where you can download roms

[monkeychemist]

Ha, you thought this was a rom request!

no, my question is about the legality of sites that have roms up for download. I remember several years ago that it was always illegal, under any and all circumstances. Now i hear that there is a 10year limit to the copyright. Also, i have noticed that rom sites that used to get taken down quite easilly aer up and doing fine... like romnation.net for example. Am i missing something? is it now ok to own and / or distribute roms? could anyone put some up on their site? I know that the nintendo revolution is going to have free roms for download so is that why it is ok now?

Just curious. Thanks,
Jeremy

[hydr0x]

i have no idea, i only know the biggest and best site we had for the last couple of years closed it's doors a few weeks back because the maintainers lost interested, not because of any lawsuits though

[SirDrexl]

I haven't heard anything about a 10-year limit to the copyright, and I would seriously doubt it to be true.

As for Nintendo "giving away" their games, they probably are not going to just let you download whatever you want with no strings attached. They are likely to be used as bonuses for buying or completing games. Asking if it's okay to download roms of any of such old games is like asking if it's okay to download the Zelda games that Nintendo had on the bonus GameCube discs, which technically were free.

[Cryomancer]

As I walways say.

Rom sites are bad for you. There are several far superior options than sites.

[kirin jensen]

I only know a little about copyright law - and I am not a lawyer, but here's how (I think) it works:

Copyright is capable of lapsing into the public domain if not enforced. That's why companies are often so ferocious about protecting it. Software copyrights are to my knowledge enforcible only for the viable commercial life of the hardware carrying it.

Thus, games by companies that are now defunct (and were not bought out) may well be in the public domain.

It may be that one of the ways of continuing the copyrights on games still held by private companies is to rerelease them on plug'n'play devices and/or greatest hit software compilations.

That's some of the basics of what I think I remember - but if I'm wrong, I'm sure someone here knows and will correct me.

[Phosphor Dot Fossils]

Copyright is capable of lapsing into the public domain if not enforced.
Nope, that's trademarks, not copyrights.

[Flack]

Ha, you thought this was a rom request!

no, my question is about the legality of sites that have roms up for download. I remember several years ago that it was always illegal, under any and all circumstances. Now i hear that there is a 10year limit to the copyright. Also, i have noticed that rom sites that used to get taken down quite easilly aer up and doing fine... like romnation.net for example. Am i missing something? is it now ok to own and / or distribute roms? could anyone put some up on their site? I know that the nintendo revolution is going to have free roms for download so is that why it is ok now?

Just curious. Thanks,
Jeremy

The Nintendo Revolution is NOT going to have free ROMs for download. Nintendo has stated that there will be a fee. Whether it's a monthly fee or a per game fee remains to be seen.

It is not now nor will it ever be legal to distribute other people's copyrighted software. As we begin to see more and more companies trying to profit off of their older software libraries, you will see more and more ROM sites closed down.

[monkeychemist]

As we begin to see more and more companies trying to profit off of their older software libraries, you will see more and more ROM sites closed down.

Ahhh that is a very good point. Thank you

[Sniderman]

http://home.hiwaay.net/~lkseitz/comics/Rom/graphics/romcorner.gif

Rom?


:D

P.S. Tip o' the hat to Lee Seitz for the image.

[kirin jensen]

Copyright is capable of lapsing into the public domain if not enforced.
Nope, that's trademarks, not copyrights.

Thanks PDF!

See? I knew someone would correct me if I was wrong. :D

[nate1749]

Copyright law also states (some latin phrase) that it is not interested in small instances of infringement. Kind of like professional judgement for cops.

Now most of those sites take it way beyond any interperation of "small," but from my experience I noticed that companies don't want to dedicate their resources if they aren't losing any money. If someone downloads 100 snes games why would nintendo care, you can't buy them legally right now even if you wanted. Now like someone said, they will probably care in the future once they do start selling those old games again electronically.

Also, in the past a company would send an e-mail to a host threatening to sue them because of one of their subscribers. The host would then immediately kill the account of out fear of some big company who could drownd them in legal fees. Recently though the courts have specified that they can't do this type of mass threating and they have to actually follow the legal procedure for handling this.

So now if Nintendo or whoever wants to shut someone down, they have to call their lawyer, their lawyer has to file all this paper work to the court etc. etc. Previously they could have had a 16 year old kid scanning the internet and pasting an e-mail threat letter to the host.

Nate

[Poofta!]

dont know what that 10 year thing is, Digital Media Copyright lasts for 95 years. so it will be a while untill it will be 'legal' and even then the company or copyright holder may apply for an extension (from what i understand)

[InsaneDavid]

Also, in the past a company would send an e-mail to a host threatening to sue them because of one of their subscribers. The host would then immediately kill the account of out fear of some big company who could drownd them in legal fees.

Sega of America sent me one of those once. :roll: ...and that was for Dreamcast cover scans, nothing else. I thought it was cool and got a good laugh out of it more than anything.

[kevincure]

Wow, misinformation. Copyright lasts 95+ years (actually, forever, because Congress and the EU keep lengthening the term so that nothing ever comes into the public domain). An infraction is an infraction - not such thing as "small violations don't matter." There is something called fair use, so you could potentially use a ROM to get an image for a book, for instance, but it's a major grey area.

Here's some common misinformation the other way, though. Someone said Sega sent them a letter for having cover scans? Tell them to fuck off. Not only is it not a copyright violation - that's clearly fair use - but it's actually illegal for a copyright holder to claim more rights than they have. If you have cash, you could take them to court and they would probably lose the copyrights involved. I wish people would countersue more often.

[SkiDragon]

I thought copyright was 75 years. Could be wrong, I guess.

[kevincure]

You remember correctly, but say hi to your new friend the Copyright Term Extension Act, aka the CTEA, Sonny Bono Act and "Mickey Mouse Protection Act." The bill, unsurpisingly, increaed the term of copyright 20 years, and was passed just in time to ensure that the earliest Mickey Mouse films didn't enter public domain. The bill even worked retroactively, giving another 20 years to works already created.

Now, you may say that's bullshit, since the Constitution requires that copyright be given "to promote the Public Good" and for "Limited Times", and giving extra time retroactively is not going to increase the number of works created in the past (since, like, it's the past and has already happened). A case named Eldred v. Ashcroft argued this very point to the Supreme Court last year, and recently lost on a 6-3 decision. Want to make a wager that copyright is extended again right around the year 2020? Jack Valenti, the head of the MPAA, did famously say that if the Constitution requires limited copyright, "forever less one day" would be acceptable to him. Looks like he's getting his wish.

There are a number of ROMs in the public domain, though (because the copyright holder placed them in the public domain), such as most of the Vectrex library. Download those at your leisure.

[nate1749]

An infraction is an infraction - not such thing as "small violations don't matter."

Sorry, you're wrong. I'll find the page, but my source is The Business Of Music - which is the industry standard guide for copyright and royalty laws. And it's not that they don't matter, it's that the law is not interested in minor infractions.

If it were, then why aren't there thousands of raids on everyone who has copied a tape, etc.? The only type of people who get in trouble are the people who go crazy with piracy.

In fact, can you find me one incident where someone has gotton in trouble for a minor infraction?

Also, what's your source?

Nate

[THATinkjar]

I download vintage roms from eDonkey/Overnet. Any of these P2P networks are great!

[InsaneDavid]

Someone said Sega sent them a letter for having cover scans? Tell them to fuck off. Not only is it not a copyright violation - that's clearly fair use - but it's actually illegal for a copyright holder to claim more rights than they have.

Uh, it was in early 2000 and as I said...


I thought it was cool and got a good laugh out of it more than anything.

It was more of a respectful request to please remove the high res scans of DC game art (front, back, insert, disc) which I had no problem in agreeing to. If they wanted to force the issue then it would be reproduction of copyrighted images. I only owned about 8% of the games I had scans for at the time just the same.


If you have cash, you could take them to court and they would probably lose the copyrights involved. I wish people would countersue more often.

That never fixes anything, just creates more muck. I think the world is sue happy enough as it is and why would I want to go after a company that was having problems as it was (I was with SoA for a short time prior) when they very professionally asked me to remove some copyrighted images?


If it were, then why aren't there thousands of raids on everyone who has copied a tape, etc.? The only type of people who get in trouble are the people who go crazy with piracy.

That's right, but I wouldn't say that those are the "only type" of people that get busted for that. Occasionally there's a slip and someone gets grabbed just out of dumb luck. ROMs aren't approved but they are tolerated to a point. It's the whole "they can't take us all" and while that's true, they are going to grab one or two of you a year. I've distroed the MAME romset under the FreeMAMERoms group years ago and as long as you're honest in answering questions when they come up, you stay current on the regulations that are ENFORCED, and are very open with your records (ie, you're not earning money from ad revenue on emulation sites - THAT should be illegal) then you really don't have much to worry about.

...aren't there about 100 other threads on ROM images this and that? The search function is your friend. :) I'll be glad when this one gets lost in the shuffle.

+50 Meseta to nate1749

[monkeychemist]

Thank you for this wealth of information. we can lock up this topic if you guys are getting bored of it :/

[kaustik]

I have been surprised that none of the major second hand retailers haven't joined the lawsuit pack. They are after all the ones that suffer when it is easier to download a ROM than buy a used copy through them. It would seem that it would be simple for them to prove that they have lost sales of SMB/Duck Hunt due to illegal downloading.

[hydr0x]

As I walways say.

Rom sites are bad for you. There are several far superior options than sites.

well, we all know irc, but that wasn't the topic, right?

[kevincure]

nate, you're wrong about this one. If it's not fair use, it's not a copyright violation. The reason people who tape songs don't get sued is because it's not worth the time of the record company to sue them, and it's bad PR. Here's a good analogy: You won't get a ticket for going 30 in a 25, but that doesn't mean that it's legal to go 30 in a 25. I don't have a source to give you, but I study IP Economics, am preparing a book on the economics of copyright, and recently worked for the US govt. on IP issues. You are right that it's exceedingly unlikely one would get sued for a "minor violation", though.

kaustik, second hand stores have no grounds on which to sue. They don't own the copyright to the games.

InsaneDavid - I must have misunderstood. I thought they'd sent you a cease-and-desist letter. If it was just a friendly request, then no worries. That said, "reproduction of copyrighted images" in the manner that you reproduced them is clearly fair use and not a copyright violation. It's not about suing to screw Sega, but about someone suing so that copyright holders think twice before firing off strings of cease-and-desist letters that are always complied with because no one wants to risk a judge saying "well, this wasn't fair use, now you owe X amounts of money." I agree with you about the muck though - I hate lawyers as much as the next guy :-).

[Powerglovekid]

Whats up with all you guys wanting to play shitty arcade games here??? nintendo ok fine, but some crappy ass stiff arcade game? PSSSH!!!!! With xbox I got an arcade at home.

http://www.pxl-vision.com/photo/PGK-IN-DA-HOUSE.jpg


bi the way nate. that pic was f'up on what you did. I aint paid it no mind since you wack anyway.

[hydr0x]

nate, you're wrong about this one. If it's not fair use, it's not a copyright violation. The reason people who tape songs don't get sued is because it's not worth the time of the record company to sue them, and it's bad PR.


mhhh are you sure about that? it's not true for Germany, that's all i know, it's absolutely legal to record radio to tape or cds/lps you own... it's also legal to dump your games and store them and it's also legal to copy your audio-cds and dvds as long as they are not copy protected

[nate1749]

I don't have a source

So you are no more credible than anyone else on here.

FYI - A cop can LEGALLY not give you a ticket due to professional judgement. You're seeing the law as one size fits all, but it's not - it's not black and white, although on paper you see it that way. In reality (when it's practiced) there's really a HUGE grey area - which is open for interpertation and once the judge makes his decision, that is the determing factor as to whether you were violating the law or not. Even then that's not really the final call because different judges interpert parts of the law differently, hence the appeal process or the reason why the supreme court isn't just one guy.

Whose charging you (whether it be sony for infringement or the state for speeding) does not determine whether you were breaking the law. So just because it appears that you violated something at face value upon basic interpertation, the judge has the final say to interpert the law and say no, the law was not written to go after incidents such as these, therfore, you were not commiting any crime, therefore you are not guilty.

Personal experience doesn't hold much credibility w/o a source. I've taken some business law classes and dished out more money than I'd like to count to traffic and entertainment lawyers, but that doesn't mean anything on a video game forum.

I'd like to hear more about your book though since I take an interest in economics as well.

Nate

[Gemini-Phoenix]

One part which caught my eye above was the bit about companies releasing compilations and Tv joystick things in order to maintain their trademarks / copywrites on certain games.

That is most probably why every so often we get a new Sonic The Hedgehog compilation - And also those cheapie Atari / Intellivision handset things that plug directly into the Tv...

Also, another grey area is the one relating to actually owning a copy of something you own.

It applies to music and games and films etc. Ie, making back-ups / copies of your Cd's is technically legal, but at the same time there are all sorts of fine lines which need treading very carefully.

Same goes for games and the like.


I believe (Or rather, have always been led to believe) that you are allowed to legally make ONE copy for your own use, so long as it stays with the original copy it was ripped from.

(Please feel free to correct me if I am in fact mis-informed regarding this)

I also remember that back in the days of the Amiga, they actually encouraged you to make a copy of a game on your first use (As a back up measure) - You were then supposed to use the copy, so that if anything did happen, you always had the original at hand to create another copy.


I also know that where companies like Nintendo, and Rom's are concerned - They only sem to be interested in certain ones...

Ie, I used to get my Rom's from EmuAsylum - Now a while back they received orders from Nintendo to remove certain Rom's from their lists, which were games like Mario / Pokemon / Donkey Kong / Zelda Etc... But they didn't cease the distribution of many of the other NES / Snes / GameBoy Rom's which EmuAsylum hosts...

[emumuumuucowgomoo]

I also know that where companies like Nintendo, and Rom's are concerned - They only sem to be interested in certain ones...

Ie, I used to get my Rom's from EmuAsylum - Now a while back they received orders from Nintendo to remove certain Rom's from their lists, which were games like Mario / Pokemon / Donkey Kong / Zelda Etc... But they didn't cease the distribution of many of the other NES / Snes / GameBoy Rom's which EmuAsylum hosts...

Ie, the ones Nintendo owns.

Nintendo has no jurisdiction to do anything if I'm offering copies of Mega Man and Bo Jackson Baseball. Heck, I could sell them. For profit. With giant stickers that say "HAHA MONKEY UNLICENSED BY THE MAN".

So why do so many ROMsites close down after Nintendo, Sega, et al write them a single ceast and desist letter?

Fear.

Usually the site owners - no matter how b055 and k-rad 1337 bitchin' they make themselves out to be in the "scene", wet themselves like 4 year olds after the first cease and desist letter comes in, take everything down, and post a blog update about OMG THE MAN CAME IN :( :( :( SHOUTOUTZ TO MY PEEPS WEBSITE ISN'T FUN ANYMORE I GOT SCHOOL AND A LIFE.

If I'm offering a full NES ROMset, the only thing Nintendo can do is bitch about THEIR roms that I have offered for download - and probably have some greasy robot-monkey coward send a nasty email to my ISP. In the end, they can't really do much about third party releases, other than alert the third parties in question and hope the Big Machine keeps on rollin'.