US Copyright Office grants abandonware rights

Wow the gravis gamepad! My first gamepad... it's been a long time.

Underdogs ftw!

The software companies are breaking fair use laws anyway by incorporating copy protection on their CD's or DVD's.

The consumer has a right to backup his own property, as long as he doesn't distribute it for profit.

I can understand wanting to make the code less easy to steal. But they should come up with another means for protecting the games' code, instead of making the entire CD copy-proof.

Speaking about old games here, i have a question that i have asked on here a few times and noone has been able to find out tha answer to it: With Nintendo offering classic games to download, do they have the rights to offer games for download in which the developer doesnt exist anymore. For example, i am desperatly looking forward to playing Shadowman again, the N64 version. Now that Acclaim Studios has vapourised, is it possible for Nintendo to offer Shadowman on it's VC service. If anyone can provide me with an answer i would be most grateful.

I wonder if this ruling also covers non-software based copy protection. Several games from the 80's used text lookup schemes (find a word in the manual and enter it) or other things such as pamphlets or toys (like Infocom).

What if a game is no longer being sold or supported, BUT is intended to be sold in the future?> I wonder how would this affect the Virtual Console, where there's presumably a lot of currently unsold and unsupported games, which is likely to be supported.. (take for example, Zelda 2. AFAIK, it's not available anywhere, BUT the chances of it coming out under Virtual Console is probably 100%)

@4:
Didn't you know? When Acclaim went under, all of its assets were sold to various buyers. I'm fairly sure that someone out there now owns the copyright to these games. It's just a matter of figuring out who bought that particular IP and ask.

Although, I do wonder if the team that did the programming would have a say in these virtual console games. Most old games didn't really have "teams" and were developed by people from the company itself, but Acclaim bought games or commissioned teams to develop their licenses... Imagineering and Beam Software come to mind.

to #5 Dave Silva

I don'[t see anything wrong or different. Cracking in this case would be either hacking the game to remove the software side of the lock (Probably not too hard, seeing how many pirates can change/alter game starting sequences), or in cases where the software lock is part of the game itself (example: MGS use of password on the disk back cover), either hack it to skip the sequence, or just tell others the solution.

>> The consumer has a right to backup his own property,
>> as long as he doesn't distribute it for profit.

AGGGGGGHHHH Will you PLEASE stop spreading this? You have NO IDEA what you are talking about. Yes, you have a right to make archival backups. For profit or not, you have no right to distribute it. PERIOD. Stop spreading the myth that if you aren't making money off it, it's ok. It's not. You can never, EVER distribute a copy. If you sell/give/whatever someone the original, theoretically you could give them the backup and destroy your own, but out side that you can NEVER EVER distribute a copy without infringing someone's copyright. That's where the name comes from: they have the RIGHT to determine how their works of authorship are COPYed and distributed.

People ask why lawyers get paid so much? Half of it is to untangle the armchair lawyering people spread around.

-p-

@6

Yeah i just finished swimming around google and wikipedia and found out that when Acclaim Studios went belly-up, a lot of thier IP's went to 'Throwback Entertainment'. The official site has a list of acquired games....and Shadowman isn't one of them. Shadowman was developed by a subsidy of Acclaim Entertainment called Iguana UK, which was later renamed to Acclaim Studios Teesside. If anyone has any better luck than me tracking down who has the IP for Shadowman, it'd be great. Forsaken was one of my favourite games on the N64 also, made by exactly the same company, and is just as hard to track down. I want to see both these games appear on the virtual console.

@7: Yeah, that strikes me as a rather large loophole. It's only a matter of time before someone starts arguing about this - especially as all three major console companies have a Virtual Console of sorts.

@10: Shadowman is currently owned by Valient Entertainment, a comic company previously owned by Acclaim. Shadowman started life as a comic character.

Read your EULAs. You're usually only licensed to use the software and not own it. Some say that you own the media (CD, DVD, Floppy) that the software is on, but the company or licensors retain ownership of the software.

For example, from the Windows XP EULA:
1.6 Back-up Copy. YOU MAY MAKE A SINGLE
BACK-UP COPY OF THE SOFTWARE.
YOU MAY USE ONE (1) BACK-UP
COPY SOLELY FOR YOUR ARCHIVAL
PURPOSES AND TO REINSTALL THE
SOFTWARE ON THE COMPUTER.
EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED
IN THIS EULA OR BY LOCAL LAW,
YOU MAY NOT OTHERWISE MAKE
COPIES OF THE SOFTWARE, INCLUDING
THE PRINTED MATERIALS ACCOMPANYING
THE SOFTWARE. YOU MAY NOT
LOAN, RENT, LEASE, LEND OR
OTHERWISE TRANSFER THE CD OR
BACK-UP COPY TO ANOTHER USER.

3. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS AND OWNERSHIP.
Manufacturer, MS and its suppliers (including Microsoft Corporation) reserve all rights not expressly granted to you in this EULA. The SOFTWARE is protected by copyright and other intellectual property laws and treaties. Manufacturer, MS and its suppliers (including Microsoft Corporation) own the title, copyright, and other intellectual property rights in the SOFTWARE. The SOFTWARE is licensed, not sold.

Also I think #9 is right, you can still make your copy of it to preservation library or archive, but it still does not say that you can distribute it.
But... it does say "reproduction" when the software is considered obsolete for the archive.

And #7 & 11, sounds like they're gonna need a software copyright guy to be the keeper of the list of what should be considered obsolete. And if like #7 says, if it does come back, does that mean it comes off the list?

Dang, they just gave more lawyers more money with this...

Awesome, thanks for that Geoff. I now know who owns the Shadowman franchise...if only they had a website so i could question them on the possibility of Shadowman coming to the VC service. Now for the rediculous task of tracking down who has the Forsaken licence.....all Valiant Entertainment did was buy back the original Valiant characters as part of the bankruptcy proceedings...that kinda leaves Forsaken floating about somewhere....

Everyone seems to making this out to be more than it is. It is simply expanding the rules for when a LIBRARY can circumvent copy-protection systems. Here is the exact wording of the new rule:

"Computer programs and video games distributed in formats that have become obsolete and that require the original media or hardware as a condition of access, when circumvention is accomplished for the purpose of preservation or archival reproduction of published digital works by a library or archive. A format shall be considered obsolete if the machine or system necessary to render perceptible a work stored in that format is no longer manufactured or is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace."

Source: http://www.copyright.gov/1201/

I believe anyone can make an archival copy of any copyrighted work, as long as they DON'T bypass copy protection to do it. Section 1201 of the DMCA deals with "Circumvention of copyright protection systems," but they only apply to libraries or archives. And according to the DMCA:

"(5) In order for a library or archives to qualify for the exemption under this subsection, the collections of that library or archives shall be--

(A) open to the public; or

(B) available not only to researchers affiliated with the library or archives or with the institution of which it is a part, but also to other persons doing research in a specialized field."

Source: http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/hr2281_dmca_law_19981020_pl105-304.html

This new rule does *not* affect the average gamer.

"The one most pertinent to gamers is that, for archival purposes, copy protection on software no longer being sold or supported by its copyright holder can be cracked."

Technically, DVDs will start to fall under this. And I'm sure some already do! Hooray!

@9:

I thought the message the original poster made actually said that. Well, what you ranted about. He said he can back it up, but not redistribute it or sell it. That's what I understood.

I always make backups of my PC game discs; I've had bad luck with scratched discs lots of times. It's within my legal right, and that's as far as I go. I don't give copies to anyone.

People, you dont own the games you buy, not for the PC anyway. Take a minute to read the EULA. You are 'leasing' the game, you dont own it. You own the disc ot's on but not the material. This has been this way for AGES, so come one, please stop thinking you actually own any game you have, for the PC.

Copy a game, keep the copy for yourself. Give the original away you either give the copy too or destroy it. This has also been the law for AGES, so come on, please take a minute to ACTUALLY READ a EULA. This would NEVER come up in topics if someone actually read them once in awhile.

And for you WOW players, I hope you know that despite buying the game and paying monthly for it, you dont own anything in the game. Not the super cool sword or any amount of gold you may have. You really need to read the WOW EULA.

INFORM YOURSELF!

Wow! #17 really! EVERYBODY knows what you just said, you brought nothing new to the table. I have seen SO many people spout off that same rant talking down to the masses as though you have some info that the common man was just to stupid to notice. No, we don't own the game, the company that made it owns it, just like with movies and music. BUT, since someone who buys a game owns the disk, and can play it from now until the day they die, AND the company that owns the game has no legal right or recourse to come to your house and take it back, it's almost as good as owning it. As a matter of fact it is exactly the same, with one exception, you can't sell copies or rent it out. That is the only benefit you don't have when you buy a game. When you buy a car it is yours forever, if you lease it though, at some point you will have to give it back (unless you then buy it). If you refuse, someone will come to your house and take it back. That is not the case with video games you ARE only leasing it, BUT, you NEVER have to give it back. It is yours forever. That is why most people refer to it as owning the game, because it is actually more like owning than leasing. 99.5% of gamers realize this, so you don't have to try to school us.

@Dave, this is old so you likely won't see it, but that's not what he said. He said as long as you don't distribute it for profit. That implies you can distribute if you don't profit. That implication is flatly false, yet people seem to perpetuate it.

I ranted because I see people talking about IP rights day in and day out and simply do not know what they are talking about. If you were a mechanic, would you be ok if someone said the carburator contained cars that were berated to make the car go?

-p-

@p-diddy:
Some sharing for non-commercial purposes may be legal, at least for audio. Check out the "Sound Recording Amendment" and the "Home Recording Act." Both discuss legal, non-commercial copying. Additionally, there are protections for sharing copies of the original copy if it's not done for a commercial advantage.