Law in which country though? As far as I know in the U.S. so long as it is copyrighted, even if the game has not been sold in 15 years, you cannot download it because it is copyrighted.
Canada
Actually I think they’re going to pass or already have passed a law in the US which allows for the archiving of old and obsolete software that is in danger of being lost forever. This includes many of the old computer games from the 80s that are on aging floppy disks and the like. archive.org had some info about it.
[This message has been edited by Laslow (edited 05-24-2004).]
The problem is in determining if something is really “abandonware” or not. Because frankly, most people don’t know or don���t care to look into it. A good example was Season of Sakura. When they announced that it was going out of print, people immediately were declaring it “abandonware” and started downloading it and encouraging others to download it. But as we know, it was only “out of print” because they had updated and put it together into the Jast Memorial collection, JastUSA still had all the copyrights to the software. Heck, I still get into arguments with people about it…
Yes but archiving to what point? There is an old Salt Mine in Utah somewhere, which I think holds about 90% of the movies ever made going back to the earliest ones they can find. That is an archive, it preserves them, the salt mine helps to keep them safe and keep them cool stop them from falling apart, but you or I cannot go in there and just ask for a copy of a silent movie from say 1930 and get a free copy.
It is wonderful they are archiving this, keeping them safe for the future, but does that allow us to freely download them once they are within that archive?
There are some games I can think of from the old Sierra days, ones that were not part of a series but existed in the type command era that are no longer sold, and perhaps will no longer be sold and yet they are not considered abandonware. With Season of Sakura it is clear it is not abandonware and if people looked hard enough at the time it might have been clear then too, but with other games it is very hard to tell as ekylo mentioned.
So is there any one way of knowing that game A is abandonware since it has not been sold in 20 years and is not going to be part of a collection but game B is not abandonware even though it has not been sold in 20 years and is not going to be part of a collection? Is there a way to tell what is and is not abandonware fairly easily?
Just the companies or the games? If the company exists but has not sold the game in 20 years, has no intent in selling the game every again, is that abandonware or not since the company might still exist though they have gone from selling games to accounting software?
quote:
Originally posted by woodelf:
And it is still being sold too.
Abandonware really only applies to the companies who no longer exsist.
Not true; to the best of my knowledge the true definition of abandonware is "software that is not available, and that has next to no chance of being made available again for a very long time (if ever)". All other definitions that I have seen, merely approximate this ideal.
Saying "companies who no longer exist" is a reasonable approximation, but you quickly run into trouble. JAST no longer exists, for example; when the rights to Peter's contracts run out the titles he has licensed vanish forever unto the void. But for the time being a license exists.
I'd write more here, but it's late; more accurately it's early and I have to go to work.
A study has been done that says file sharing is not what’s killing CD sales, and I think this also applies to Bishoujo games. http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=23577
Even if you were to stop all the piracy it may not affect the sales. The main premise of the article in the link is just because they are downloading the MP3’s does not mean that they would have actually bought them had they not been able to download it. If you won a free holiday, you’d probably go on the holiday but may not have neccesarily paid to go on that same holiday.
I can’t confirm this for sure, but a friend told me that sales actually increased while Napster was around, probably because people were able to get samples of the artists songs and then would buy them if they liked them. I’ve heard on the radio some artists consider MP3’s similar to having their songs played on the radio.
I originally got into Bishoujo games because I downloaded some of the smaller ones and liked them. After I found out where I could get more I have bought as many as I can. Were it not for the sites offering them I would never have known about these games, and known that they were worth buying. I don’t download them anymore because I want to support the industry and I like to get the extra stuff you would get when you buy the games like the covers, manuals etc and the stuff that often gets cut out of the games you can download to minimise the download size.
These downloads may very well be the best advertising you have until they can be accepted as widely as adult anime is. Reviews are all well and good but people still have to be able to find them and people don’t always trust them either. I would allow games that are really small and able to be downloaded easily to remain on websites and have links to where people can buy more and get much better quality ones like ones with voices and animation that we have now. Even though some of the one that aren’t selling anymore have been redone like 3 sisters story and Season of Sakura, I’d still allow people to download them let them know where they can get the enhanced versions.
I do have a problem if all the games were available to every one for free and therefore nobody bought them, and I do not like that games are available right after they’re released, but as long as people have experienced these games will want more then there is always hope.
The problem is that this idea also relies on the morality of your average human being. And most people miss a great deal of that. For example, you can see one of those people on OptiGamer, from which I linked a thread relating to bishoujo games in the thread “Ignorance about bishoujo games”.
Most people wouldn’t buy them if they can get them for free. Sad, but true. Especially young people, which I have to live with every day at school.
I actually think pchrgt has an excellent point. If someone won a free around the world trip I think most of us would take it, or if we found a way to “get” such a trip I think we would take it, however to pay for such a trip would be more then I think many if not all of us could afford.
Morality has never been an major issue on the idea of piracy, or at least I think, since given the choice even some of the most moral would rather something for free then something they have to pay for and so long as there is plausible deniability (works for governments can work for you) they can overcome moral qualms by never learning what they are doing is truly wrong or harmful to another person, company, industry etc. History is rife with examples of people doing morally wrong things but remaining ignorant of it by choice in order to sooth their moral conscious and not face a moral dilemma.
Sure downloading games just released is wrong, but games from 5 years ago, well to many that is a gray area so to them it’s okay so long as they don’t learn it is wrong, could be one way around moral qualms about downloading games, and also in a similar way of accepting games. You publicly denounce them say they are horrible, they are porn, they are something that can harm society, or whatever people say, so playing them is morally okay since you have to understand them in order to accurately speak out against them, and if you enjoy them well that is okay too since you will atone for it by speaking against these games. Hey I know people that think in similar ways about other topics so I can see people thinking like this about these games, play them at night speak out against them during the day.
That is why I think you have to try and separate what people say in public and what they do in private. Since some just might be downloading these games and enjoying them, but publicly denounce them because either they are expected too, they feel peer pressure too, it is ‘the’ thing to do, or perhaps they see something in others who play the games they either don’t want to see in themselves or not like to see attached to the games so they denounce the games in hopes of getting those people away from the games. You will notice those that do denoucne them almost always say the same negative things about them, like a tape recorder, so it’s hard to tell who is just parroting the mantra and who has played the games but to hide the fact is parroting the mantra. This idea of parroting despite having played such games is especially true with an issue that should not be but has become as controversial as Bishoujo Games. I am not saying don’t trust anyone, just don’t assume that the stated reason is always what they really feel, especially in age groups where peer pressure to at least publicly conform is of major concern.
I actually think more would get them for free since they can do so in private without anyone knowing allowing them to play them and still stand against them. Yeah that sounds cynical but I think we all know people that on at least one issue or another says they stand on one side in public but then seems to stand on the other side in private, which is why I don’t think this view is as cynical as it might seem at first.
[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 05-26-2004).]
The problem with downloading any software is not that it endangers the industry or manufacturer. Rather, it encourages the belief that it is all right to steal under some circumstances.
Once people accept the idea of a double standard, it’s easy to justify theft. It’s a big company, my taking it won’t hurt them. I wouldn’t buy it anyway, so they’re not losing anything. I’m too poor to afford it right now, etc. The only way to have a clear code of ethics (and conscience) is to refrain from taking anything you don’t own without paying for it. If it’s something you can do without, don’t participate in illegal trade. That philosophy will serve you well in other areas of life.
I agree that the best way not to allow people to think they can take whatever they want whenever they want is not allow that to happen at first with things they do not need, and that might not matter for their survival, however that also pushes control away from those that might be able to control it, and trying to stop it is a waste of time, of money, and of energy since throughout history there has never been anything anyone can do to stop this kind of stealing, any attempt just makes those trying to do it harder to find the next time. This is not to say it should be condoned or efforts to control it should not be made, but outright stopping it is at least at present not seemingly able to be done.
Also, people can always justify anything they want (some very drastic examples from history come to mind) regardless of their being use to double standards or not being use to double standards. Taking games or other items in this fashion goes more toward the idea of “I want therefore I will take” rather then the ideal of “I want but cannot afford so I will work hard to earn money to buy what I want”.
If the latter as an ideal ever did exist in a majority of the people numerous examples in real life have driven it from most of the people or so it seems to me.
I agree the philosophy mentioned as an ideal, but the problem with ideals is they are ideal. While I do not support illegal trade and stand against it at such times as these games I have to admit it has it’s place and at times might even help legal trade. We cannot stop it, so the best thing to do is find a way to control it which might not be easy but is a lot easier and will have a more immediate positive effect then attempting to shut it down.
[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 05-26-2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
The problem with downloading any software is not that it endangers the industry or manufacturer. Rather, it encourages the belief that it is all right to steal under some circumstances.Once people accept the idea of a double standard, it's easy to justify theft. It's a big company, my taking it won't hurt them. I wouldn't buy it anyway, so they're not losing anything. I'm too poor to afford it right now, etc. The only way to have a clear code of ethics (and conscience) is to refrain from taking anything you don't own without paying for it. If it's something you can do without, don't participate in illegal trade. That philosophy will serve you well in other areas of life.
Sorry but I don't feel bad about downloading songs from major artists. Do you know that 4 companies own the music industry? They release music under thousands of aliases to make it seem like its not a huge monopoly.Maybe i would feel bad about it if they didn't hold a nazi like strangle hold on music. Did you know that they "pay" radio stations to play their music? Laws were passed years ago that forbade them from paying radio stations to play their music, but guess what, they found a loophole. They have middle men who pay the radio stations to add songs to the rotation. Then the 4 big companies pay the middle man. Why is this bad? All that comes out are 4:30 minute or less stale cookie cutter songs played over and over and over. Radio playlists are shinking more and more every year. I could turn on my radio to one of my favorite stations and if I name 10 songs I bet you that I have a 80 pct chance that one of the songs i named would be playing at this exact moment. Now they have the gall to sue everyday hardworking people for TENS of thousands of dollars, ruining their lives. 90 percent of the people settle for around 10 thousand dollars because they can't afford to wage a costly leagal battle against the billionare companies. Do I care if record sales dropped 5 percent? All that means is that the CEOs won't be able to buy a new personal jet for an extra year, boo-hoo. Would I steal from a small bussiness or a individual? Hell no. Do I mind stealing from a heartless billions of dollars a year monopoly when I take precautions to make sure I'm not caught? No. Think about it logically. If i go out and vote will it make any difference? No it won't. In the history of the world no laymens single vote has ever mattered (There has been lots of cases where govement bodies with only say 200 representitives passed acts with only vote but thats with a body thats millions of times smaller). If everyone thought like that would it make a difference? Yes. But for you as a person it makes no difference because if you personally go out to vote or you don't the same person will be elected president ( I won't even get into the electorate college which is the real body that picks the president). It's kinda the same way with the entertainment industry. Will my extra 1000 a year going to matter to the Record Industry? No because its a Billion dollar a year company and my personal payments would have no impact on anything they do. Will my extra 1000 a year help the small B game industry? They are a small body of government. My 1000 may make the difference between getting a certain game licenced or the company not being able to.
quote:
Originally posted by Laslow:
Sorry but I don't feel bad about downloading songs from major artists. Do you know that 4 companies own the music industry? They release music under thousands of aliases to make it seem like its not a huge monopoly.Maybe i would feel bad about it if they didn't hold a nazi like strangle hold on music.
To me it doesn't matter whether it's 4 companies or 1, or 100 for that matter. It's a question of property rights. If you believe that individuals and corporations have the right to produce or acquire rights to goods, then you cannot condone theft. It's not about the big, bad, monopolistic companies and their money-grubbing practices. It's about private property. Stealing from a corporation is no different from stealing from your neighbor, except that you may find it easier not to get caught. Do you shoplift when you consider the markup on store merchandise "unfair"? No, because the chances of getting caught and the repercussions are greater than when you download files. Be honest with yourself. Stealing is wrong no matter who the victim is, no matter what the product is.
quote:I've never understood the uproar about payola. To me it's just a marketing scheme like product placement in movies. It's a given that large corporations have a bigger budget than individual artists for promoting their products. Is it fair? Maybe not, but I believe in the old adage cream rises to the top, that is, quality will be recognized for its true value by the public. An unknown artist whose work truly merits it can gain fame and popularity through public performances and self-promotion. The reason so few artists are successful is because most of what they produce is derivative or appeals to a small audience. I don't see how this relates to piracy other than being another exuse to rant about those big, bad mega-corporations.
Did you know that they "pay" radio stations to play their music? Laws were passed years ago that forbade them from paying radio stations to play their music, but guess what, they found a loophole.
quote:
Do I mind stealing from a heartless billions of dollars a year monopoly when I take precautions to make sure I'm not caught? No.
The operative word here is "stealing". If you don't have any scruples about that, there's not much more I can say. Think about what you're saying the next time some street thief rips off your property. What applies in one sphere applies in all.
quote:
I've never understood the uproar about payola. To me it's just a marketing scheme like product placement in movies. It's a given that large corporations have a bigger budget than individual artists for promoting their products. Is it fair? Maybe not, but I believe in the old adage cream rises to the top, that is, quality will be recognized for its true value by the public.
Of course with payola it could also be aruged to be an unfair competitive advantage, since some artists can afford to pay more then others or might be more popular to start and have more given to spend on such a trick then other artists.
That being the case is it true the cream will really rise to the top, or those that are played the most are thought to be popular by the often easy to deceive public who just might assume since the song is played often it might be by a popular artist and if they don't buy it they will be 'uncool' so they rush to buy it?
If the latter is the case then the cream does not rise to the top, what is placed at top is just assumed to be the cream since it is on top.
[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 05-27-2004).]
quote:Remember that business is just another form of warfare. Unfair is a subjective term with limited legal application. When Microsoft required PC makers to sign contracts prohibiting the sale of non-Windows system software, that was deemed "unfair restraint of trade" by the courts, and they were rightly slapped down for it. When Starbucks opened a franchise across the street from my favorite coffee house and ultimately drove it out of business, that was just "good marketing". Since there are laws against payola, such practices can and should be fought. There's no law that guarantees an individual or business the "right to succeed", however.
Originally posted by SCDawg:
Of course with payola it could also be aruged to be an unfair competitive advantage, since some artists can afford to pay more then others or might be more popular to start and have more given to spend on such a trick then other artists.
quote:When I see the popularity of certain television shows today, I'm inclined to agree with your opinion about the taste of the average consumer. It's tough to make waves in a sea of mediocrity.
That being the case is it true the cream will really rise to the top, or those that are played the most are thought to be popular by the often easy to deceive public who just might assume since the song is played often it might be by a popular artist and if they don't buy it they will be 'uncool' so they rush to buy it?
Suffering seems to be the lot of all artists. A few, a very few, do overcome the obstacles and make their way to the top. When you read the biographies of the greats, it's amazing how they persevered through early setbacks. It's not a life I would choose, but I have no ambitions of fame or fortune.
quote:If people were more discriminating in their tastes, the quality of entertainment might rise. Then everyone would realize the value of bishoujo games, for example. [img]http://princess.cybrmall.net/ubb/wink.gif[/img]
If the latter is the case then the cream does not rise to the top, what is placed at top is just assumed to be the cream since it is on top.
[This message has been edited by perigee (edited 05-27-2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
Remember that business is just another form of warfare. Unfair is a subjective term with limited legal application. When Microsoft required PC makers to sign contracts prohibiting the sale of non-Windows system software, that was deemed "unfair restraint of trade" by the courts, and they were rightly slapped down for it. When Starbucks opened a franchise across the street from my favorite coffee house and ultimately drove it out of business, that was just "good marketing". Since there are laws against payola, such practices can and should be fought. There's no law that guarantees an individual or business the "right to succeed", however.
That is true and it might just be my wishful thinking on how business should be done, but then again I would argue even if it is not illegal it is still an unfair advantage which I know means if it is not illegal not a lot can be done about it. I also agree business is like warfare, but unlike warfare in business there has to be competition at times equal competition in order not to have one company control the industry and thus try and control the prices (within the law) of what they sell.
I thought, and the last time I heard this discussed this was about 5 years ago since Sociology doesn't deal with these laws often, a professor I had mentioned a law that stated places like Wal-Mart cannot be within 3 miles of similar local non-national potential competitor in order to provide the competitor with at least a slight fighting chance which they would not have if Wal-Mart opened right next door or across the street. Though maybe that was just a local or state law which was trying to protect local businesses which are more likely to give back to the community then a giant chain with no 'history tie' to the community.
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
If people were more discriminating in their tastes, the quality of entertainment might rise. Then everyone would realize the value of bishoujo games, for example.
Indeed, if people would try new and different things and maybe think more for themselves instead of following the popular trends blindly the quality of entertainment might just rise. Another bonus might be these games gaining popularity since people would actually play them rather then just think that they are "porn" because that is what everyone else says they are, even though none of those saying this have actually played the games.
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
When I see the popularity of certain television shows today, I'm inclined to agree with your opinion about the taste of the average consumer. It's tough to make waves in a sea of mediocrity.
Yes I have seen a lot of studies on many different things through my work and in one it was seen that the average consumer when asked about a product does not inquire about it's quality, but it's popularity, which says a lot about their taste since the ones they are asking are the ones that often represent the product itself.
Since learning this my opinion of the average consumer's taste has always been tempered with the knowledge that many seem to perfer popularity over quality which can lead to a very sub-standard and bad product being everywhere almost overnight.
[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 05-27-2004).]
American Idol is the epitome of whats wrong with the music industry. Who needs innovation and uniqueness when you can put on a skimpy dress like 10,000 other people and try to belt out the same boring old love songs in the exact same voice. Yes you sure are an idol, you sing tired 30 year old songs over and over with no heart or personal interpretation.
Well have any of you heard the rumors that those that are actually good and original in their style are not put on the show because that is not what the fans want to see?
It seems the fans want someone to be so bad they can laugh about the person for months on end, wonderful people huh?
Speaking of American Idol you know it is so popular there is now going to be a [i]Chinese Idol[i] show? Not sure what’s sadder the show was that popular or the Chinese seemingly that desperate for television programming.
Piracy is a big problem with bishoujo games… but the availability of free downloads somewhere is not really the primary reason for not buying the game, as best I can tell. The biggest reason I know of, from talking to people who download, is the fact that these are adult games.
Meaning that they can’t go conveniently get them in stores (many people don’t like to order online), can’t get them at all if they’re underage (a LOT of people on hentai boards are!), are afraid to mail-order them and let people in their house see them buying a ‘Porno’… and they have less respect for the game company than they would for “real” anime, because 'It’s just porn and porn is all full of ripoffs anyway.'
Difficult to get legally + expensive = much simpler to pirate, for most people.
If the culture would get over this stupid phobia of sex… if you could just order them from Amazon… if you could just pick them up in the anime store in town… There would still be pirates (there are ALWAYS pirates) but there would be a lot more sales.