here.

So basically you play pirated games?

[kupomogli]

A pirated game. Not plural. I'm not going to import a game I'm 100% sure it's getting a US release and I'm for sure going to buy it(and currently now own it.) I get what you mean though. I contradicted myself in the same post :P.

I meant I haven't played any pirated games other than Dissidia since it was going to get a US release.

[Kid Ice]

A pirated game. Not plural. I'm not going to import a game I'm 100% sure it's getting a US release and I'm for sure going to buy it(and currently now own it.) I get what you mean though. I contradicted myself in the same post :P.

I meant I haven't played any pirated games other than Dissidia since it was going to get a US release.

Sometimes your bullshit is almost kind of an art.

[Ed Oscuro]

but it seems nintendo is focusing more on going after REAL pirates, you know the people making money selling bootlegs.
Also, people downloading Contra Rebirth for free.

[darkwingduck13]

I just think it's pure bullshit that Sony made the PSP capable of playing PSOne games and then locked it down so we'd have to rebuy our PSOne collections to play them again. It's not even a question of changing media, like it was with the tape-to-CD or VHS-to-DVD scenario. I already bought a crapload of PSOne games. I'm not buying them again on some retarded download service. Hopefully the PSP Go gets cracked wide open ASAP. I want to see that ship sink like a stone.

[Oobgarm]

Also, people downloading Contra Rebirth for free.

Also, people circumventing the German anti-penis pussy laws.

[kaedesdisciple]

I just think it's pure bullshit that Sony made the PSP capable of playing PSOne games and then locked it down so we'd have to rebuy our PSOne collections to play them again. It's not even a question of changing media, like it was with the tape-to-CD or VHS-to-DVD scenario. I already bought a crapload of PSOne games. I'm not buying them again on some retarded download service. Hopefully the PSP Go gets cracked wide open ASAP. I want to see that ship sink like a stone.

So, what you're saying is that all those people who put hard work into figuring out exactly how to play PS1 games on the PSP shouldn't be compensated? People's sense of entitlement around the media they think they own is mind-boggling sometimes. You didn't purchase the software for those games, you purchased a license to use it on the console that the owner of the license determined. Additionally, it IS a question of changing media, you're going from the format that is compatible with the PS1 to the format that is compatible with the PSP. If the owner wishes to publish the game on another platform and put in the effort to make sure those games work properly on said console, they have every right to be compensated for doing so.

You don't want it? Speak with your wallet and don't buy it, but don't try to come up with a justification for piracy.

[kupomogli]

You don't want it? Speak with your wallet and don't buy it, but don't try to come up with a justification for piracy.

I go to sites like QJ.net also and some people there bash Sony all day long, like they hope the PSP fails, etc. Basically uses the fact that they have firmware that they won't ever purchase a game they have and use excuses like the PSP has "no good games" which is why they download them all. It's sad, because if the system had no good games, why would they download them all?

Then there are those that say. Sony doesn't release demo's so I download the full versions and play a little bit to see if I like it then buy it. However, I can guarantee that little bit becomes the full game and they don't end up purchasing the games.

I don't like piracy on the system because it's my favorite system. The amount of games released on it, ported or otherwise, that are very good is nice for this generation. I think it even beats out the DS, though the DS runs fairly close as it has alot of good games too.

--
However, when it comes to PSX games. Sure you don't buy them from the PSN, or if they don't have them there to purchase you obviously don't buy it, but can it really be considered piracy if the PSX games you play are owned by you, even though not digital downloads? Say if you ripped your own copy of Tactics Ogre. It's not like you are downloading it from another source. You're using a legitimate copy you have in your home that you yourself own.

I could understand if the person is downloading a list of PSX games from rom sites, etc, because they don't own the games and Sony has the option of selling those games on the PSN. The only thing is that not everyone is trustworthy, so Sony doesn't know if one person is using a legitimate copy or if they're just pirating the software.

[darkwingduck13]

So, what you're saying is that all those people who put hard work into figuring out exactly how to play PS1 games on the PSP shouldn't be compensated? People's sense of entitlement around the media they think they own is mind-boggling sometimes. You didn't purchase the software for those games, you purchased a license to use it on the console that the owner of the license determined. Additionally, it IS a question of changing media, you're going from the format that is compatible with the PS1 to the format that is compatible with the PSP. If the owner wishes to publish the game on another platform and put in the effort to make sure those games work properly on said console, they have every right to be compensated for doing so.

You don't want it? Speak with your wallet and don't buy it, but don't try to come up with a justification for piracy.

Theoretically, assuming I bought a PSP at retail (I didn't...thank God for the used market, which they're also actively trying to eliminate with the PSP Go...but that's a different discussion), I have already compensated the people who made the games playable on the PSP. It's a device that's able to play (most) PSX games. I paid for it. Therefore, I compensated them. I didn't pirate anything to get that functionality. It's built into the device. Your argument basically assumes that I would be shipping my PSX games to Sony, having them convert the data, quality test the games, and then buy that finished product. If I want the quality testing, then sure, I can skip all the hassle and buy the PSN version. Otherwise, I can say "Screw that!" and do it myself. If it's bug-free, great, if not, I'll live.

To the last bit: I did speak with my wallet, and will continue to do so. I bought my PSP used. I buy the vast majority of my games used or on clearance at Target or Toys R Us. I'll also appreciate your further caution in calling people out for "supporting piracy," especially when you have no idea if the person voicing their opinion is engaging in said activity or not. I support digital rights and customer ownership.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Theoretically, assuming I bought a PSP at retail (I didn't...thank God for the used market, which they're also actively trying to eliminate with the PSP Go...but that's a different discussion), I have already compensated the people who made the games playable on the PSP. It's a device that's able to play (most) PSX games. I paid for it. Therefore, I compensated them. I didn't pirate anything to get that functionality. It's built into the device. Your argument basically assumes that I would be shipping my PSX games to Sony, having them convert the data, quality test the games, and then buy that finished product. If I want the quality testing, then sure, I can skip all the hassle and buy the PSN version. Otherwise, I can say "Screw that!" and do it myself. If it's bug-free, great, if not, I'll live.

To the last bit: I did speak with my wallet, and will continue to do so. I bought my PSP used. I buy the vast majority of my games used or on clearance at Target or Toys R Us. I'll also appreciate your further caution in calling people out for "supporting piracy," especially when you have no idea if the person voicing their opinion is engaging in said activity or not. I support digital rights and customer ownership.

Doesn't matter what you speak with, your initial post was pretty caustic and could easily be misconstrued as pro-piracy.

So, now that you've made your point that you have little to no interest in supporting Sony through new hardware/software purchases ... why do you feel that they should support your interests for free? There's no symbiosis here supporting your sense of entitlement.

Looks to me like your position is - I bought this system and all these games used (thus not directly funding its subsistence) - Sony should let me port all my PS1 games over for free!

As Kaedesdisciple stated, it's not as simple a process as you seem to assume it is - just because a system has the ability to emulate a specific software format does not mean that the PS1 games you purchased on disc, even brand new give you an end-user license to copy them over to another system to play in an emulated fashion.

[darkwingduck13]

Doesn't matter what you speak with, your initial post was pretty caustic and could easily be misconstrued as pro-piracy.

So, now that you've made your point that you have little to no interest in supporting Sony through new hardware/software purchases ... why do you feel that they should support your interests for free? There's no symbiosis here supporting your sense of entitlement.

Looks to me like your position is - I bought this system and all these games used (thus not directly funding its subsistence) - Sony should let me port all my PS1 games over for free!

As Kaedesdisciple stated, it's not as simple a process as you seem to assume it is - just because a system has the ability to emulate a specific software format does not mean that the PS1 games you purchased on disc, even brand new give you an end-user license to copy them over to another system to play in an emulated fashion.

It seems like you've pretty much ignored the entire first paragraph of my response, but that's all right.

You are right about one thing: I do feel entitled. I feel entitled to use the device I paid for (whether I paid Sony or not is irrelevant since someone at some point paid Sony for the device/games...they didn't get cloned or immaculately conceived!) for its intended purpose. In some cases, I feel entitled to use devices I've bought for purposes which they were not intended. If I want to use my PSP for a doorstop, it's not anyone's problem but my own. Sony has the funds from the purchase of my PSP, and they have the funds from the purchase of my PSX games. I'm not asking them to allow me to port anything. There's no "porting" involved. The word itself implies far more complexity than what is essentially the same as transferring a VHS tape to DVD media or a cassette tape to CD. Sony loses nothing when I transfer my PSX games to another device capable of playing them...a device which Sony has already been paid for. They simply want to make more money by selling the same thing multiple times.

All I'm asking is that they not actively seek to extort more money from people who have already paid their entry fee. God knows the whole world would come up in arms if all those DVD-VHS combo players suddenly lost the functionality of the VHS component...so it staggers me that people come out to actively defend Sony for what is basically the same situation.

Have fun buying all your PSX games again, if you're interested in playing them on your PSP. Once the Go comes out, have fun going through hoops trying to get all your UMD games on it, if you're interested. Sony's promised some kind of solution, but I'm betting it's not going to be free.

I wonder how many people will be happy to pay again (even some small amount) to get all their recently purchased UMDs working on a new version of the same system? I know I won't be one of them.

Maybe I'd have bought more things via retail from the start if Sony hadn't had their collective heads up their collective asses on this whole thing. It certainly wouldn't have hurt.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I ignored nothing, your sense of entitlement to be able to do what you want with the stuff you own is simply not correct.

It is a great, grand misconception in this world that people who purchase a copy of a game for a video game console have the "right" to do anything other than play it on the console it was developed for (or in some cases a future console which is built to accept compatible media).

Doesn't matter if you own a game on CD/DVD/Cartridge, you are granted no rights to make "backups" even if only intended for your own personal usage.

Your ownership of PS1 software on disc does not entitle you the right to copy them over to the PSP for usage. That process alone involves creating a copy of the software which is not a right that you have.

[tom]

Better to be a pirate than to join the navy (Steve Jobs)

[kaedesdisciple]

It seems like you've pretty much ignored the entire first paragraph of my response, but that's all right.

You are right about one thing: I do feel entitled. I feel entitled to use the device I paid for (whether I paid Sony or not is irrelevant since someone at some point paid Sony for the device/games...they didn't get cloned or immaculately conceived!) for its intended purpose. In some cases, I feel entitled to use devices I've bought for purposes which they were not intended. If I want to use my PSP for a doorstop, it's not anyone's problem but my own. Sony has the funds from the purchase of my PSP, and they have the funds from the purchase of my PSX games. I'm not asking them to allow me to port anything. There's no "porting" involved. The word itself implies far more complexity than what is essentially the same as transferring a VHS tape to DVD media or a cassette tape to CD. Sony loses nothing when I transfer my PSX games to another device capable of playing them...a device which Sony has already been paid for. They simply want to make more money by selling the same thing multiple times.

All I'm asking is that they not actively seek to extort more money from people who have already paid their entry fee. God knows the whole world would come up in arms if all those DVD-VHS combo players suddenly lost the functionality of the VHS component...so it staggers me that people come out to actively defend Sony for what is basically the same situation.

Have fun buying all your PSX games again, if you're interested in playing them on your PSP. Once the Go comes out, have fun going through hoops trying to get all your UMD games on it, if you're interested. Sony's promised some kind of solution, but I'm betting it's not going to be free.

I wonder how many people will be happy to pay (even some small amount) to get all their recently purchased UMDs working on a new version of the same system? I know I won't be one of them.

Maybe I'd have bought more things via retail from the start if Sony hadn't had their collective heads up their collective asses on this whole thing. It certainly wouldn't have hurt.

So, they're not allowed to "extort" more money from consumers by making it convenient for them to download games directly to their new device, but you're perfectly within your right to take software which you do not own and use it in a way which is not permitted by the EULA that you agreed to uphold. Before you argue that you own a PS1 game I'd like to see how you own the intellectual property, otherwise you simply own a disc with some 1's and 0's on it that you've been granted permission from the true owners to use in a set way. Or, maybe you feel that you're simply above the EULA because you bought the games second hand and don't support the developers directly. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how you're coming across.

By the way, your VHS-DVD comparison is fundamentally invalid here since, while VHS and DVD represent the same intellectual property, they are two different products. Whether the PS1 game is on a CD or on flash memory or a HDD, 1's and 0's are still 1's and 0's.

EDIT: Hey Frankie, looks like we were saying the same thing at the same time lol

[Nature Boy]

However, I can guarantee that little bit becomes the full game and they don't end up purchasing the games.

So basically you're trying to tell us that you're the *only* gamer with willpower and high morals and *everybody else* who happens to download a game for their PSP and claims they're just trying it and they'll buy it later is a liar.

(You *did* just tell us you've downloaded one game only, and that you'll buy it, right?)

Uh huh...


All I'm asking is that they not actively seek to extort more money from people who have already paid their entry fee.

Where's the extortion?

If you own Castlevania: SOTN for PS1 and you want to play it on your PSP, you have to buy it again. Just like you'd have to buy it again if you wanted to play it on your 360.

And just like you had to buy "Super Mario World" again when you wanted to play it on your GBA, even though you owned the SNES cart already.

Nowhere in those decisions is their any extortion, because nowhere is anybody forcing your or me to spend money.

I'm not anti-hacking, I'm just anti-justifying it by calling any of this stuff extortion.

[TonyTheTiger]

I'm not anti-hacking, I'm just anti-justifying it by calling any of this stuff extortion.

QFT. If people are going to hack (or straight up pirate) then so be it. You can make it more annoying for them but anybody who is dead set on doing it is going to find a way. What bugs me is the roundabout "logic" some of these people use to justify what they're doing. They work so hard to rationalize their behavior that it comes off as laughable. Just man up and tell it like it is. "I do this because I don't want to pay for the real deal." I have MP3s. It's wrong that I have them. But I do. I don't go around saying "Well, if these artists made better albums and didn't force you to pay for 15 garbage tracks to get the one or two good ones then blah blah blah...."

[kupomogli]

So basically you're trying to tell us that you're the *only* gamer with willpower and high morals and *everybody else* who happens to download a game for their PSP and claims they're just trying it and they'll buy it later is a liar.

(You *did* just tell us you've downloaded one game only, and that you'll buy it, right?)

Uh huh...

I'm not saying "all," but most people. I'm only saying there are those people that say that and probably do that.

Also. I said I downloaded it prior because I wasn't going to import a game that's getting a US release that I would end up purchasing. Also said I own the game now(preordered at Amazon with that 5OFF promo, came in a few days ago.)

[Icarus Moonsight]

Extortion implies force. Since you're not forced to buy any PSP game the term can not apply. If you can figure out for yourself, get someone to do it for you or find the information to allow your PSP to play iso images of your PS1 games, then you have earned the entitlement you are seeking. Nothing is free. You pay either in money or time. Your choice.

You want a portable PS1 (http://benheck.com/Games/Sony_projects/PSp/PSp%20page%201.htm)? Go out; get a PSOne, take it apart, modify the board, pay someone to furbish a case or do it yourself, buy an LCD screen online and put all the shit together. Makes cheap game downloads seem more reasonable huh? LOL

I support IP somewhat (I do think some of the laws are pretty draconian) I also greatly dislike the entitled attitude that proliferates these days.

[kedawa]

Attitudes like that just polarize opinions and drive people further away from legitimate games.
Equating the ripping and emulating of legally acquired games to actual software piracy isn't going to make them stop. If anything, it'll just cause them to stop acquiring their games legally to begin with. Afterall, if they're going to be branded a pirate either way, why should they continue spending money on legit games?

[Icarus Moonsight]

Who's post is that directed to?

[Nature Boy]

I'm not saying "all," but most people. I'm only saying there are those people that say that and probably do that.

If you're *not* trying to say 'all' then you need to re-evaluate what you type, because this:


However, I can guarantee that little bit becomes the full game and they don't end up purchasing the games.

Basically implies that you *did* mean "all."

Just a heads up dude.

[kupomogli]

Just a heads up dude.

I contradicted myself in the same post about "not pirating games, but the only one I did was Dissidia." I end up typing basically what I mean but don't really end up proof reading and rewording it how it should actually sound.

[Howie6925]

If PSPGO is going to be all digital download, will it play the psp games available on torrent site or are they going to be a different file format? (Dont blast me, I'm just asking :) ).

[Jorpho]

If PSPGO is going to be all digital download, will it play the psp games available on torrent site or are they going to be a different file format? (Dont blast me, I'm just asking :) ).Well, you have to admit that it would be extremely silly if Sony didn't at least try to take precautions against something like that. (Of course, the hackers will probably find some way around it eventually.)

[Zthun]

It is a great, grand misconception in this world that people who purchase a copy of a game for a video game console have the "right" to do anything other than play it on the console it was developed for (or in some cases a future console which is built to accept compatible media).

Doesn't matter if you own a game on CD/DVD/Cartridge, you are granted no rights to make "backups" even if only intended for your own personal usage.



I really want to see a legitimate source on this, because nobody can really point to what is legal where and everyone seems to have a different interpretation of what you can and can't do. If you're going to make a claim like this, I want to see this one in writing - what law/act, year, and clause. It seems like everything contradicts everything else.

There's a difference between downloading pirated games and making a backup. One is obviously illegal. The other is never clear.

[Howie6925]

Well, you have to admit that it would be extremely silly if Sony didn't at least try to take precautions against something like that. (Of course, the hackers will probably find some way around it eventually.)

yeah I guess it would be silly for them not to protect them selves against that.

[Nature Boy]

If you're going to make a claim like this, I want to see this one in writing

I happen to have a copy of Lego Batman with me. It happens to have, in writing, at the back, a rather *long* End User License Agreement that mentions (and I quote) "to use one copy of this Product solely and exclusively for your personal use"

Whether that would stand up in court should someone prosecute me for making a 'backup' to play on a second Xbox or not I don't know. But it's there.

(And no, I'm not making a backup of the game at all - I've got no reason to)

[Jorpho]

I gave up on trying to work out these legal things a long time ago.

It is vanishingly unlikely that anyone here is ever going to go to jail or face any kind of fine for playing a pirated game. Play what you want! And if it's something you really want to play, then you might as well support the developers. (Don't we all have enough perfectly-legal games in our backlogs already that we haven't played yet?)

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I really want to see a legitimate source on this, because nobody can really point to what is legal where and everyone seems to have a different interpretation of what you can and can't do. If you're going to make a claim like this, I want to see this one in writing - what law/act, year, and clause. It seems like everything contradicts everything else.

There's a difference between downloading pirated games and making a backup. One is obviously illegal. The other is never clear.

I'm no lawyer so don't expect specific "law/act", etc. but, I do know how to interpret legalese.

If you're interested in seeing these property rights in action just read any EULA (End User License Agreement) for any modern software for any console or portable.

You should be able to find one in the instruction manual for whatever game you're looking at.

Read it line-by-line, section by section.

You will not find any section which grants the user the right to make "backup" copies for personal use.

And, no, the absence of a line granting the right to make backup copies does not grant the right or make it a legal practice. Standard copyright law covers most things.

Now, back in the day - In some limited cases "backup" copies of software were allowed for personal use only - this was in an era where sensitive, easily corruptible through normal usage magnetic media was the standard/prevalent media format, since then, companies have not granted this right ... and it's been a loooooooong time since we've been buying running things on floppies.

[TonyTheTiger]

For the record, EULAs and the like have not had extensive testing in the courts. Just because something is written in one does not necessarily guarantee it will be upheld in a given situation. Whether or not a particular clause would be upheld in each of the infinite number of situations that could arise remains to be seen. The law in this area is vague at best. We know EULAs have some legitimacy but we don't know exactly where the limits are.

[Zthun]

You will not find any section which grants the user the right to make "backup" copies for personal use.

And, no, the absence of a line granting the right to make backup copies does not grant the right or make it a legal practice. Standard copyright law covers most things.


From what I've researched and understood, standard copyright allows you to make one backup copy for security reasons, such that you cannot modify any protection or codes through the transfer. Meaning, don't remove the copy protection if there is any. This makes it nearly impossible to do for games, so pretty much you're screwed if you wanted to make a legal backup anyway. But you do have the right to make a backup if it is possible.


I just think it's pure bullshit that Sony made the PSP capable of playing PSOne games and then locked it down so we'd have to rebuy our PSOne collections to play them again. It's not even a question of changing media, like it was with the tape-to-CD or VHS-to-DVD scenario. I already bought a crapload of PSOne games. I'm not buying them again on some retarded download service. Hopefully the PSP Go gets cracked wide open ASAP. I want to see that ship sink like a stone.

I'm going to say this. I really don't care if this is pro-piracy or not, but I am going to agree that it is bull-shit when companies don't have backwards compatibility. I can understand a cut-off point somewhere, but when you force users to have to re-buy all of the software/music/games/dvd, etc for a different format, you are asking for people to crack them.

Fact is, I won't rebuy everything ever time someone says such and such is the new format. I work, standard 9-5 job; I make pretty good money too, but that doesn't mean I have 10,000 dollars just lying around to convert everything I have to a new format anytime someone wakes up in the morning and says 'HEY, THERE'S AN IDEA!'. I'm not going to re-buy ALL my music CD's when I can just rip the CD into itunes and put the mp3s into my ipod. I'm not going to rebuy a blu-ray dvd when I can just rip the old dvd I have and burn it to a blu-ray disc. Downloading games illegally is one thing, converting your current format to the next gen is another.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

From what I've researched and understood, standard copyright allows you to make one backup copy for security reasons, such that you cannot modify any protection or codes through the transfer. Meaning, don't remove the copy protection if there is any. This makes it nearly impossible to do for games, so pretty much you're screwed if you wanted to make a legal backup anyway. But you do have the right to make a backup if it is possible.

If we're talking about modern software, which I assume we are - Modern "software" is licensed, it is not "sold" and it is not "owned" by the user who either buys it on disc or downloads it via a legal online distribution service.

When you buy a game on disc you do not own the contents of the disc, you own the right to play it on your video game console.

In the event that a company grants you the right to "transfer" that software to multiple compatible systems for usage that right is clearly outlined in the EULA.

I don't know where you're referencing these "security reasons" that would permit a user to make a backup copy for any reason ...

... if anybody with a broader, deeper knowledge of these things would like to clear this all up, please, be my guest, if not, here's some Wiki articles on EULA's and Software Copyright:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EULA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_copyright

[Poofta!]

Wait till they hack the PSP-GO and people just start loading UMD games and homebrew on it. You know it will happen, they do it every time they update the firmware on the PSP.

this will be the only way i buy the PSP-GO. even though i love the way the console looks, the idea behind it and the new features.

i love the psp as a console, probably my favorite console ever since it can play all the games from my other favorite consoles! (snes, ps1, genesis, and supposedly gba but i havent tried that).

plus i actually love a LOT of the psp games (i own 76 psp games). i refuse and see no need to get a GO unless i can do with it all the stuff i do with my current one. i will NOT rebuy a single piece of software and refuse to loose the awesome emuation. in fact i decided not to upgrade to a 3000 due to in part the same issue. (and the screen bug). i still have my 1000 and happily play my vader 2000 every chance i get.



Nobody has managed to hack the PS3 yet, so I would say Sony's strategy of securing their hardware has at least some chance of success. Nintendo, on the other hand, is screwed.

no one hacked the ps3 cause no one cares. honestly. with the danger of making this thread about ps3 vs 360 (please lets not, if its any consolation i own both and enjoy both -- differently), the ps3 has nothing to offer, okay maybe like 5% of its games are exclusive and probably 50% of those are worth getting. hackers will always go the path of least resistance which will yield identical or similar results, as far as pirates are concerned the xbox is the way to go. i have been part of the hacking 'scene' in one way or another since the mid 90s and have learned that much. (i dont do releases, please put down the pitchforks and torches =P )


I just think it's pure bullshit that Sony made the PSP capable of playing PSOne games and then locked it down so we'd have to rebuy our PSOne collections to play them again. It's not even a question of changing media, like it was with the tape-to-CD or VHS-to-DVD scenario. I already bought a crapload of PSOne games. I'm not buying them again on some retarded download service. Hopefully the PSP Go gets cracked wide open ASAP. I want to see that ship sink like a stone.

i agree, in that sense i guess i pirate, but its a gray area since i own them all in their original format (in fact i use the original disks to rip them to a psp format). 16bit and earlier stuff though, well i guess i pirate then ;)


Theoretically, assuming I bought a PSP at retail (I didn't...thank God for the used market, which they're also actively trying to eliminate with the PSP Go...but that's a different discussion), I have already compensated the people who made the games playable on the PSP. It's a device that's able to play (most) PSX games. I paid for it. Therefore, I compensated them. I didn't pirate anything to get that functionality. It's built into the device. Your argument basically assumes that I would be shipping my PSX games to Sony, having them convert the data, quality test the games, and then buy that finished product. If I want the quality testing, then sure, I can skip all the hassle and buy the PSN version. Otherwise, I can say "Screw that!" and do it myself. If it's bug-free, great, if not, I'll live.

To the last bit: I did speak with my wallet, and will continue to do so. I bought my PSP used. I buy the vast majority of my games used or on clearance at Target or Toys R Us. I'll also appreciate your further caution in calling people out for "supporting piracy," especially when you have no idea if the person voicing their opinion is engaging in said activity or not. I support digital rights and customer ownership.

*claps* =)


I ignored nothing, your sense of entitlement to be able to do what you want with the stuff you own is simply not correct.

It is a great, grand misconception in this world that people who purchase a copy of a game for a video game console have the "right" to do anything other than play it on the console it was developed for (or in some cases a future console which is built to accept compatible media).

Doesn't matter if you own a game on CD/DVD/Cartridge, you are granted no rights to make "backups" even if only intended for your own personal usage.

Your ownership of PS1 software on disc does not entitle you the right to copy them over to the PSP for usage. That process alone involves creating a copy of the software which is not a right that you have.

well then screw sony, screw the law and screw you for supporting it. i suppose im a criminal then.




By the way, your VHS-DVD comparison is fundamentally invalid here since, while VHS and DVD represent the same intellectual property, they are two different products. Whether the PS1 game is on a CD or on flash memory or a HDD, 1's and 0's are still 1's and 0's.

um LOL, what? you just identified how the comparison is IDENTICAL and perfect. vhs and dvd both contain the same product [film], converted from one format [magnetic tape] to another [1s and 0s] to run on updated hardware. ps1 games <now bear with me, heres where it gets funny> same product [game] converted from one format [cd] to another [flash/HDD] to run on updated hardware. lol.

but i will argue what sony is doing is even worse, if the update between vhs-dvd-HD at least upped the quality and often time added features, sony is just selling the same old shit but letting me use it on a different platform for my convenience (even though the platform can do it natively). well since they own the IP its their right, but i say F that and i choose not to support it. it may be legal but it certainly is not ethical, in my opinion anyway, and the only ethics anyone follows are their own (although there are people who share the same view)



Where's the extortion?

If you own Castlevania: SOTN for PS1 and you want to play it on your PSP, you have to buy it again. Just like you'd have to buy it again if you wanted to play it on your 360.

And just like you had to buy "Super Mario World" again when you wanted to play it on your GBA, even though you owned the SNES cart already.


while youre right extortion is the wrong word (im guessing he used it for shock value), it is not quite how you put it. SOTN on psp is a different game of sorts than the ps1 version. it's source code was heavily updated (to add widescreen, 2nd game, menus etc) same for it on 360, same for the mario on gba (i purchased sotn on ps1 and psp, and mario for snes and gba, for the record). what we're against it seems is selling an identical dump of a ps1 game we already own, but putting it in a container psp can read. basically the psp could read the game by itself from the get go, sony just didnt want us to do it ourselves. well we can, so middle finger to sony. i guess its the greed that irks us. sony like i said is well within its right to do this, legally, but that doesnt make it nice ;) . it is poor business practice.

you piss off your fans and your fans will cease to take care of you. you try to strong arm your fans and you make rebellious enemies.

food for thought: ps1 ff7 is released on psn and is identical to putting my real ff7 disk into the drive and playing. however if i copy (not saying its possible, just saying IF) that disk to the HD of my ps3 so i dont have to get up every time to play it, im a criminal. is sony allowed to do this? legally yes. but is it fair? do we all just blindly follow every law? has history taught us nothing?


Attitudes like that just polarize opinions and drive people further away from legitimate games.
Equating the ripping and emulating of legally acquired games to actual software piracy isn't going to make them stop. If anything, it'll just cause them to stop acquiring their games legally to begin with. Afterall, if they're going to be branded a pirate either way, why should they continue spending money on legit games?

quoted for truth.

<phew, great, interesting thread, spent an hour reading and responding to it> sorry if i offended anyone. lets game on ;)

now lets all grab a nice multiplayer game and play something fun, huh?

[TRM]

but i will argue what sony is doing is even worse, if the update between vhs-dvd-HD at least upped the quality and often time added features, sony is just selling the same old shit but letting me use it on a different platform for my convenience (even though the platform can do it natively). well since they own the IP its their right, but i say F that and i choose not to support it. it may be legal but it certainly is not ethical, in my opinion anyway, and the only ethics anyone follows are their own (although there are people who share the same view)


I totally agree with Poofta! above and Zthun as well.

In my opinion, if I purchased the original game, and it can run natively on the new system, then why do I have to purchase to download the identical same game over again, should I want to play it on the new system? If it was updated and upgraded would be one thing, but exactly the same?

It's just like downloads vs ripping my own CDs. If I purchased a CD, and can rip it onto my computer and slap those files onto my iPod, then why would I want to pay so that I can download them and slap them onto my iPod?

It is just corporate greed at play, and whether it is legal or not is one thing. But for everyone who is actually in support of paying twice for the same thing? I find that a bit surprising.

And before anyone points fingers and starts screaming piracy, I am not a supporter of piracy. I believe that people should buy the games, the CDs, the downloads, and what not. Support the people who make this shit. On the other hand, to charge me over and over again for something that I paid good money for (once) and can convert to the new media, forget it. That's just being greedy and lazy on the part of corporations.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

well then screw sony, screw the law and screw you for supporting it. i suppose im a criminal then.

Screw me?

Supporting it?

Come on man,

I never stated my position, I was just expounding on the issue of software copyright "rights" after an abrasive rant about how Sony owes us all the right to take our 10+ year old PS1 games and copy them into our PSPs free of charge.

While more often than not I purchase legit software at retail, I never said that I don't posses bootlegs (movies, music and games). I do understand that it causes X amount of financial damage to the industry, and I don't make any attempt to rationalize the practice.

What I'm opposed to (like many others here) is a cavalier sense of "entitlement" that some people have in matters like this.

You can buy the thing that you want, or you can steal the thing that you want - but the excuse that you stole the thing that you want because the company owes it to you based on your past loyalty/purchases is downright silly.

No company owes us anything. Games are (regardless of however you choose to view them - art, entertainment, a hobby, etc.) non-essential items. People in this industry are employed to produce them and if they want to charge us for at the very least a bare-bones (yet QA tested) port of an old title, I understand what my money is going towards and I gladly pay it.

As far as the right (or lack thereof) to "transfer", "copy" or "back-up" modern software - don't kill the messenger, I didn't create copy protection and I didn't pen the User Rights Agreement that all of us immediately agree to upon the purchase of any given piece of software.

[ScourDX]

Step up piracy will not do good. It only annoys consumers. If Sony or Nintendo truly want to kill piracy, they must

1. Control the internet
2. Control what user can or cannot do with their internet
3. Control user's life

Wait a minute, this is Fascism.

[Poofta!]

Screw me?

Supporting it?

Come on man,

I never stated my position, I was just expounding on the issue of software copyright "rights" after an abrasive rant about how Sony owes us all the right to take our 10+ year old PS1 games and copy them into our PSPs free of charge.

While more often than not I purchase legit software at retail, I never said that I don't posses bootlegs (movies, music and games). I do understand that it causes X amount of financial damage to the industry, and I don't make any attempt to rationalize the practice.

What I'm opposed to (like many others here) is a cavalier sense of "entitlement" that some people have in matters like this.

You can buy the thing that you want, or you can steal the thing that you want - but the excuse that you stole the thing that you want because the company owes it to you based on your past loyalty/purchases is downright silly.

No company owes us anything. Games are (regardless of however you choose to view them - art, entertainment, a hobby, etc.) non-essential items. People in this industry are employed to produce them and if they want to charge us for at the very least a bare-bones (yet QA tested) port of an old title, I understand what my money is going towards and I gladly pay it.

As far as the right (or lack thereof) to "transfer", "copy" or "back-up" modern software - don't kill the messenger, I didn't create copy protection and I didn't pen the User Rights Agreement that all of us immediately agree to upon the purchase of any given piece of software.

yes, i apologize for insulting you. at some point in my mind you became the of the greed being protected by law. sorry. you made it seem like you supported it.

having said that, do you feel i STOLE a psn download, or even a virtual console download, if instead of downloading/buying it, i took a real copy of the game and dumped it onto that piece of hardware to play it?

i am arguing that porting my own copy of ff7 to the psp instead of buying sony's is moral and just (yet still illegal). and sony are a bunch of dicks for making it so. so im doing my little civil disobedience dance and doing it my way, while giving them the finger. i refuse to support a corporation concerned more with the bottom line (even though its their right) than anything else (like customer loyalty, fan service etc). youre 100% right though, they dont owe me shit, they gave me a piece of hardware that still works 10 years later with an ability to play some damn awesome games on it, and for that i am grateful, the ps1 is afterall one of my favorite consoles (up there w/ snes, psp and gba). but they way the treat me is the same way i treat them. im a criminal? their a fascist. they need to get paid (for that next multimillion beach house i bet)? i need my money to eat etc (i already paid you).

had they been a bit more keen to what the fans want perhaps they wouldve continued to receive their support. (wheres our BC in ps3, huh sony?)

the psp is an awesome piece of hardware. i love it. i understand the necessity of keeping it a closed platform, since leaving it open (like it kinda is now) not only gives us the awesome emulators, but also enables us to pirate UMDs, which is wrong, and will completely kill and bury the console (some may argue it already has). however i am unsure that i am willing to sacrifice the emulation capability for anything sony has to offer. i understand i cant have my cake and eat it too (have the PSPGO hackable and be able to transfer my umd games to it while at the same time somehow prevent pirating of psp games). so i will stick with my current 2k model until someone hacks the shit out of the GO (or the 4k model)

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

yes, i apologize for insulting you. at some point in my mind you became the of the greed being protected by law. sorry. you made it seem like you supported it.

having said that, do you feel i STOLE a psn download, or even a virtual console download, if instead of downloading/buying it, i took a real copy of the game and dumped it onto that piece of hardware to play it?

i am arguing that porting my own copy of ff7 to the psp instead of buying sony's is moral and just (yet still illegal). and sony are a bunch of dicks for making it so. so im doing my little civil disobedience dance and doing it my way, while giving them the finger. i refuse to support a corporation concerned more with the bottom line (even though its their right) than anything else (like customer loyalty, fan service etc).

the psp is an awesome piece of hardware. i love it. i understand the necessity of keeping it a closed platform, since leaving it open (like it kinda is now) not only gives us the awesome emulators, but also enables us to pirate UMDs, which is wrong, and will completely kill and bury the console (some may argue it already has). however i am unsure that i am willing to sacrifice the emulation capability for anything sony has to offer. i understand i cant have my cake and eat it too (have the PSPGO hackable and be able to transfer my umd games to it while at the same time somehow prevent pirating of psp games). so i will stick with my current 2k model until someone hacks the shit out of the GO (or the 4k model)

I look at it this way:

The PSP (1000/2000 anyway) has been cracked wide open.

There's not much that you can't do on it. (and no, I'm not flatly advocating any of the following)

If you want to pirate UMDs you can.
If you want to use 3rd party software to dump and recode your PS1 games and use the official PS1 emulation that Sony crafted you can.
If you want to use the wide aray of emulators that people have either ported or developed from the ground-up you can.
If you want to use it for a homebrew-only device you can!

I could care less if you or anybody else use a PSP for anything other than its intended purpose, and I wouldn't begrudge you for dumping a PS1 game to run on your custom firmware PSP whether you own it or not.

Piracy is piracy, it's not a good thing for the industry, and in a perfect world nobody would do it, but I don't really have a polarized or radical postion on it.

Like I said, I was only responding to the concept that Sony should "let us" do it for any reason, much less that they "owe" us that right.

I don't think that Sony, or Nintendo or Sega or any company that has a history/legacy of producing "ports" of titles for legacy systems on modern system HAS to give us anything for free.

[darkwingduck13]

Wow, this one really flared up fast!

Some things to note:

-It is legal to make a backup copy of your software. Source: Frickin' copyright.GOV (http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-digital.html) and the American Bar Association says "probably." Who'd have thought a bunch of lawyers would want to hedge their bets? :roll: (http://www.abanet.org/publiced/practical/software_backups.html)

-Companies don't want you to think that it's legal. They also want to change the law. They won a big battle when they got the DMCA instated. Note that in the following court case, the backup copies of DVDs aren't being questioned thanks to the Fair Use Doctrine. The software that creates them? Well, it violated the DMCA, which never should have been passed. It's what any sane person would call a mistake, one that was bought and paid for by big media companies. (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/08/judge-copying-dvds-is-illegal/) Some other things worth noting about this particular incident: until recently, the legality of Fair Use wasn't heavily questioned. Now, though, the big media corporations are doing everything they can to even undermine this fundamental of copyright law. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use)

-Shrinkwrap EULAs are also complete bullshit. How can you agree to something you can't even read until the other party already has your cash? This is being pushed through the courts as well. If it gets enforced, it won't be because it's right. It won't even be because it's legal. It'll be because the companies paid to make it legal, and nobody did anything to stop them. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license_agreement#Shrink-wrap_and_click-wrap_licenses) A binding contract is agreed to when funds change hands, period. Unfortunately, the majority of courts don't seem to have the balls to stand up for something as simple as the old phrase "A deal's a deal!" You don't get to go back and change the rules once you've already taken someone's money.


The ultimate goal of all this, or at least the ultimate goal in the short term? They want to end the First Sale Doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_sale_doctrine#Computer_software). This is every media company's wet dream, and they're pushing daily to make it happen. Who are the only people who ever agreed to the whole "licensing" thing instead of the "purchasing" thing that we've always done? The companies who sell the product. The whole thing is like the biggest back-door or end-around to policy change in history. They change something without making any announcement or big deal about it, put literature that you can't read until you buy it inside each of their products, then after X number of years, start litigating. Litigate customers. Bribe lawmakers. Game the system in ways that individual consumers can never compete with.

Know your rights, while there are still rights left to know.
Digital to the people.
Fight the power!

:fist:

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

computer software =/= video game console software

[darkwingduck13]

A video game console is a computer. I'm really surprised I even had to say that here.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

A video game console is a computer. I'm really surprised I even had to say that here.

I'm fairly certain that if you asked Nintendo, Sony and Microsofts's lawyers if they legally (for the specific intention of dealing with copyright law) defined their game consoles as "computers" that they would tell you no.

[darkwingduck13]

That doesn't keep them (and you, in this particular case) from being wrong. On the internet, too! If one were put on trial for murder and given the freedom to define whatever they like, then "stabbing that guy in the eye until he stopped breathing" might not get defined as murder.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

That doesn't keep them (and you, in this particular case) from being wrong. On the internet, too! If one were put on trial for murder and given the freedom to define whatever they like, then "stabbing that guy in the eye until he stopped breathing" might not get defined as murder.

That's fine.

You can call my intepretation of EULAs "wrong" if you'd like. Law is largely about interpretation and judgement.

While you nor anybody else will probably ever wind up in court over the violation of an End User License Agreement - I wouldn't want to have to defend myself against a multi-billion dollar company and their lawyers if I ever did.

Still doesn't properly support your initial point that Sony owes you the sun and the moon because at one time you bought some PS1 games.

[darkwingduck13]

Now we get back to what urged you to play devil's advocate in the first place. I'm glad you could admit that this whole thing stemmed from fear of the evil lawyers (We can agree there...I wouldn't want to defend myself either, even knowing I was innocent! Money buys far too much in America these days...) rather than any actual conviction that you were right.

My initial point was that I want to use the device I paid for in the ways that I wish. I own it. It's mine. Despite what they wish, I am not a criminal. If they hadn't built backward compatibility into the thing, this would've been a completely different rant. The device probably wouldn't even have been on my radar (though I've been pleasantly surprised with the PSP's catalog of games...but again, different topic). I never said they owed me the sun and the moon. I just don't appreciate being locked out of functionality that I paid for for no other reason than to support the company's greed. As Poofta! eloquently put it:

while youre right extortion is the wrong word (im guessing he used it for shock value), it is not quite how you put it. SOTN on psp is a different game of sorts than the ps1 version. it's source code was heavily updated (to add widescreen, 2nd game, menus etc) same for it on 360, same for the mario on gba (i purchased sotn on ps1 and psp, and mario for snes and gba, for the record). what we're against it seems is selling an identical dump of a ps1 game we already own, but putting it in a container psp can read. basically the psp could read the game by itself from the get go, sony just didnt want us to do it ourselves. well we can, so middle finger to sony. i guess its the greed that irks us. sony like i said is well within its right to do this, legally, but that doesnt make it nice . it is poor business practice.

By the way, I like Outrun too. Can we be friends? :D

[kaedesdisciple]

Has anyone else thought of the fact that not every person on the planet was around when the PS1 was released and the games aren't as readily available to all consumers as they were then? It's pretty selfish of us to think that we as owners of PS1 games are the only people in the world who are interested in playing them on the new PSP. You would deny Sony and the games' IP owners the opportunity to sell to an entirely new market and leave the games' distribution entirely in the hands of the PS1 game disc owners? Now that's just a horrible business decision as it leaves too much control in the hands of the consumer. Sony had to make a decision one way or another, either let the users copy the games over themselves OR make them available on a marketplace where they could control the content and monetize the process. Seeing as how doing both would dilute the product and reduce Sony's ROI in making the games available for download, they went with the decision that they feel best fit the profitability of everyone in the supply chain.

On the supply chain note, let's throw another log on the fire here. How do we know this isn't entirely Sony's call and the IP owners, you know, the people that DEVELOPED the games, don't want more money? Most are throwing the blame entirely on Sony, which I guess is pretty easy to do since they're a big corporation and the Internets love to demonize big corporations. However, we aren't looking at all of the legal agreements that exist between Sony and all of the owners of the games' IP. Everyone's gotta get paid here, video games are a business after all.

[darkwingduck13]

Has anyone else thought of the fact that not every person on the planet was around when the PS1 was released and the games aren't as readily available to all consumers as they were then? It's pretty selfish of us to think that we as owners of PS1 games are the only people in the world who are interested in playing them on the new PSP. You would deny Sony and the games' IP owners the opportunity to sell to an entirely new market and leave the games' distribution entirely in the hands of the PS1 game disc owners? Now that's just a horrible business decision as it leaves too much control in the hands of the consumer. Sony had to make a decision one way or another, either let the users copy the games over themselves OR make them available on a marketplace where they could control the content and monetize the process. Seeing as how doing both would dilute the product and reduce Sony's ROI in making the games available for download, they went with the decision that they feel best fit the profitability of everyone in the supply chain.

On the supply chain note, let's throw another log on the fire here. How do we know this isn't entirely Sony's call and the IP owners, you know, the people that DEVELOPED the games, don't want more money? Most are throwing the blame entirely on Sony, which I guess is pretty easy to do since they're a big corporation and the Internets love to demonize big corporations. However, we aren't looking at all of the legal agreements that exist between Sony and all of the owners of the games' IP. Everyone's gotta get paid here, video games are a business after all.

I'm not denying them anything. I don't give a rat's ass if people want to buy them again. It's a free market, and Sony can try to sell the same thing as many times as they want. Just don't call me a criminal because I have the time and know-how to do it myself. Believe it or not, they'd still make their money back and then some just because of all the other people who would not want to put in the effort themselves. Convenience is a big thing these days, and if people are willing to pay for it, so be it.

By the way:

Now that's just a horrible business decision as it leaves too much control in the hands of the consumer. Sony had to make a decision one way or another, either let the users copy the games over themselves OR make them available on a marketplace where they could control the content and monetize the process.

You own stock in Sony, don't you? :D

Wait...wait...Kaz Hirai, is that you?!

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Has anyone else thought of the fact that not every person on the planet was around when the PS1 was released and the games aren't as readily available to all consumers as they were then? It's pretty selfish of us to think that we as owners of PS1 games are the only people in the world who are interested in playing them on the new PSP. You would deny Sony and the games' IP owners the opportunity to sell to an entirely new market and leave the games' distribution entirely in the hands of the PS1 game disc owners? Now that's just a horrible business decision as it leaves too much control in the hands of the consumer. Sony had to make a decision one way or another, either let the users copy the games over themselves OR make them available on a marketplace where they could control the content and monetize the process. Seeing as how doing both would dilute the product and reduce Sony's ROI in making the games available for download, they went with the decision that they feel best fit the profitability of everyone in the supply chain.

On the supply chain note, let's throw another log on the fire here. How do we know this isn't entirely Sony's call and the IP owners, you know, the people that DEVELOPED the games, don't want more money? Most are throwing the blame entirely on Sony, which I guess is pretty easy to do since they're a big corporation and the Internets love to demonize big corporations. However, we aren't looking at all of the legal agreements that exist between Sony and all of the owners of the games' IP. Everyone's gotta get paid here, video games are a business after all.

I think when people see a bare-bones port on a service like XBLA or PSN that they think that the process of "porting" it to the network consisted of one dude with a used copy of the game, a CDR and a copy of NERO.

The bottom line in me being comfortable with Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo asking for my money again is that I fully understand that there are various steps/levels in the process of delivering the product that warrant it.


Employees need to get paid for the process of porting the code and QA'ing it

Advertising money needs to be spent, even if the game's release is only reported on the web

Copyright/Property owners need to get paid

Bandwidth to deliver the product to you needs to be paid for

etc.


There's no magic process by which a game can be brought to an online network completely devoid of cost, even if the raw code of a game works fine in your emulator ... a business needs to run the way a business runs and no amount of bitching about cost is going to change that.

Is the cost involved in this process high?

No, and it's lower than distributing at brick/mortar - but that's why the asking price is generally low for these offerings in comparison.

[kaedesdisciple]

By the way:


You own stock in Sony, don't you? :D

Wait...wait...Kaz Hirai, is that you?!

Very cute, I'm making logical business arguments as a counter-point and you're turning it into a personal attack. This, to me, says you don't want to argue that point because you just plain don't understand it. You're also choosing to ignore my supply chain argument as you continue to harp on Sony. Way to prove your own ignorance and lack of logical argumentation skills.

There is no reasoning with you, you're completely set in your delusions and no amount of reason or logic will shake it from your sense of self-justification.

[Icarus Moonsight]

It's a free market.

I require some supporting evidence from you on this point. LOL

[darkwingduck13]

Very cute, I'm making logical business arguments as a counter-point and you're turning it into a personal attack. This, to me, says you don't want to argue that point because you just plain don't understand it. You're also choosing to ignore my supply chain argument as you continue to harp on Sony. Way to prove your own ignorance and lack of logical argumentation skills.

There is no reasoning with you, you're completely set in your delusions and no amount of reason or logic will shake it from your sense of self-justification.

What "attack?" I haven't said anything negative about anyone in particular during this whole thread (Except Sony. But that's a given, considering what we're talking about!).

And in this particular case, there's nothing logical about making business-related arguments to my initial point. I don't mind them selling their digital downloads to the people willing to pay for them. I honestly don't know how many more ways I can say it. What I am against is them doing their best to criminalize the people who have already paid for these games, and force those people into paying for them again in a rampant display of customer-unfriendly greed.

I'm not even delusional. I haven't said a thing in here that isn't true.

When you're right, you don't even need self-justification. :angel:

[Cryomancer]

Issues regarding what you are legally allowed to do and not do with stuff that comes on discs keeps changing and is never clear.

But I tell you one thing, when I put a CD/DVD/whatever into my PC and turn it into mp3s/avis/whatever so I can enjoy it on another piece of hardware, I sure don't feel like a criminal. And that "crime" really shouldn't carry the massive monetary sums they always sue for either. Making a company lose out on a few CD sales shouldn't mean you owe them $20,000 or whatever they ask for nowadays. Both sides of this culture war are wrong in their own ways, and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

[darkwingduck13]

Issues regarding what you are legally allowed to do and not do with stuff that comes on discs keeps changing and is never clear.

But I tell you one thing, when I put a CD/DVD/whatever into my PC and turn it into mp3s/avis/whatever so I can enjoy it on another piece of hardware, I sure don't feel like a criminal. And that "crime" really shouldn't carry the massive monetary sums they always sue for either. Making a company lose out on a few CD sales shouldn't mean you owe them $20,000 or whatever they ask for nowadays. Both sides of this culture war are wrong in their own ways, and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

The great thing about this is that in your situation you aren't taking any sales away from the company. You bought the frickin' CD! If you don't just run down the street throwing burned copies in peoples' driveways, then you haven't made anyone lose any sales at all.

[TonyTheTiger]

Issues regarding what you are legally allowed to do and not do with stuff that comes on discs keeps changing and is never clear.

But I tell you one thing, when I put a CD/DVD/whatever into my PC and turn it into mp3s/avis/whatever so I can enjoy it on another piece of hardware, I sure don't feel like a criminal. And that "crime" really shouldn't carry the massive monetary sums they always sue for either. Making a company lose out on a few CD sales shouldn't mean you owe them $20,000 or whatever they ask for nowadays. Both sides of this culture war are wrong in their own ways, and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

The dilemma courts face is that there are two competing interests, both of which are equally valid. On one hand, we have in the U.S. a strong sense of personal autonomy. If you buy something then you own it and nobody can tell you what you can and can't do with it in most situations. On the other hand, digital information is far more vulnerable to exploitation and therefore needs more protection. Ford doesn't have to worry about somebody walking into a car dealership, pulling out a replicating device, and driving away with a free brand new Ford Fusion. Activision, however, does.

[Cryomancer]

Activision has dealerships now!?

(joking, joking)

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

The dilemma courts face is that there are two competing interests, both of which are equally valid. On one hand, we have in the U.S. a strong sense of personal autonomy. If you buy something then you own it and nobody can tell you what you can and can't do with it in most situations. On the other hand, digital information is far more vulnerable to exploitation and therefore needs more protection. Ford doesn't have to worry about somebody walking into a car dealership, pulling out a replicating device, and driving away with a free brand new Ford Fusion. Activision, however, does.

Speak for yourself, I just torrented a new Ford Fusion. (Not enough seeders on the Porsche).

[Cryomancer]

If you could make copies of objects people would do it constantly. It would probably makes stores as we know them pointless.

Imagine though, an industry where what you sell is the design of your product. You don't sell a car, you sell the replicator schematics thereof. Of course once one person buys it the whole neighborhood can make replicars based on the one he made. But hell, at least we would all have the stuff we need to get around. Imagine this with everything, build your own food, computer parts, video game consoles, etc. Data would be the item for sale, and hey look, we're already moving that way as it is. Data would of course still be pirated, possibly more than ever. But on the other hand perhaps it could create an economy where the quality of one's design was more important than the advertising hype you could place around it...oh who am I kidding that part will never happen, heh.

Maybe the replication plans could also be married to that concept they want to apply to PC gaming where games are free, and the creators get paid based on how often people play them. Get whatever car you want to have, the car design team gets so many cents per 10 miles per person, etc.

tl;dr replication tools are gonna be awesome, current copywrite concepts will be meaningless in the future, etc.

[NE146]

Really I don't see much arguing about pirating when people are going to pirate away. It's such a minor thing to me.

The big difference though is when you try and PROFIT off it and try to make money by selling bootleg copies or charging for modification services in order to play bootleg copies. That's where you kind of cross the line I think.

Go ahead and pirate stuff if you really want, but keep it to yourself :p Personally I'm glad I have hundreds of bootleg games for my Apple IIe. Theres no way I could have afforded all of them LOL

[tom]

I'm fairly certain that if you asked Nintendo, Sony and Microsofts's lawyers if they legally (for the specific intention of dealing with copyright law) defined their game consoles as "computers" that they would tell you no.

FAMICOM (Family COMPUTER)

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

FAMICOM (Family COMPUTER)

*sigh*

Yes. I see what you did there.

However, I suggest reading "Game Over" if you'd like to see how Nintendo's Lawyers (of the Famicom era) dealt with software licensing, copyrights, and intellectual property ownership. They were no more willing to let it slide in the 80's then they likely would be today.

[tom]

Yes, I did read Game Over, Nintendo managed to twist it around against Tengen and Atari. I mean 'hello' are you stupid US courts'? you can attach a keyboard to the famicom and buy a cassette player AND BASIC, for gods sake. Nope, the Family Computer is ONLY a console. I bet the US courts were bribed.

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c173/thomasholzer/NintendoDataRecorderContents.jpg

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Yes, I did read Game Over, Nintendo managed to twist it around against Tengen and Atari.

Exactly!!!

Please remember that I'm not waving a flag in support of these things, I'm just trying to be as realistic as possible as to how they're interpreted and/or enforced in corporate law.

[tom]

I know.