Oldergames...

[Muscelli]

I remember a while back Oldergames was subject to some criticism over Lost & Found vol.2 due to the code of one of the games contained in the set being similar (identical?) to the retail version. I tried looking up info, though I never really got to see where this went..

Also, was it determined if they in fact had the rights to release the titles in the first place? I remember them (him) being under fire for this as well.

I am just curious to see what happened to the company. Everything went to an abrupt stop when things seemed to be getting hot for them, and I never heard about them since.

[tubeway]

I missed most of what happened to OlderGames as well, and would also like to be brought up to speed.

[Playcosm]

I'm not sure about what game you're talking about and what system, but we've had similar questions about Oldergames concerning their CD-i games which Oldergames released in 2002. We followed Oldergames until the end when RW Bivins sold the Oldergames name and 'business' in 2007. You can read a little more info about that here (http://cdii.blogspot.com/2007/11/your-chance-to-get-original-oldergames.html) and here (http://cdii.blogspot.com/2007/12/oldergames-cd-i-prototypes-super.html). Perhaps not exactly your answer, but at least close to the subject ;)

[CMA Death Adder]

Hello.


I am just curious to see what happened to the company.

The OlderGames name and internet domain were acquired by Super Fighter Team (http://www.superfighter.com/) on December 14, 2007. For various reasons, we chose not to acquire their back catalog of software. Additional information about the acquisition can be found in this thread (http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=110370).

The OlderGames website (http://www.oldergames.com/) became a place of celebration for classic gaming; currently it hosts the Ad Lib music archive and will host other specialty sites in the future, as time allows for them to be finished and uploaded.

Super Fighter Team (http://www.superfighter.com/), having already brought solid titles such as Beggar Prince (http://www.beggarprince.com/), Legend of Wukong (http://www.legendofwukong.com/) and Zaku (http://www.zaku-lynx.com/) to market, will continue to impress and amaze in the coming years. :)

Thanks for your interest and support, and best wishes for 2010.

[Daria]

Hello.



The OlderGames name and internet domain were acquired by Super Fighter Team (http://www.superfighter.com/) on December 14, 2007. For various reasons, we chose not to acquire their back catalog of software. Additional information about the acquisition can be found in this thread (http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=110370).

The OlderGames website (http://www.oldergames.com/) became a place of celebration for classic gaming; currently it hosts the Ad Lib music archive and will host other specialty sites in the future, as time allows for them to be finished and uploaded.

Super Fighter Team (http://www.superfighter.com/), having already brought solid titles such as Beggar Prince (http://www.beggarprince.com/), Legend of Wukong (http://www.legendofwukong.com/) and Zaku (http://www.zaku-lynx.com/) to market, will continue to impress and amaze in the coming years. :)

Thanks for your interest and support, and best wishes for 2010.


... that's what you're using it for? I hope you didn't pay much for it.

[CMA Death Adder]

... that's what you're using it for?

Sure. I feel it's a much better thing for people to see than, say, a cybersquatter's search page.


I hope you didn't pay much for it.

Being able to use the OlderGames domain as a means to provide a free resource for classic gaming enthusiasts is great; it's well worth it. :)

[Bojay1997]

I remember a while back Oldergames was subject to some criticism over Lost & Found vol.2 due to the code of one of the games contained in the set being similar (identical?) to the retail version. I tried looking up info, though I never really got to see where this went..

Also, was it determined if they in fact had the rights to release the titles in the first place? I remember them (him) being under fire for this as well.

I am just curious to see what happened to the company. Everything went to an abrupt stop when things seemed to be getting hot for them, and I never heard about them since.

Bottom line, after some heated debate on this site and others, as well as private correspondence, I concluded that none of his games were actually licensed in any way. I don't want to go into too much detail because he shut down his business and stopped selling the games for the most part, but I did contact a couple of the rights holders at the time and confirmed that no such deals were in place. There were a couple of titles for the 3do I believe that were properly licensed from Elite Software and I believe Good Deal Games still sells copies. Other than that, he basically just took protos of unreleased games and claimed that he had the right to release them based on some ridiculous abandonment of copyright theory which doesn't exist in the real world. I realize a lot of other sellers have done the same thing here and elsewhere, but he's the only person I know who repeatedly lied about actually having the rights to sell prototype games as opposed to releasing them and hoping that the rights holders didn't really care about the few hundred dollars to be made.

[skaar]

Bottom line, after some heated debate on this site and others, as well as private correspondence, I concluded that none of his games were actually licensed in any way. I don't want to go into too much detail because he shut down his business and stopped selling the games for the most part, but I did contact a couple of the rights holders at the time and confirmed that no such deals were in place.

Ah, cyber vigilante "justice" took him down then.

http://bostondirtdogs.boston.com/Headline_Archives/Bronson.bmp

[tubeway]

Hell yeah. Charles Bronson, baby!

[Ed Oscuro]

CMA Death Adder is a gentleman and a scholar, not to mention he wields a big axe. Don't try selling him somebody else's IP / code.

I read a bit of the situation, but basically if the previous OG owner had any legal ability to release stuff like Wacky Worlds the community would have rallied to them and there would have been no vigilantism. Blackmoon Project...there's a laugh and a half.

Also, THEY KILLED THE GIGGLER, MAN! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuKeUAavpnU)

[SegaAges]

You guys are crazy, it makes me want to make a sandwich (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW5HfjCmR98&feature=related)

[EColeman24]

Bottom line, after some heated debate on this site and others, as well as private correspondence, I concluded that none of his games were actually licensed in any way. I don't want to go into too much detail because he shut down his business and stopped selling the games for the most part, but I did contact a couple of the rights holders at the time and confirmed that no such deals were in place. There were a couple of titles for the 3do I believe that were properly licensed from Elite Software and I believe Good Deal Games still sells copies. Other than that, he basically just took protos of unreleased games and claimed that he had the right to release them based on some ridiculous abandonment of copyright theory which doesn't exist in the real world. I realize a lot of other sellers have done the same thing here and elsewhere, but he's the only person I know who repeatedly lied about actually having the rights to sell prototype games as opposed to releasing them and hoping that the rights holders didn't really care about the few hundred dollars to be made.

Wow so none of his games were actually licensed in any way...crazy. No wonder all of this got swept under the rug and tucked away.

[rwbivins]

Wow so none of his games were actually licensed in any way...crazy. No wonder all of this got swept under the rug and tucked away.

Nonsense. I posted contracts we had signed on forums like this before we closed. When it came to "unlicensed" releases the deal was this: I'd call company x,y,z and they said it was simply beneath them to even spend the money to write up a contract and would say something to the extent of "good luck you crazy guy, hope you don't go bankrupt releasing our old, written off garbage".

Simply put: the current game industry with a typical budget in the 3-5 Million dollar range (btw - this is for a start up company) does not care... at all. if you do a limited release. It is simply BENEATH THEM TO CARE. This is why unearthed and un-dumped prototypes were being released all the time and still are - not by just us but EVERYONE. I'm sure even Joe Santulli of DP would back me up on this. The DIFFERENCE IS that OlderGames and from my knowledge of them Digital Press... unlike every - other - release - provider actually CALLED companies and/or developers to at the very least ASK if it was "okay". We did and STILL DO somewhere have signed contracts with homebrew developers such as Charles Doty, and Andrew Looney but others we never had the chance to release games for.

I think one of the biggest reasons we were so happy to call DP a friend was because the guys behind it actually knew the DMCA and the rules regarding releases of protos.

So you know a programmer that worked on game x,y,z that OG releases... and what? He was a programmer... what did he or some schmoe in marketing have to do with rights? You need to understand that companies merge, lose interest, and go away. I remember the day I called the VP of Ubisoft regarding Marko and he said "why are you bothering me over such meaningless nonsense... just do it and leave me alone". For those companies such as elite who provided two of our 3DO releases - We did pay, they did expect to get the money and we delivered. For those such as "jack sprite" for the cd-i - I personally spoke with Rob Fulop, a CGE 2K10 alumni... go ask him what he said... if I'm not mistaken he said something along the lines of "people actually care about the cd-i still?".

So what happened in the end? I, along with my best friend who never seemed to bother having the time to care about what we did except for CGE shows decided that it simply wasn't worth it anymore. If you, or anyone you know ever purchased an unreleased, and undumped prototype in this lifetime you would know it isn't cheap. After all the hours of replying to emails, shipping, packaging, designing, and printing everything it was just no longer fun for me. I no longer cared. I HATED doing it. I walked away and have zero regrets.

I started that company because I absolutely despised high-end prototype collectors. FYI I'm talking about the people who will and would pay thousands for a game that you probably never knew existed. To dump such protos, to even have the audacity of releasing such prototypes to all of you to play is treason in such circles. This is what I did. This is what it was at the end of the day. Spend a few grand and make $500. It simply wasn't worth it. It was a ride that went its course. I am happy and grateful that a passionate and truly caring gamer and programmer like Brandon Cobb stepped in and made OlderGames a place for people like us, who care about the good old days and the time when this industry couldn't count it's genres on a single hand.

Sure we made our mistakes. I was a collector with an idea and it simply didn't work - not because of what we accomplished but because we lost a fortune on my stupid idea. And for those who thought we had a war with Good Deal Games I will say this -- We came to be because Mike Thomasson inspired me, we partnered up because we believed the same things, we broke away because he couldn't share the "limelight" which I could care less about, and for all the claims of legitimacy and being "legal this, and that" - I remember, and for those of you who attended CGE2K7 probably will as-well the simple fact that Mike had TimeCop available for sale at his booth. I highly doubt he acquired the license from Universal and Jean Claude Van Damme. We always sought permission, where we did get it we paid, where we didnt we held the release back - where nobody gave a crap we went forward.
In the end GDG is using our .iso's to burn the 3DO games they have published - we paid
for this encryption... under DMCA we own the releasable versions byte-by-byte as work for hire re-encrypted releases... I could sue... I and John would probably win... but we wont. Not because we don't believe that we should defend our rights but because there is simply ZERO money in retro-publishing. Mike knows I respect him for what he has done just as he knows he was also wrong in some of the things he did. At the end of the day it simply isn't worth our time and I would rather see him and others he may inspire like he did me at one time succeed for without people like him and Joe Santulli this scene would surely be dead.


Hopefully this answers these questions once and for all. I'm tired of answering this stuff four years later. I'm just here to collect and be a part of it. nothing more, nothing less.

This is my longest post ever, anywhere. I'm pretty short and to the point but I figured this was something that had to be written so I could just move on and collect.

[Leo_A]

Weren't Oldergames the ones that got upset that someone else freely released a Half-Life proto for the Dreamcast and decided to withold theirs (That they claimed was far superior) out of spite that they weren't going to be able to make money off it like they felt they had the right to?


Nonsense. I posted contracts we had signed on forums like this before we closed. When it came to "unlicensed" releases the deal was this: I'd call company x,y,z and they said it was simply beneath them to even spend the money to write up a contract and would say something to the extent of "good luck you crazy guy, hope you don't go bankrupt releasing our old, written off garbage".

Doesn't sound like any corporation I've ever heard of.

[portnoyd]

blah blah blah

TL;DR.

Seriously, the topic is long dead. No one gives a shit.

[Jorpho]

Doesn't sound like any corporation I've ever heard of.It only sounds unbelievable to me in the sense that they were able to talk to someone who even knew what they were referring to, rather than someone who would simply say there was no information.

[Leo_A]

It only sounds unbelievable to me in the sense that they were able to talk to someone who even knew what they were referring to, rather than someone who would simply say there was no information.

Companies are generally very protective of their copyrights. I can't imagine most companies giving their informal consent to utilize their IP.

[Kitsune Sniper]

This is my longest post ever, anywhere. I'm pretty short and to the point but I figured this was something that had to be written so I could just move on and collect.

... no, I'm pretty sure I've seen longer posts by you in the past.

And it WAS already in the past. YOU brought it back.

[skaar]

In the guy's defense, if it was me I wouldn't want my legacy to end with some guy's forum post against me - I'd want to clear the air too.

Still, that's a necro.

I'm still amused at the guy who felt the need to go vigilante on him, though. We need a hero?

[portnoyd]

Legacy? On the Internets? Unless you're Epic Beard Man, you don't have a legacy.

[Oobgarm]

Legacy? On the Internets? Unless you're Epic Beard Man, you don't have a legacy.

I disagree:

http://portsloglog.com/

[Bojay1997]

Unbelieveable that this guy would pop up with his claims again. In any event, I don't want to extend the necro, but contrary to his assertions, the DMCA does not allow commercial or even non-commercial distribution of abandonware. The only abandonware rights granted in the DMCA amendments are the right to break copy protection for the purpose of preserving software already owned by the user for archival purposes.

I would also note that I have quite a few e-mails from him at the time claiming he actually had signed contracts for those purportedly "licensed" games from all of the companies whose games he released. Now his story has changed to some vague permission granted over the phone from somebody who allegedly didn't care what he did with their intellectual property. Frankly, there is no way this really happened as I have worked in litigation and intellectual property for entertainment companies for almost a decade now and there is no way these companies would risk their intellectual property by granting open ended permission to some unknown entity to do whatever they wanted with it, especially since this was only a few years ago and IP was beginning to be re-licensed for digital release and sale. Nobody is disputing the licensing of the stuff he got from people like Charles Doty. The issue was always with the stuff from still going companies which have fully functioning legal departments.

I'm not a vigilante and I have no interest in acting to stop homebrew or even proto releases. My issue was with the misrepresentations this guy was making about the nature of his products and what the law allows, pure and simple.

[rpepper9]

This thread reads like a conversation joined mid stream!

[portnoyd]

It's funny that we're talking about this, but Bivens is never going to even come back to DP any time soon. I bet he had to "set the record straight" and ran off when he thought he did that. Jokes on him that no one even noticed that there was a record to be straightened.

[j_factor]

As far as the Sega CD and similar releases go, I don't really see how what this guy did is any different from a site like NES Reproductions. It's not exactly legal, but you keep it small-time and they generally don't care enough to go after you. The only things I find objectionable are the Lost & Found releases. I think someone said they analyzed the code for the so-called "early development version" of Three Dirty Dwarves and found it identical to the retail version. I wouldn't really know about that for sure, but no one, including Bivins, was ever able to identify any differences. Deep Fear was a bit of a crock too -- I know some "US version proto" discs do exist, but it's just the European version in NTSC. The other half of Vol. 3, the "Duck video tools demonstration", is a blank disc in my copy. Not sure what it was supposed to contain, but the screenshot on the back of the case shows the Choice Cuts video, which is not exactly "lost and found" as it's a pretty common demo disc. Also, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that video didn't even use TrueMotion (Duck), it used Cinepak.

[Jorpho]

Companies are generally very protective of their copyrights. I can't imagine most companies giving their informal consent to utilize their IP.The cases you are likely to hear about involve famous IP that, by virtue of the fact that they're still famous, are still of considerable value to companies. Why would you hear anything about a company being protective about a copyright no one even remotely remembers or cares about anymore? It is hardly newsworthy!

[j_factor]

The cases you are likely to hear about involve famous IP that, by virtue of the fact that they're still famous, are still of considerable value to companies. Why would you hear anything about a company being protective about a copyright no one even remotely remembers or cares about anymore? It is hardly newsworthy!

This is true. Especially if we're talking about a game that was never even released. I mean let's say I found a proto of Agartha for Dreamcast, and wanted to make a cover and manual and make 500 copies to sell to people. If I somehow contact some senior executive at Sega of America, they're not likely to even know what that game is. Even if I find someone at Sega who has heard of the game, and they want to give me permission to release it, they would probably have difficulty legally confirming that they owned the game (and thus had the power to grant me permission to release it). There have been actual cases of companies being contacted about possible re-releases, with the response given that they couldn't prove they had the rights to the game(s) in question.

[Leo_A]

The cases you are likely to hear about involve famous IP that, by virtue of the fact that they're still famous, are still of considerable value to companies. Why would you hear anything about a company being protective about a copyright no one even remotely remembers or cares about anymore? It is hardly newsworthy!

It doesn't work that way.

A company that doesn't enforce it's IP can effectively lose it. Try putting up a clip of a show on YouTube from say 1960 that is largely forgotten, was never syndicated and hasn't been on television since it's first run and will never be officially releases (And is only available from the collector market using 16mm prints that were distributed to stations back in the day that have found homes with collectors). It's still going to be pulled once the IP folders locate it. Of course more effort is expended protecting IP that represents the greatest value for a company, but they're not going to just ignore copyright violation and they're certainly not going to unofficially condone it like he claimed.

And I highly doubt anyone he may of contacted was even familiar with what he was inquiring about and could've detirmined the percieved value of the item in question. And no corporate attorney or the person in charge of licensing is going to have an attitude like that and immediately grade the value of something as worthless and give free reign to violating copyright laws protecting their property.

And if ownership is in doubt due to age or obscurity of an item, they're still certainly not going to just say have at it and good luck.

[Jorpho]

A company that doesn't enforce it's IP can effectively lose it. Try putting up a clip of a show on YouTube from say 1960 that is largely forgotten, was never syndicated and hasn't been on television since it's first run and will never be officially releases (And is only available from the collector market using 16mm prints that were distributed to stations back in the day that have found homes with collectors). It's still going to be pulled once the IP folders locate it.Would you care to give an example?

Even if you can, I might argue that television is a rather different medium than video games. Television broadcasts get flung across the nation and could easily be so distributed once again, and potentially even find a new, wide audience. Television shows are also the product of a combined effort of a substantially larger number of people than a lot of older video games, and directly feature the likenesses of a lot of those people too. Old video games for discontinued consoles are a much, much harder sell, at least until recently, and there doesn't seem to be much money to be made selling outdated PC games that still take considerable persuasion to run properly either.

[Bojay1997]

Would you care to give an example?

Even if you can, I might argue that television is a rather different medium than video games. Television broadcasts get flung across the nation and could easily be so distributed once again, and potentially even find a new, wide audience. Television shows are also the product of a combined effort of a substantially larger number of people than a lot of older video games, and directly feature the likenesses of a lot of those people too. Old video games for discontinued consoles are a much, much harder sell, at least until recently, and there doesn't seem to be much money to be made selling outdated PC games that still take considerable persuasion to run properly either.

You're kidding, right? While it might not have the value of library television or film, millions of dollars in downloads of old games are sold every year and sites like Good Old Games and companies like Sold Out Software specialize in reaping large revenue streams from older games by making them work with recent operating systems. Similarly, all three of the major console manufacturers sell huge libraries of games from even their earliest systems generating a significant amount of revenue. As someone who makes his living at least in part protecting companies against infringement, I can tell you that most companies take it very seriously and spend large sums of money retaining law firms and investigators to track down infringers. At the end of the day, IP is often far more valuable than the current top selling game and can generate revenue for literally decades to come.

[Jorpho]

millions of dollars in downloads of old games are sold every year and sites like Good Old Games and companies like Sold Out Software specialize in reaping large revenue streams from older games by making them work with recent operating systems.Good Old Games is something of an aberration so far. Also, while I wholly support what they're doing, I doubt they're doing what they're doing because it's a remarkably profitable venture. As for Sold Out Software, I can scarcely imagine a case where they've done what you say aside from packaging Broken Sword with ScummVM. And furthermore, the whole point is that none of the stuff these companies are selling is unusually obscure - for certain definitions of obscure, anyway.


Similarly, all three of the major console manufacturers sell huge libraries of games from even their earliest systems generating a significant amount of revenue.As I said, that's a fairly recent phenomenon.

[CMA Death Adder]

Curious that this thread has returned; I'd figured it to have been settled quite a while back. At any rate -- Hello, everyone. :)

Solely to clarify the business nature of Super Fighter Team, I feel the need to post the following:

Any and all video game products produced and released by Super Fighter Team have been properly negotiated with the IP owner(s), and in every case, agreements have been reached and legal contracts signed by both parties. In the event that we consider a video game for publishing and are unable to reach a signed agreement with the IP owner(s), we do not move forward on the project.

The management style of OlderGames' former owners is irrelevant to its current operations, as none of these gentleman are presently involved in said operations. As it stands, the OlderGames website (http://www.oldergames.com/) now exists as a means to celebrate and promote classic gaming, with niche interest websites such as:

* The Ad Lib music archive (http://adlib.oldergames.com/)
* The end of the game.com (http://gcom.oldergames.com/)

If anyone has any additional questions regarding the present and future of OlderGames and / or Super Fighter Team, please present them here in the forum, or directly to me via e-mail or private message. Thanks!

[Leo_A]

Would you care to give an example?

Not particularly, I don't feel like searching search engines for YouTube pages of shows that haven't been aired anywhere in decades until I find a link to a dead entry that was just recently deleted due to a request from the owner for copyright violations.

I would challenge your point though that a show that hasn't aired in decades that just exist on 32mm prints in a corporate film fault (Or poor quality 16mm prints in the collector market) is any more markeable and valuable then a game that was never released or perhaps never even finished. The cost to transfer those to a modern medium to broadcast or bring to DVD would likely outweight the financial benefit it would bring. But protect it they still do just in case it is something that could earn revenue for the company in the future even though it likely never will.

Try putting anything up on YouTube beyond perhaps the introductions of shows like Bus Stop (An early 60s series), Coronet Blue (Late 60s), Sierra (Mid 70s) that have never been telecast since their initial runs and watch the owners like ABC and Universal report them for removal. Might take 6 months or it might be gone next week, but you'll find it gone one of these days as they scan it regularly to protect their property. I find it hard to believe a game developer or publisher would be any less vigilant in protecting their assets and would just carelessly give their consent for it to be violated.

A copyright is utterly useless if not protected, renewed, and kept secure. And if you start having your employees decide to ignore copyright violations by making a judgement call that it's not worth their time, it's a slipperly slope and mistakes are going to be made as they inevitabley will fail to protect something in the future that could've been financially beneficial to the company. It doesn't take long or cost much to give your permission for someone to utilize your IP. and it will still remain protected and under your control (I believe for example that's the situation between Atari and AtariAge in regards to their classic gaming libraries).

I don't care either way in the debate and I'm not here to prove something one way or another. I just wanted to express my initial skepticism at what I thought was an unlikely story.

[j_factor]

You're kidding, right? While it might not have the value of library television or film, millions of dollars in downloads of old games are sold every year and sites like Good Old Games and companies like Sold Out Software specialize in reaping large revenue streams from older games by making them work with recent operating systems. Similarly, all three of the major console manufacturers sell huge libraries of games from even their earliest systems generating a significant amount of revenue.

But all of those are games that came out at some time in the past and had their day in the sun. Games that were never finalized and released are a pretty different animal. Also, all of that stuff, as yet, has only had games for PC and the main consoles (NES/Genesis/etc.); I've yet to see any CDi games on offer. :p

Good Deal Games still sells most (if not all) of the games they copublished with Oldergames. How do you explain that? They've been selling these games for like 7 years now. I would think that if there were any issue with the original IP holders, it would have surfaced by now and they wouldn't be on sale anymore (if not the site sued and/or shut down). At least if they lacked permission and the companies were "taking it very seriously and spending large sums of money retaining law firms and investigators to track down infringers". Hell, how do gamereproductions.com and similar sites get away with it?

Also I just noticed Wikipedia seems to say that Oldergames went under because of the Jaguar CD version of Frog Feast.

[Bojay1997]

Good Old Games is something of an aberration so far. Also, while I wholly support what they're doing, I doubt they're doing what they're doing because it's a remarkably profitable venture. As for Sold Out Software, I can scarcely imagine a case where they've done what you say aside from packaging Broken Sword with ScummVM. And furthermore, the whole point is that none of the stuff these companies are selling is unusually obscure - for certain definitions of obscure, anyway.

As I said, that's a fairly recent phenomenon.

Good Old Games is not some company doing what they do for the sake of preserving history. They are a profit making venture with deals with most of the major publishers with whom they share revenue. Although I haven't seen their overall revenue numbers, I know that they have done almost a hundred thousand dollars for one smaller publisher I worked with in the last year, so it clearly is very lucrative. Sold Out has repackaged a number of late 90s and early 2000s era games to run with later versions of Windows and continues to distribute to major chains like Best Buy and Fry's. Their revenues are in the millions worldwide.

The point is, it doesn't matter if something is obscure or not or profitable or not. If it has a valid copyright, it is owned by someone and that person or company has the right to decide how it's used. While I agree with you that small hobbyist efforts are probably minor enough that most companies will ignore them, that doesn't change the fact that the former owner of Oldergames misrepresented his authority to publish many of the games he claimed to have the rights to publish and flat out lied about what was contained on his last Saturn releases in my opinion essentially defrauding the people who purchased it. As this hobby continues to gain popularity and mainstream scrutiny, the status of the rights to unreleased IP will probably be something that becomes a subject of further debate. We're not at that point right now and I think this discussion has come full circle, so it seems like a good time to end this long dead thread.

[Bojay1997]

But all of those are games that came out at some time in the past and had their day in the sun. Games that were never finalized and released are a pretty different animal. Also, all of that stuff, as yet, has only had games for PC and the main consoles (NES/Genesis/etc.); I've yet to see any CDi games on offer. :p

Good Deal Games still sells most (if not all) of the games they copublished with Oldergames. How do you explain that? They've been selling these games for like 7 years now. I would think that if there were any issue with the original IP holders, it would have surfaced by now and they wouldn't be on sale anymore (if not the site sued and/or shut down). At least if they lacked permission and the companies were "taking it very seriously and spending large sums of money retaining law firms and investigators to track down infringers". Hell, how do gamereproductions.com and similar sites get away with it?

Also I just noticed Wikipedia seems to say that Oldergames went under because of the Jaguar CD version of Frog Feast.

For the same reason that I can walk into downtown Los Angeles every day of the week and find bootleg copies of DVDs of movies that just came out less than fifteen minutes from the same studios that produced them. On the other hand, I've been part of studio initiated crack downs on swap meet vendors selling bootleg movies from a van where the DVDs were destroyed and the studios sued for damages against mom and pop vendors. Ultimately, there is only so much enforcement that happens and eventually some people get caught and some never will. It doesn't change the legality of what is going on or indicate that the companies don't care what's happening. Frankly, Good Deal Games is not selling most of the disputed titles anymore and certainly not the Saturn stuff that really went well over the line. Ultimately, nobody has bothered to turn the reproduction vendors in, but who knows what will happen down the line. Maybe nobody ever will or the companies will just decide it's not worth the time and money. It really doesn't matter what happens. It doesn't change the facts of what went down with Oldergames and the fact that people doing repros and proto releases are doing so at their own risk.

[Jorpho]

Good Old Games is not some company doing what they do for the sake of preserving history. They are a profit making venture with deals with most of the major publishers with whom they share revenue. Although I haven't seen their overall revenue numbers, I know that they have done almost a hundred thousand dollars for one smaller publisher I worked with in the last year, so it clearly is very lucrative.But if it's so lucrative, why don't they seem to have any significant competition?


Sold Out has repackaged a number of late 90s and early 2000s era games to run with later versions of WindowsSuch as? Aside from Broken Sword, that is. I suspect the older titles they are still selling are those that run under later versions of Windows without much persuasion.


The cost to transfer those to a modern medium to broadcast or bring to DVD would likely outweight the financial benefit it would bring.O rly?

[Bojay1997]

But if it's so lucrative, why don't they seem to have any significant competition?

Such as? Aside from Broken Sword, that is. I suspect the older titles they are still selling are those that run under later versions of Windows without much persuasion.

O rly?

Because like NetFlix, once someone dominates a certain market, it's tough to find a competitive niche. Good Old Games already has most of the publishers locked down, so what would be the point of starting a competitor unless they developed some kind of significant cost or technology advantage?

I know I own a copy of Sold Out's American McGee's Alice for example which is a bitch to run without significant patching in its original version. There are dozens of titles from the same period that they are still selling which have similar issues in their original versions.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Such as? Aside from Broken Sword, that is. I suspect the older titles they are still selling are those that run under later versions of Windows without much persuasion.

Take a look for yourself! (http://www.sold-out.co.uk/)

They're mostly a UK / European distributor, but some titles make it across the pond once in a while. They sell a LOT of games at a relatively low price and make a killing out of it. Their biggest competitor was Xplosiv, but the label went down when Empire Interactive, its owner, went bankrupt a few years ago.

[Leo_A]

O rly?

Using Universal for example, their internal free for transferring 32mm prints is $5,000 per episode. If we're talking about a half hour program from 1960, that's probably about 38 episodes right there and a cost of just $180,000 just for doing transfers. That's enough to insure that a program that was never syndicated and is only remembered by those left that caught it during it's initial run will never see the light of day again.

It's also why many DVD collections contain poor quality transfers. You'll often see syndicated cuts of episodes on DVD collections since it's just so expensive going back and working with the original prints to get complete and pristine looking episodes. Even happens on modern programs. Once CBS and Paramount merged a few years back, the last 5 seasons or so of Cheers for example on DVD were syndicated versions of the episodes with several minutes cut from each for the additional commercial breaks after it's first run since CBS/Paramount just used syndicated versions of the episodes on tape rather then the original film to trim cost. Before the merger, the season releases were the complete unedited episodes going back to the original elements with a restoration undertaken.

Another good example is Room 222. Shout Factory had to use 40 year old terribly faded 16mm prints that a tv station would've used back in the day to broadcast it since it would've cost them well over a hundred thousand per season for FOX to make high quality transfers from the original prints. That's why that program looks so horrible on DVD and when it's syndicated compared to how people remember watching it during it's initial run since FOX won't pay to go back to the original elements to make modern transfers of it and a indepenent like Shout Factory could never afford it themselves.

And it's why many of the indepenents like Shout Factory, Imavision and Timeless when they do license a show from a company like ABC that has never been syndicated , go to the collectors market looking for 16mm prints that were sent to local stations back in the day for broadcast rather then paying for the original prints to be located and retrieved from the vault and a transfer to be done of them since it just cost so much. Then they basically use near consumer grade equipment like you can buy to make transfers of your 8mm/Super8/16mm home videos to make transfers. Doesn't yield a terribly good result but it's the only way for many shows to make it out just because it's just so expensive to do it properly.

But despite a largely forgotten program having little earnings potential for it's owner, the copyright is still going to be protected and they're still going to go after violators. That's why I have trouble picturing a game developer or publisher having the indifferent attitute about their intellectual property that we're told they did.

[Jorpho]

Take a look for yourself! (http://www.sold-out.co.uk/)

They're mostly a UK / European distributor, but some titles make it across the pond once in a while. They sell a LOT of games at a relatively low price and make a killing out of it. Their biggest competitor was Xplosiv, but the label went down when Empire Interactive, its owner, went bankrupt a few years ago.Obviously I am well aware of what they generally do if I know they are packaging Broken Sword with ScummVM.


I know I own a copy of Sold Out's American McGee's Alice for example which is a bitch to run without significant patching in its original version. There are dozens of titles from the same period that they are still selling which have similar issues in their original versions.Well, they're not selling that one anymore. What other examples can you think of?

I might venture that the "significant patching" was also included in later retail versions and that it was that last version that was distributed by Sold Out.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Obviously I am well aware of what they generally do if I know they are packaging Broken Sword with ScummVM.

I wouldn't know, I buy my games from digital distribution sites. :P

[Bojay1997]

Obviously I am well aware of what they generally do if I know they are packaging Broken Sword with ScummVM.

Well, they're not selling that one anymore. What other examples can you think of?

I might venture that the "significant patching" was also included in later retail versions and that it was that last version that was distributed by Sold Out.

I'm now convinced that you're just arguing to argue. The significant patching was not included in later retail versions and was original to the Sold Out version. If you're too lazy to follow the web link someone posted above, feel free to visit your local Fry's, Micro Center or Best Buy. They all stock a large range of Sold Out reissues, including numerous titles from the late 90s. I also just picked up the Fallout Collection today at Target. It contains numerous patches and is fixed to work with XP and Vista. The first game was released in 1997 by a company that doesn't even have the rights anymore. Per your argument, someone should have been able to release that game as well without permission because it has no value. I'm sure the company that paid to license Fallout for re-release and the company that was paid for the rights would beg to differ with you.

[Kitsune Sniper]

I'm now convinced that you're just arguing to argue. The significant patching was not included in later retail versions and was original to the Sold Out version. If you're too lazy to follow the web link someone posted above, feel free to visit your local Fry's, Micro Center or Best Buy. They all stock a large range of Sold Out reissues, including numerous titles from the late 90s. I also just picked up the Fallout Collection today at Target. It contains numerous patches and is fixed to work with XP and Vista. The first game was released in 1997 by a company that doesn't even have the rights anymore. Per your argument, someone should have been able to release that game as well without permission because it has no value. I'm sure the company that paid to license Fallout for re-release and the company that was paid for the rights would beg to differ with you.

You know, I always thought the Trilogy rerelease used the same assets as the Good Old Games rerelease - but I don't know if that's the case.

[tom]

I want Super Fighter Team to do a game.com game, that'll be awesome

[Jorpho]

If you're too lazy to follow the web link someone posted above, feel free to visit your local Fry's, Micro Center or Best Buy. They all stock a large range of Sold Out reissues, including numerous titles from the late 90s.And if you're too lazy to read my posts, I am already quite familiar with Sold Out's reissues, which is why I am surprised at these claims that they contain such sweeping original alterations.
I also just picked up the Fallout Collection today at Target. It contains numerous patches and is fixed to work with XP and Vista. The first game was released in 1997 by a company that doesn't even have the rights anymore. Per your argument, someone should have been able to release that game as well without permission because it has no value.What the hell are you talking about? This is an IP worth six million (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/04/12/great-geiger-bethesda-buys-fallout-ip/) that was recognizable to gamers everywhere well before Fallout 3 was even released! Do you really think that's anywhere in the same league as something like Three Dirty Dwarves?

[j_factor]

Even Three Dirty Dwarves is way more valuable than anything else Oldergames did. If you look at something like Citizen X, there's really no comparison to be made with anything like Sold Out Software or any other significant rerelease.

[Bojay1997]

And if you're too lazy to read my posts, I am already quite familiar with Sold Out's reissues, which is why I am surprised at these claims that they contain such sweeping original alterations.What the hell are you talking about? This is an IP worth six million (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/04/12/great-geiger-bethesda-buys-fallout-ip/) that was recognizable to gamers everywhere well before Fallout 3 was even released! Do you really think that's anywhere in the same league as something like Three Dirty Dwarves?

Obviously you're not that familiar with Sold Out as you seemed to say that they weren't making money from their re-releases of old games, which is simply incorrect.

As for your other point, that's exactly what I'm saying. IP has value even if there isn't an active SKU out there. That's exactly why studios protect their IP so heavily. Will Three Dirty Dwarves ever make Sega more money? Who knows? It's not your place to make those decisions for Sega just like they don't come to where you work and take your work product from five or ten years ago for free and re-release it for whatever they want to do with it. There really is no point to continuing this debate. Your point seems to be that older unsuccessful or unreleased IP has no value and should be free. My point is that it does have value, the law is firmly on the side of the companies and that Oldergames misrepresented their rights to release the games they released at the end. Since they are no longer in business, it really doesn't matter anymore and your opinion about what the law should be or how companies should treat their IP is completely irrelevant to how the world actually works.

[Bojay1997]

Even Three Dirty Dwarves is way more valuable than anything else Oldergames did. If you look at something like Citizen X, there's really no comparison to be made with anything like Sold Out Software or any other significant rerelease.

Citizen X is a perfect example. After Digital Pictures folded, their IP was sold to another entity which then licensed it to a production company to re-edit into a feature film which was subsequently released on DVD and on cable. That IP might have value down the road if someone decides to re-license the old games for release on a virtual console type platform since at least Mad Dog McCree and several contemporary shooting games from the same era have been released on Wii. I'll be honest, I have no idea what point you're trying to make as whether something is presently valuable or not has nothing to do with its treatment under the law and whether or not OlderGames misrepresented the licensing status of the games it released.

[Gameguy]

Some companies don't really mind if the IPs are used, as long as nobody profits from it.

Sierra didn't really mind when their King's Quest games were remade by Tierra Entertainment(now renamed AGDInteractive). The first game was remade before getting permission from Sierra.

http://www.adventureclassicgaming.com/index.php/site/features/329/


Disappointed that Sierra On-Line was no longer interested in developing the license, a number of dedicated adventure game enthusiasts banded together under the tongue-in-cheek company name Tierra Entertainment and set about to remake King's Quest. The new release would be called King's Quest 1 VGA. The indie project would be led by the company's founders Britney Brimhall and Christopher Warren.

Like many fan games, Tierra Entertainment had never received approval from Sierra On-Line to develop this remake.

The games are still available for download, nine years after the first remake was released. On the main page there's a legal statement that says the properties are owned by Sierra but used with permission. I guess they were given official permission at some point. The games are available for free so I don't think they paid anything to get permission.

http://www.agdinteractive.com/games/games.html

[Jorpho]

Obviously you're not that familiar with Sold Out as you seemed to say that they weren't making money from their re-releases of old games, which is simply incorrect.Look again. I never said that. (Obviously they would have gone the same way as Empire Interactive if they were losing money all these years.)


Your point seems to be that older unsuccessful or unreleased IP has no value and should be free.I am also not saying that such things should be free, or anything else about the law. In fact, I get quite incensed when someone points to a download of an older game and says "HAY LOOKIT, IT'S FREE!" I am saying that I think it is entirely feasible that a company could be entirely indifferent regarding the value of ancient discontinued software of practically zero interest to everyone.


Citizen X is a perfect example. After Digital Pictures folded, their IP was sold to another entity which then licensed it to a production company to re-edit into a feature film which was subsequently released on DVD and on cable.FMV games would be entirely unique in that regard.

That IP might have value down the road if someone decides to re-license the old games for release on a virtual console type platform since at least Mad Dog McCree and several contemporary shooting games from the same era have been released on Wii.Actually, Mad Dog McCree seems to have been almost continuously available one way or another ever since its release.

[CMA Death Adder]

I want Super Fighter Team to do a game.com game, that'll be awesome

This could be achieved, considering we own an official game.com development kit; and I admit that it would be a personal achievement for me to produce a game for the game.com that's actually worth playing...

[j_factor]

Citizen X is a perfect example. After Digital Pictures folded, their IP was sold to another entity which then licensed it to a production company to re-edit into a feature film which was subsequently released on DVD and on cable. That IP might have value down the road if someone decides to re-license the old games for release on a virtual console type platform since at least Mad Dog McCree and several contemporary shooting games from the same era have been released on Wii.

Your comparison to Mad Dog McCree is ludicrous. Citizen X was never released, and isn't even 100% complete. I doubt Nintendo (or any console maker) allows betas on their download services.

You can still buy Citizen X from Good Deal Games, by the way. Obviously the owners of the IP either don't care or lack documentation of their ownership (or actually gave permission). It's not like they're surreptitiously sneaking copies through back-door channels, they're selling it openly, and can be found with a simple google search.


I'll be honest, I have no idea what point you're trying to make as whether something is presently valuable or not has nothing to do with its treatment under the law and whether or not OlderGames misrepresented the licensing status of the games it released.

My point is merely that you make no sense. Selling copies of an unreleased (and super obscure) game, while still illegal without permission, is a far cry from anything to do with notable games that were released normally, and rereleases thereof. It really boggles the mind that you brought up Fallout in comparison to a company selling previously unreleased and unheard-of games for Sega CD and CDi.

I do still think the Lost & Found releases were bullshit and just plain wrong, but I find nothing terribly objectionable about anything else Oldergames released. (Well, Frog Feast is a total rip-off of Frog Bog for Intellivision and would seem to violate the principle behind Atari v. Philips and other cases, but Oldergames was only the distributor.) Them selling Plunderball is no different from the sites selling things like Sunman for NES.

[Bojay1997]

Your comparison to Mad Dog McCree is ludicrous. Citizen X was never released, and isn't even 100% complete. I doubt Nintendo (or any console maker) allows betas on their download services.

You can still buy Citizen X from Good Deal Games, by the way. Obviously the owners of the IP either don't care or lack documentation of their ownership (or actually gave permission). It's not like they're surreptitiously sneaking copies through back-door channels, they're selling it openly, and can be found with a simple google search.



My point is merely that you make no sense. Selling copies of an unreleased (and super obscure) game, while still illegal without permission, is a far cry from anything to do with notable games that were released normally, and rereleases thereof. It really boggles the mind that you brought up Fallout in comparison to a company selling previously unreleased and unheard-of games for Sega CD and CDi.

I do still think the Lost & Found releases were bullshit and just plain wrong, but I find nothing terribly objectionable about anything else Oldergames released. (Well, Frog Feast is a total rip-off of Frog Bog for Intellivision and would seem to violate the principle behind Atari v. Philips and other cases, but Oldergames was only the distributor.) Them selling Plunderball is no different from the sites selling things like Sunman for NES.

I think you are completely misunderstanding the various lines of argument going on which I suppose is partially my fault for essentially arguing with a couple of different people at once. The whole discussion about Fallout was in response to the other guy claiming that old IP has little or no value or that companies aren't making money off old IP by making them compatible with newer systems. Obviously, Fallout which was pretty dormant for almost a decade is very valuable and even the old games continue to sell both at retail and on-line. I agree with you that the value of Fallout is many, many times that of Citizen X and all of what Older Games released including the Saturn stuff combined. Still, as we both agree, the legal protections applying to both sets of IP are identical. I also agree with you that there is no legal difference between what Oldergames did and what other repro or proto releasing entities are continuing to do. Finally, Maximum Surge wasn't finished or released either, but the majority of the footage became the movie that the company that bought Digital Pictures' IP released. Clearly, IP on at least some unreleased games has value.

My only point all along has been that OlderGames' former owner misrepresented the fact that he had permission to release most of the games he released. If he had been honest about that four years ago or just did it and didn't do interviews and post on sites about having permission, I would have never bothered to post back then and wouldn't have responded to this necro'd thread. It wasn't until a few days ago in this thread that he admitted that he didn't really have permission but purportedly got someone from some of the companies to say he could do whatever he wanted and to leave them out of it. I know for a fact that's not how Sega or most other companies work. Moreover, I know that's not what happened here based on conversations I had when all of this was originally going down with someone I have known for a long time in Sega's legal department.

Sega and most major entertainment companies have something called a clearance department which reviews requests and if they are approved, they will send out a permission letter or a signed release. I deal with those types of agreements every day and I can tell you that sometimes companies will agree to let other companies or charities use their IP for little or no money if it is handled in a professional manner. They will not, however, give permission over the phone to random people calling up with business propositions. It doesn't work that way.

The reality is, we don't know for sure how the IP holders feel about Good Deal Games using their IP. Nobody has ever presented any proof that they gave permission. It seems more likely they don't even know about it. At this point, I'm not sure why this argument is even going on. You and the other guy are speculating about what happened and have zero basis for your speculation or partial defense of the now defunct Older Games. I'll admit I don't have all the facts, but I have enough to know for sure that at least the last Older Games releases were not authorized and were IPs with active copyright protection from a company that had no knowledge about what Older Games was doing. I'll even go one further and state that if Older Games had continued selling those games, based on the discussions I had with representatives of Sega's legal department, I personally believe Sega would have been prepared to take action. As it stands now, the former Older Games is dead and the games in question are no longer being sold. As such, it's no longer an issue.

[Raster]

Good Old Games is not some company doing what they do for the sake of preserving history. They are a profit making venture with deals with most of the major publishers with whom they share revenue. Although I haven't seen their overall revenue numbers, I know that they have done almost a hundred thousand dollars for one smaller publisher I worked with in the last year, so it clearly is very lucrative.


Good Deal Games is not the same as Good Old Games. Good Deal Games focuses on older console game systems. Good Old Games re-releases older PC/Windows games.

[Bojay1997]

Good Deal Games is not the same as Good Old Games. Good Deal Games focuses on older console game systems. Good Old Games re-releases older PC/Windows games.

You're kidding, right? You bumped a completely dead thread only to not bother to read the discussion? Nobody said Good Deal Games was the same as Good Old Games. They have no relation whatsoever.