Revisiting Piracy - etc etc...

[emkay]

Shawn, you point out the impact of crappy law.

 

Current terms aren't optimal. They run long and in a large fraction of cases too long for people to respect them.

 

A young person today would have a hard time exploring the history of software without some infringement, and a lot of money.

Infringement can be reduced easily by the creator of the software. Just build a machine that only can run your software. Make the machine as fast as possible, to prevent people from writing emulations on the PC. Then take your product and sell it , move from house to house and sell it to people without showing the content before they buy it.

 

Makes 100% win to you.

 

 

oh.... wait.... 500 Million Dollar investment and no one buys your product .... hmmmm....

in the worst case, you get really robbed because you have no protection by anyone...

As for music, the big message is people want to explore that too, and do so on their terms. Napster ruined FM for a lot of people, who found out how much was really out there.

 

Making back catalog music avaliable is the right thing to do and when it is, people buy. But what of the modern acts?

 

Clear conflict of interest there.

 

Taylor Swift may well be out last platinum act. She says streaming devalues music, and from her and the major labels point of view she is right.

Good example. Streaming music is valuable for music you want to hear more than one time.

I actually wouldn't play a song from her a 2nd time.

 

When old classical music was there, no one talked about any infringement. If you can play the music, you're allowed to do so. That music is played even today ....

That music copyright thing devalues music. Because it gives money to artists who cannot really sing or play an instrument.

 

See what happens at youtube. IF a song is copyrighted, you're not even allowed to whistle such a melody. Do it in more than one video could cause a closing of your channel.

 

 

 

But is that the goal?

 

It isn't for me. I love to find niches and scenes and really drill down to their influences and get a lot out of it all.

 

When I can buy right from the artist, or their label works in ways that don't get in the way, it is all a good, high value experience.

 

Other examples abound.

 

When we don't put these things into real, accurate terms, we run the risk of ongoing messes not progress to goals that make sense for everyone more of the time.

 

It won't make sense all of the time, but it can be a lot better than it is now.

 

The wrong part of view is clearly at the artists. "I made something so I have to get money for it" is in no way correct. If you don't get money for your feat , you didn't build the value to other people, to make them paying for it/return the value.

 

Only if you're a part of a "Mafia" , others may help your task there.

 

A neutral court has to judge on that.

Edited January 17, 2015 by emkay

[potatohead]

As long as we have open methods, the *IAA groups can just compete with them.

 

Sure, they will see some infringement, but we get ongoing freedom in computing, and we can opt to publish in other ways.

 

Some people are seeing very good success doing that, and I personally want to reward and support it for the future.

 

Having some slack in the system is IMHO necessary. It checks abuse and extortion otherwise possible.

 

This leaves smaller operations with some issues, and it is also important to improve things for them, which is why again we all need to discuss this in frank, accurate terms.

[potatohead]

I will also be brutally honest. I will not trade open computing for improved revenue. Ever.

 

If that means we get less works, or some find it not viable to create, so be it. Happy to help improve, but closed computing is off the table. Costs and risks are too high.

[kiwilove]

People who take a very hard line with software piracy - should take a look at all other aspects of our society etc - and you should see there's much more work to be done in those other areas - to stop people ripping other people off in so many different ways, etc etc.

 

I'm not saying we should go easy on software piracy, etc - I'm just saying there is so much inconsistency present - and how we may go hardline on some issues and then totally ignore the same kind of thing in other areas. As always it's due to misinformation - and not knowing the true story/details etc..

 

Harvey

[snicklin]

I personally think that there should be a worldwide system for copyright laws and patents (not that the countries will all agree, I just propose what I'd like to see).

 

The laws need to be consistent across countries in order to ensure that copyright owners are fully protected.

 

As far as I am aware, a patent has to be applied for in each country that the creator wants to be protected in. It would be far more efficient if you only applied to one place.

 

It would then allow that organisation to invest money in keeping up with new technologies and altering the laws to reflect the times.

 

It would have to be completely ring-fenced so that there is no mission creep. We don't want another "Common Market" policy which goes on to become a new government for Europe that nobody voted for.

[potatohead]

I don't prefer that model. It is all too easy for it to be abused.

 

Take software patents. Those are permitted in the US but not EU. OSS software would take a big hit if that were unified.

 

I oppose software patents for a lot of reasons. Good to have parts of the world in agreement to compete with others. We can see the impact of things and let options play out.

[snicklin]

I don't prefer that model. It is all too easy for it to be abused.

 

Take software patents. Those are permitted in the US but not EU. OSS software would take a big hit if that were unified.

 

I oppose software patents for a lot of reasons. Good to have parts of the world in agreement to compete with others. We can see the impact of things and let options play out.

 

Hmm, there's some valid points there which I've taken onboard (this isn't a subject I think about a lot, so I am still open to changing my mind).

 

What about a system whereby you apply for patent in your own country and if approved, this is then sent up the chain and automatically distributed to a worldwide patent office for approval?

 

Then if your country has different rules to the worldwide system, the worldwide system then rejects yours.

 

I like the idea of "trying out" concepts around different locations, but what happens if something is tried in one place (for example: software patents) and they then try to remove it? Can you just invalidate all of those software patents? Not easily I suspect.

 

On a more relevant note, could software copyright be given a shorter time limit? I know that they extended music copyright from 50 to 70 years because of Cliff Richard, but could the opposite be done for software? We could put a 10 year limit on software copyright. That should be enough time for even MS to be able to get as much return as possible.

[potatohead]

Yes, they can be invalidated.

 

Honestly, they should never have been granted in the first place.

 

There really isn't any absolute protection, just as there isn't one world government. Right now, given how humans are, I think that's a good thing.

 

Deffo shorter terms. In the US, this is a growing problem keyed to Mickey Mouse. Every time Mickey comes up, so does an extension. Disney can build an empire on the Brothers Grimm, without cites mind you, but nobody gets to build on Disney? Some how that is broken.

 

It's problems like these that need just as much attention as casual infringement does. In fact, that's a nice trade that may well lead to a better state of things.

 

And it's not like the current scenario is bad. The smaller entities need some help, but the larger ones are making lots of money. They just aren't making what they think they should make. Interestingly, that is a market and economics problem as I've put here. The dollars they expect largely aren't there, and who really values things?

 

Markets say things are worth what people will pay for them.

 

Right now, e-books are a very interesting case. Lots of pressure to price them as physical books, but some authors are finding sweet spots, $1.99 being one of them, where they can sell more direct, capture more margin, and do well in volume against the larger houses. Personally, I don't value an e-book the same. If it's DRM free, that's high value and I pay, because I can give it away, transcode it, use it in various ways, annotate it, etc... If it's restricted, that is much lower value. Paper takes labor, and it's robust, and it doesn't take enabling tech, and it's subject to the right of first sale, meaning it's really mine. Very high value.

Edited January 19, 2015 by potatohead

[Jetboot Jack]

 

You draw the line at "current" device and platforms? I'm just trying to point out that even some people who have very black and white views often are still rationalizing somehow/somewhere. Having illegal copies of even old Atari software is still illegal and copyright infringement, and is harming the secondary game market (people like Best, B&C and Video61 who put money into purchasing up old stock for instance.) The law is clear (who owns the IP may not be so clear after 30 years though....)

 

What generally do folks here think about illegally downloading an old movie or song? What about E.T.? Ok to download, or must you buy it? What about all those Duran Duran albums you want to listen to now? Ok, or not? Where's the line, and who is it ok to harm? As long as the "author" or primary creator isn't being "harmed" ? Or is the line the current IP holder; if they aren't receiving money from your purchase, it's ok to infringe?

 

I personally view software which is no longer available from a legitimate supplier as abandonware - so I own all the games I have as original purchased copies (plus backups wherever I can) UNLESS there is NO way of obtaining the software.

 

I have spent silly money on ebay purchases of A8 games, but I also have copies of some games digitally that I can find no way of obtaining by legitimate routes - or have non functioning originals.

 

I am not suggesting this is Black and White issue, but it is an issue where too many people avoid buying games and other software when they are easily available and the tiny minority of collectors of long outdated and abandoned systems are not in any way a significant contribution to "piracy".

 

Let me give you an example.

 

Back in the late 80's I set up a software development and publisher (Harlequin) - we developed a couple of titles for Atari, then licensed a number of games from major publishers (Grandslam, Elite, Psygnosis, System 3 etc) and set to making some lovely A8 games. We also signed some original games (Plastron) and spent a fair bit of cash getting this little business off the ground.

 

Our first game was Plastron, a reasonable title, not the best game ever, but solid and quite playable. We researched our market and set our price point for cassette and disc and manufactured 2000 copies - which would cover all the costs (the advance to the developer, physical goods, duplication, advertising etc etc) - like I said a very modest business plan.

 

We took a stand at the Atari Show in London and demo'd the game - we sold a 100 units, we shipped a further 1500 units to the usual distributors and retailers and sat there with 400 copies unsold - to this day unsold. Which is fine, the game sold okay, it was never gonna set the world on fire. We put no DRM on the games, shipped people discs if they bought cassettes and generally behaved like good community chaps.

 

BUT from day 1 we encountered piracy, the game was on a Multiboot menu within days of release, I was sent one. I met MANY Atari freaks who had copies, had positive comments about the game, but never bought one even though it was still on the shelves at the time. It made me sad.

 

Needless to say we lost some money and my colleagues re-evaluated our plans, we decided that the A8 market was not a place to do business, if we could not sell 2000 copies worldwide of a nice little game, what point was there developing further games. We cancelled all the original titles, closed the contracts we could (Pacland, Ghosts and Goblins, Last Ninja II etc) and soldiered on with the Psygnosis games (contractual obligations) and started to work on 16 bit material.

 

It's not an Atari thing, my example is what it is, but it is the effect of piracy - I do not doubt that if the pirates had bought legitimate copies of Plastron we would have continued our other games - we could make them work with just 2000/3000 copies sold each...

 

sTeVE

[emkay]

Needless to say we lost some money and my colleagues re-evaluated our plans, we decided that the A8 market was not a place to do business, if we could not sell 2000 copies worldwide of a nice little game, what point was there developing further games. We cancelled all the original titles, closed the contracts we could (Pacland, Ghosts and Goblins, Last Ninja II etc) and soldiered on with the Psygnosis games (contractual obligations) and started to work on 16 bit material.

LOL. You named LN2 ? So where has LN1 been that was before?

 

Also, what is "world wide" in your sense? And what game has been created by "your" company, that got copied ?

 

Well. C64 and the 16 bit machines had better visuals and sometimes better sound than the A8. It was one factor of why the A8 was a worse place for softwaredevelopment. BUT!!!! .... ..... those platforms had much more piracy and copying around. I know stores that sold Atari STs with the promise of regulary free copies of new software.

 

What really, was missing , were the big "wow" games on the A8, just like "Space Harrier" or "Yoomp!" .... those on cartridges that were just bigger than a Disk, would have been a non copyable game on the 1st place.... and a "worldwide" commercial presentation was needed though...

The Atari always wasn't good in Jump&Run games, compared to other computers. But people would have jumped on 3D looking games, everytime. And the A8 can do 3D better than the ST and the Amiga in some cases, or on other words: The Atari was build in 1st case for ego view games.

[Jetboot Jack]

LOL. You named LN2 ? So where has LN1 been that was before?

 

Also, what is "world wide" in your sense? And what game has been created by "your" company, that got copied ?

 

I was not involved in the A8 Last Ninja project, I believe it was handled by System 3 themselves, but I have no information on that. I made an agreement with System 3 to develop and publish Last Ninja 2, that was the latest LN game that had been released at the time (1988).

 

Worldwide, any country I could find an A8 reseller, distributor or co-publisher - UK, Germany, USA primarily as they were the active markets, but I was talking to people in other European countries for instance. We were also looking at user group advertising to attract more potential purchases in smaller markets.

 

As I said, Plastron, originally developed for Atari. Harlequin stepped in when the developers did not receive their money and agreed to publish the title, we paid the developer a signing fee and signed a contract to assign the rights to Harlequin for publication.

 

Simples...

[Tezz]

I don't want to get too deep into this subject but I would like to say personally for the record that I've always viewed software piracy as theft (which it is) and I've never condoned it. I was far from well off back in the A8's commercial era but I saved and bought every release legitimately to ensure that I was supporting the software houses and for future releases. I was more than aware that the A8 needed as much support as possible with much lower potential sales compared to the other platforms.

 

I had all the same opportunities to obtain copies as the next man, there's always been a big scene here with all the platforms, I went to many gatherings and knew various people from all sides cracking and swapping as well as people working commercially and demo coding and everthing inbetween. I was lucky to have Atari World here in the city centre to easily buy the latest releases but I did buy mail order too.

 

ps. I bought Plastron btw Steve and I still have my disk version here. I was eagerly awaiting your future releases.

[Jetboot Jack]

Glad you enjoyed it - "your future" releases greatly surpassed any of the ones I ever had planned - Bomb Jake is just superb!

 

sTeVE

[emkay]

I was not involved in the A8 Last Ninja project, I believe it was handled by System 3 themselves, but I have no information on that. I made an agreement with System 3 to develop and publish Last Ninja 2, that was the latest LN game that had been released at the time (1988).

Sorry, but an A8 LN "project" doesn't usually mean that there was a game.

 

I'm also not stating "I cancelled my Timemachine project" because no one would have bought it.

 

Worldwide, any country I could find an A8 reseller, distributor or co-publisher - UK, Germany, USA primarily as they were the active markets, but I was talking to people in other European countries for instance. We were also looking at user group advertising to attract more potential purchases in smaller markets.

Well, particular "Plastron" was one of the games, I had to pre order and the amount of available pieces was limited, so not everyone could buy one. While Plastron came in a "nicer" disk-case, many cassettes of those games...MANY of those games ... came in a rather bad condition. You had to make a tape copy just for reading the software. The signal was often too weak and only readable for the Atari after some added amplification.

 

As I said, Plastron, originally developed for Atari. Harlequin stepped in when the developers did not receive their money and agreed to publish the title, we paid the developer a signing fee and signed a contract to assign the rights to Harlequin for publication.

 

Simples...

In short: It was NOT the piracy that didn't sell your game, it was the bad interest from Atari and the resulting weak selling procedure.

Edited January 19, 2015 by emkay

[Goochman]

Sorry, but an A8 LN "project" doesn't usually mean that there was a game.

 

I'm also not stating "I cancelled my Timemachine project" because no one would have bought it.

 

 

Well, particular "Plastron" was one of the games, I had to pre order and the amount of available pieces was limited, so not everyone could buy one. While Plastron came in a "nicer" disk-case, many cassettes of those games...MANY of those games ... came in a rather bad condition. You had to make a tape copy just for reading the software. The signal was often too weak and only readable for the Atari after some added amplification.

 

 

In short: It was NOT the piracy that didn't sell your game, it was the bad interest from Atari and the resulting weak selling procedure.

 

Regardless how you view the situation we had a publisher back in the day that couldnt move 2000 copies of a title. Good business judgement is to move on since developers wont be able to fix the other problems outside their control. Only an EA or such back then could solve the packaging/distribution issues that may have come up.

 

I was a 50/50 person back in the 80s (and a young lad) - there were some franchises that I would support no matter what and bought their titles (Ultima/Origin, Alternate Reality and a few others), however when Atari titles disappeared off the shevles of EB, Babbages, Sears, etc... there wasnt a whole lot of other places to go. I did have 2 Atari stores in my area but they only carried ST software for the most part. Mail order wasnt something a 12 year old was savvy at and you needed to find magazines that Atari dealers published in...............so a 1030 modem and a phone line was unfort the best acquistion method for me back then.

[Jetboot Jack]

TBH Emkay I find you reply a little frustrating since it appears you have not read my post, but rather reply with almost no regard to the actual content and recycle YOUR opinions rather than paying any attention to the material posted. Perhaps I have been hopelessly unclear, so let me restate

 

"Sorry, but an A8 LN "project" doesn't usually mean that there was a game." - I had NOTHING TO DO WITH LAST NINJA 1 on ANY FORMAT, I did not claim there was a game, I BELIEVE there was at some point work done on it, as I have spoken to various people who allude to a failed attempt - and since I was involved in the Last Ninja 2 for Atari I suspect I know more than you of it.

 

"In short: It was NOT the piracy that didn't sell your game, it was the bad interest from Atari and the resulting weak selling procedure." - how do you know, what do you know, were you involved in the sales process for the game? I could not see how you could know anything 27 years after events you were not involved with! It had nothing to do with Atari, they are not the publisher nor involved in any way - except they put me in touch with some Polish distributors for PLASTRON after Harlequin signed it. As to weak selling procedure, well why don't you hop in your time machine, and tell 22 year old me what I was doing wrong!?

Edited January 19, 2015 by Jetboot Jack

[Bill Loguidice]

There are some simple facts we know from actual evidence. Some developers and publishers were hurt by piracy, which resulted in some product not seeing release and potential future products going undeveloped. There was both economic and creative harm. That is absolutely indisputable. If those core facts can't be acknowledged, then it's a pretty fruitless discussion.

[kiwilove]

With a world that run by money / profit - it can easily end up producing trash in the effort to make money - especially the huge return to make it a No.1 bestseller etc - no matter what the medium is...

 

Hollywood and it's copycats - actually don't encourage creativity at all - but produce formulaic works that stifle creativity in every way. The writers, directors, producers etc etc can be blamed for this - they can't see the wood for the trees, etc. It takes someone who works/whatever outside the industry to see clearly the rubbish being produced. It's market should see clearly the drivel being made and fogged off as being the latest 'in' thing...

I think that the stories are all wrong - the wrong values being stressed - and there is the failure of universal values being aired and demonstrated - and the focus is all wrong. Violence does effect all of us - whether it's in the news or in all our media - where it is seen to be OK to being exposed to this kind of material. Blockbuster movies in which violence - and lots of it is seen to be usual/normal.

In reality it's much better to have a plain, boring life in which nothing much happens - for a safe and secure life, etc etc. To have this presented on screen often - would make for the most boring movies - I'd guess. I like to see anti-heroes/ines and anti-violence movies in which the central character(s) do their best to avoid encouraging violence - and perhaps it follows them still...but showing the character(s) do the right thing all the time.. still...

I really hate seeing crime movies/etc in which there is so much screen time given to the villan - such that is is like a how to become a villan scenario - that you'd feel that people inclined that way, will appreciate their hero starring in a movie. In a way, it is saying it is OK being evil.

Videogames are no different in this regard. I was turned off first person shooters as the hardware improved, that more and more graphic detail was shown. Sure - I've played all the earlier violent games - even enjoying martial arts games that appeared on the Playstation - but as the Playtation 2 appeared - I was turning off the latest videogames - also for costs reasons too... I knew I couldn't afford buying the games - and also did not want to go the pirating route too.

Harvey

[Bill Loguidice]

And again, for every call of whatever medium going "too mainstream" and becoming less interesting as a result, it's easy enough to argue that we have as much creativity as ever. It's all too easy to focus on the mega-hits and not the creations that exist just outside of the mainstream, yet are still accessible to everyone.

 

Piracy is also rampant in every medium, no matter the type or how modest the scope. This includes the books I've created, and I'm sure it will carry over to the film once that see wide release. This directly affects me in a lot of ways, which is obviously frustrating to no end. On a smaller scale, even if 1 out of every 50 people who pirated something bought it instead of getting a free ride, it actually could make a huge difference, and the difference between either getting more stuff from that individual or more stuff in that vein getting greenlit by publishers.

[emkay]

"In short: It was NOT the piracy that didn't sell your game, it was the bad interest from Atari and the resulting weak selling procedure." - how do you know, what do you know, were you involved in the sales process for the game? I could not see how you could know anything 27 years after events you were not involved with! It had nothing to do with Atari, they are not the publisher nor involved in any way - except they put me in touch with some Polish distributors for PLASTRON after Harlequin signed it. As to weak selling procedure, well why don't you hop in your time machine, and tell 22 year old me what I was doing wrong!?

Well, I think you did become wiser by the years, and you won't believe me. 27 Years before, you would even believe less.

Actually, I wonder why people did programs after 1986 for the A8 , expecting the big money by that? Atari declared the 8 bits dead after that year.

And, yes the 8-Bits got a resurrection due to the opening of eastern Europe, but, hey, even the market of the Amiga was on the way down after 1989....

Atari did many things wrong with the A8. The causes have been explained several times in this forum. Actually, back in that time, people like me were only able to know things about Atari Commodore a.s.o. by Computermagazines. If someone is closer to that stuff, he surely can do a better observation about the depending facts "some years earlier".

[Creature XL]

TBH Emkay I find you reply a little frustrating

 

If you take any of his posts (except POKEY stuff) serious, I must say it is your fault. Really.

 

Oh and I want to mention, that your post(s) is/are maybe the only ones which are A8 related. Thank you for this

[emkay]

If you take any of his posts (except POKEY stuff) serious, I must say it is your fault. Really.

 

Oh and I want to mention, that your post(s) is/are maybe the only ones which are A8 related. Thank you for this

The question is more, what is wrong with people like you, getting personal like that?

Nothing else to write?

 

Funny, really.

[Jetboot Jack]

Emkay wrote "Actually, I wonder why people did programs after 1986 for the A8 , expecting the big money by that? Atari declared the 8 bits dead after that year."

 

I'll tell you why, first off - because we could. I ran a video game store in a Reading that was originally an Atari only specialist and several of us friends were long term Atari users.

 

Secondly Atari UK were actively encouraging developers and developing 8bit software until 1991 - they supplied me Dev kit and cross development systems (2600, 7800 and XE).

 

Thirdly I was becoming involved with several publishers and developers who I met through retail, Activision, Incentive etc and the key to getting into game development was developing games!

Edited January 19, 2015 by Jetboot Jack

[emkay]

I think that the stories are all wrong - the wrong values being stressed - and there is the failure of universal values being aired and demonstrated - and the focus is all wrong.

 

Not sure what you're writing about. But the 1st computergame was written on a computer that was built, based on financials, paid by taxes taken from the government, and the time when the game was written was also paid by taxes.

The 1st computer at home had a copy of such a game running... and so on.

 

And, well it may sound harsh, but companies like Atari had grown up, putting the money from game junkies. You know what a junkie is. When it is a different type of drug, real drugs were illegal, but games were legal. Who is making the difference?

If you ask "Stars" , they always had a "Drug" history. In Rocksongs Drugs were declared cool...

But that's another story...

Atari built the A800 and paid people for creating software, not the customers, the creator of the Computer did the payment, to aid the spread of the computer.

Earning money for "3rd" parties is only possible on a base that reflects a "winning" position. But chaotic circumstances made the marketplace "Atari 8 -Bit Computer" a bad place.

Thinking of the fact that "Lucasfilm Games" got a million Dollars just for writing a game like Rescue on Fractalus and then blaming about the leaked "Behind Jaggi Lines" .

What do you think, how many Ataris have been sold, because people played or wanted to play "behind jaggi lines" ...

WTF. a million Bucks ? For a pull down of a program that had already been written on supercomputers?

 

 

Selling Software just for a profit is somehow a contemporary phasis (to other products) in the development of software. This market comes from "Software" sells Hardware and it seems to turn back into this. Except of some "newcomers" most Software that has any use for people, has been written, and you get it free on the market, to sell a Computer, Tablet, Phone .... even a TV sells today by the available free Software. Even Gaming-Consoles, that were sold cheap and the games brought some profit, have today an online store/presence with free available software...

 

The bad part in those discussions is when people protect their position, barking for anything strange and hiding in their corner instead of trying to understand what happened for real.

Edited January 19, 2015 by emkay

[atari8warez]

The bad part in those discussions is when people protect their position, barking for anything strange and hiding in their corner instead of trying to understand what happened for real.

 

Could we say this also very much includes you?

 

Who could understand the impact of the piracy better than the ones subjected to it?