Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (
More info?)
Ok, trying to obtain the trademark in order to take action against
those who sell homemade arcade machines (the competition) is scummy.
Obviously those who build and sell arcade machines are being
compensated for the labor/materials.
There is a somewhat frustrating problem with the retro emulation
philosophy. The claim that the original copyright holders are no longer
profiting from old games now seems less valid than it was during the
inception of MAME. In the last few years accurate versions of old
arcade games have become popular and are available on most console
platforms. I believe that if not for the popularity of MAME and other
emulators, the console and arcade companies would not have had the
vision to put out these packages. Nonetheless, one can no longer use
the excuse that, "there is no other way to play these games." In a way
it's a catch-22 since these games would not have been available if not
for MAME and other emulators. Once these emulators proved to be
popular, legal alternatives became available.
Also, I often hear that the copyright period for game software is
unreasonably long. Does anyone know what the exact time to expiration
is for a software copyright under US law? Is this even defined?
-moomoo
keith corcoran wrote:
> he's really saying he wants to stop someone who spends a couple of
weeks
> building a great machine from scratch from selling it on ebay, being
> compensated for time and materials and competing with his machines,
though
> it seems he's argueing he's doing it for the betterment of the
community.
>
> he points to instructions about downloading roms, etc but it seems if
i were
> to build a machine and give someone the URL to star roms.. they could
then,
> as the end user, purchase the roms and all would be ok. providing
that my
> machine's design or artwork didn't infringe on any copyrights. while
you
> couldn't legally run the games he offers in his machines, it wouldn't
take
> long for the end user to get online like the rest of it and figure it
all
> out. at that point it's on them. if they legally bought a gun and
decided to
> use it in a robbery, it's not the fault of the seller.
>
> that's the bottom line here seems that he'd like to make it illegal
to sell
> a machine that could potentially be used to run mame and play illegal
roms.
>
> not sure how this will pan out but i don't see more people buying his
> product as a result (though he states that's not the intended
outcome). in
> fact, the very people who are not buying his machines are the same
people
> who still won't be able to afford them if he's successful in shutting
down
> 'illegal arcade machine' sales.
>
> so now it's not only the ROMs that are illegal, but soon the machine
itself.
> dun dun dunnnnnnn!
>
> the plot thickens.
>
> k.
>
> "moomoo" <maymemoomoo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1109059464.783351.218730@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > Ok, so he claims that he only wants to be able to easily take
action
> > against people who sell ROMs for profit under the MAME name. Also,
he
> > is willing to forget the trademark application (a lost cause
anyway)
> > and work with the MAME authors.
> >
> > The ultracade effort to trademark "MAME" may have been poorly
thought
> > out, but given this explanation I don't see it as part of the usual
> > evil empire tactics.
> >
> > MooMoo
> >