Kuribo64
Views: 19,994,551 Home | Forums | Uploader | Wiki | Object databases | IRC
Rules/FAQ | Memberlist | Calendar | Stats | Online users | Last posts | Search
04-19-24 01:17 PM
Guest:

0 users reading Game files and legality | 1 bot

Main - General Chat - Game files and legality Hide post layouts | New reply


SuperMario64DS
Posted on 02-05-16 05:15 PM (rev. 5 of 02-05-16 05:34 PM) Link | #67549
I've been doing extensive research on this subject and would like your opinion.

Many communities (Such as this one) outlaw piracy and the distribution digital copies of pay-to-own software. I'm sure most of us agree this is a good policy.

However, policies against distribution of files within these games appear to be more laxed. Generally, one can 1) produce (Make available) or 2) reproduce (Re construct) files within a game and face no repercussions. This includes distributing assets from within the game (Textures, models, level data), or recreating/modifying similar assets (Optimising a level from a newer game to work in an older game).

IP laws are a mess. An intellectual property can typically be protected under a patent (An idea), copyright (A work) or trademark (Visual or phrase). These three constantly overlap and deliver different meanings under different cases. In this case:

-Distributing or reproducing game files falls under copyright - You do not own the right to copy these assets.
-File formats may be patented
-You may be using trademarked content (For instance, a logo or character design

The other side of this is fair use/parody: Generally, you can use a protected work without fear of backlash so long as it is 1) in a non-commercial setting (This definition is really loose), 2) does not harm the owner (Releasing a mod that may compete with/replicate a current title, for instance). This, once again, becomes complicated:

1. However, the laws regarding this once again are messy. For instance, we have Mario Wikis (Super Mario Wiki, Wikia) who monetize through ad revenue. This creates interesting situations: a) Nintendo could sue, but the accused party could claim fair use anyway (The definition isn't clear/past cases have allowed such use) b) Nintendo doesn't sue because it's too much trouble to attack a small group c) Nintendo doesn't sue because of backlash from fanbase d) Nintendo doesn't sue because they don't care e) Nintendo sues, wins, and you rot in prison.

2. The copyright owner owns the copyright until it expires, so even if the level you're recreating is old they can still sell the source title and still take action against you. However, like mentioned above: a) Nintendo doesn't sue because it's too much trouble to attack a small group b) Nintendo doesn't sue because of backlash from fanbase c) Nintendo doesn't sue because they don't care d) Nintendo sues, wins, and you rot in prison.

Common arguments:

As long as you release it for free, it's okay.


You cannot verify that the person downloading the (distributed/ported/remade) content owns the source game - It's illegal


What's your take? The common mentality seems to be that it's too costly/troublesome for the "big guy" to come after you, or that they don't care/unofficially support it off the books (Which may still be illegal, but they won't do anything because they don't mind - SEGA appears to be cool with the Sonic hacking scene). Then we have cases like NWPlayer and MrBean on YouTube: Nintendo takes down videos of WiiU "hax" under the guise of copyright claims; this, however, begs the question of if whether they could do this normally or if they abuse the power given to them by YouTube to monetize/silence "scarwee haxx0rs".

It's worth noting that entire communities - Custom Mario Kart, Sonic Retro, Models/Textures/Spriters Resource have existed for years with little or no trouble. Whether these communities are in the wrong legally is up in the air.

It's also worth noting that asset releasing such as this (To my knowledge) (In this context) has not yet been the basis of any court battles, but has resulted in, at worst, C&Ds. The issue here is that we're delving into an area in which, though we aren't pirating entire games, we're releasing content within that game that could not be obtained without purchasing the game otherwise.

The issue is we lack solid definitions in the law - "Yes, this is okay" "No, this is not okay" doesn't exist. They're inconsistent, changed case-by-case, and do not adequately cover everything.

And lastly, even if the devs are 100% cool with it/ignore you, if it's still illegal is it morally wrong?

Arisotura
Posted on 02-05-16 07:07 PM Link | #67551
In this domain, practice matters a lot more than theory (but also, don't forget that "X is illegal" isn't universal, it depends on your country's laws, making matters even more complicated).


Lawsuits are a long and expensive process for both parties. Nintendo will only sue when they're sure to win, for example when you're caught in a blatant case of piracy. They go after those who distribute ROMs and ISOs. They generally avoid the more 'gray legal area' cases.

Monetization is a different topic. I don't know if it can be applied to, say, making money from the ads on your Mario-related wiki, because in that case, whether you use copyrighted material doesn't matter.

But generally, making money from third-party assets without the author's consent should be avoided. I think that would also cause Nintendo to sue you.


Youtube is a different case. They blindly grant any copyright takedown requests to stay away from legal issues. Nintendo knows this, and they abuse it. Every once in a while, they will shut down some popular videos or channels to try scaring the ROM hacking scene. And every time, the same scenario repeats, all the morons go crazy and think this means doom for ROM hacking. It doesn't. Youtube takedowns have very little actual legal value.






Regarding sharing files and assets from games: we discourage sharing original files via our uploader, mostly to stay safe. I definitely don't think this could be used against us, though. Because in that vein, any damn use of copyright assets would be illegal too-- our default theme features recolored SMB graphics, our banner depicts Mario... and yet, we aren't getting in trouble for that.

Is sharing game files alone that bad, too?

On one hand, they fall under the copyright, distributing them without permission is prohibited.

On the other hand, you can't play the original game with one file alone. There is a loss for Nintendo when you have obtained the whole game without paying. What does it mean for one file? Nothing.

This is a gray legal area. If you stick to theory, it's as illegal as sharing the whole game.

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul
melonDS the most fruity DS emulator there is

zafkflzdasd

LeftyGreenMario
Posted on 03-15-16 08:50 PM Link | #68641
Bump, interesting thread, but speaking of sharing original files, I think staying safe is a sure bet, but honestly, as you put it, having just model files and textures and sprites shouldn't be a problem in of itself since you can't replicate the gaming experience with just those. One might argue that people can use these files and put them in monetized games, but those usually never turn out well, see Era's Adventure 3D, Mole Kart, and that Chinese knockoff of Super Mario Galaxy. But even the free stuff can be taken down, just as what happened with Super Mario 64 HD, since I believe it too closely replicated the experience of Super Mario 64. Still, that brings up a question: you could make pretty-much-perfect Super Mario Bros. SNES replicas with Super Mario Bros. X (which isn't taken down, although its project by the main developers is halted because an alleged, not proven legal notice by Nintendo) so again, it's a gray issue of replicating gaming experience.

On another hand, some cloud sites even have an issue with uploading mere game files, including MediaFire. My sister had some notice by MediaFire with problems on Kinopio.arc, but I think it's some algorithm bullcrap but why would it filter out that file, I don't know. It's copyrighted, yes, but... a lot of other files in my MediaFire, which INCLUDES .brstms, .pac/.pcs (Brawl-specific files), .psas (Brawl-specific moveset files), and others remain untouched. That's really weird.

There's a huge disadvantage of choosing to make file sharing illegal in which is makes it very inconvenient for everyone here, given that this is a ROM hacking site, which file sharing should be reasonably expected. And while there is some small legal caution, it makes me wonder why we even have Models Resource, Spriters' Resource, where Nintendo HAS acknowledged their existence in the past, which host a boatload of copyrighted content, like complete high-quality rips and even fully rigged Mario models (and some models even have animations!). Why is it okay for those sites to host huge amounts of content, but we can't? Is it because they're in .png or .dae or .obj while game files we can't share like .arc aren't extracted and decompiled? Again, I'm baffled by we can't really share stuff like .arc files but we have a lot of sites that share .brstms.

tl;dr copyright is a hot, convoluted mess

Arisotura
Posted on 03-15-16 11:24 PM Link | #68702
consider that Mediafire is like Youtube

they cover their asses by blindly complying to any takedown request

____________________
NSMBHD - Kafuka - Jul
melonDS the most fruity DS emulator there is

zafkflzdasd

Baby Luigi
Posted on 03-15-16 11:27 PM Link | #68705
Well this is why I switched to Dropbox. Nintendo can go fuck themselves

SuperMario64DS
Posted on 03-17-16 06:05 PM (rev. 2 of 03-17-16 06:06 PM) Link | #68816
Posted by LeftyGreenMario
...Models Resource, Spriters' Resource, where Nintendo HAS acknowledged their existence in the past, which host a boatload of copyrighted content


I'm curious about this. What did they say?

@StapleButter I recall tons of Mario Kart stuff disappearing from MediaFire's servers because an email at 'NintenTo.com' requested that they'd be taken down.

Baby Luigi
Posted on 03-17-16 06:55 PM Link | #68818
They told them to not upload sprites of their major games before they were released worldwide, I believe.

I remember that happened with Pokemon Black and White sprites.

LeftyGreenMario
Posted on 03-17-16 09:22 PM Link | #68827
Posted by SuperMario64DS
I'm curious about this. What did they say?

@StapleButter I recall tons of Mario Kart stuff disappearing from MediaFire's servers because an email at 'NintenTo.com' requested that they'd be taken down.

I don't remember exactly, but RandomTalkingBush, a prominent member of that site, has said something like "They said, 'it's okay if you upload Pokemon Black and White sprites to this site but ONLY after the game is released'". So it seems like they're totally cool with it, and even I can get on board with that.


Main - General Chat - Game files and legality Hide post layouts | New reply

Page rendered in 0.046 seconds. (2048KB of memory used)
MySQL - queries: 28, rows: 208/208, time: 0.010 seconds.
[powered by Acmlm] Acmlmboard 2.064 (2018-07-20)
© 2005-2008 Acmlm, Xkeeper, blackhole89 et al.