312 replies to this topic

[StanJr]

MegaManFan said:

Actually, the reason I +haven't+ done that yet is because several people have told me to take a "wait and see" attitude, and they seem to think there's good reason to do so.  

Yeah, we need to wait and see until Infogrames comes for the Atari Age name and logo. Kind of like we waited and saw with the Nazis taking Poland (surely they won't....)

[MegaManFan]

So far we only know they asked AA to remove some games, and Al complied. If they wanted more, we'd either know about it, or we'd be bitching about it at some other site because AA went offline.

[Thomas Jentzsch]

MegaManFan said:

So far we only know they asked AA to remove some games, and Al complied.  If they wanted more, we'd either know about it, or we'd be bitching about it at some other site because AA went offline.

...and if AA would need our help, they would for sure ask for it.

[NintendoDieScreaming]

Should AA go offline, is there a "AA2" (for lack of a better name/analogy) we can flee to???

[Dav]

StanJr said:

Yeah, we need to wait and see until Infogrames comes for the Atari Age name and logo.  Kind of like we waited and saw with the Nazis taking Poland (surely they won't....)

There used to be a pacman.com and a galaga.com. One morning everyone woke up and they both pointed to namco.com. It seems namco sued the owner for copyright infringement then dropped the charges when they signed over the domain names.

[StanJr]

so....you would say there is a historical prescedence for this sort of thing.....

[Nukey Shay]

NintendoDieScreaming said:

Should AA go offline, is there a "AA2" (for lack of a better name/analogy) we can flee to???

Yeah, Digital Press. IMO they are equally significant classic gaming sites.

[StanJr]

true, but be ready, DP is more than just Atari stuff. A significant portion of the conversation is modern systems and PC stuff. However last week was Atari week at DP, so they still got love for they streets.

[Philflound]

Has anyone gotten Santulli's take on all this? I haven't gone to the DP forums to see what's brewing there. Just don't have the time.

Phil

[StanJr]

try this thread. Seems DP is taking a "tough luck" take on this. But I wonder if it affects their sales of protos and such?

http://www.digitpres...t=42555&start=0

[Bryan]

StanJr said:

try this thread.  Seems DP is taking a "tough luck" take on this.  But I wonder if it affects their sales of protos and such?

http://www.digitpres...t=42555&start=0

I'm surprized how many people are taking the "Yeah! You programmers had it coming!" approach. Many of the Atari themed games were done out of admiration for Atari, not to just rip them off for profit.

-Bry

[Mayhem]

Most of that was directed at the hacks which in all essence were completely illegal but pretty much ignored by the powers that be until recently. But I'm sure some people here (maybe not vocally) were thinking exactly the same thing too...

[Zach]

I agree with Bryan here. The hacks that were formerly in the store were more like fan-fiction than pirating.

[NintendoDieScreaming]

Beautiful...

I've been to DP for only one purpose before: Emulation. They have sufficient emulation, and that's all good. The reason I am not a member of their forums, I shall not post here, becuase that would throw the thread into a completely different direction.

[Brad2600]

I was and I still am hoping that DP will have an open mind about this, instead of refusing to acknowlege the dangers of Infogrames and their tactics.

[NintendoDieScreaming]

Kepone said:

I was and I still am hoping that DP will have an open mind about this, instead of refusing to acknowlege the dangers of Infogrames and their tactics.

Agreed, Kepone*.




*=This has bugged me for quite some time now... ...what the hell does kepone mean?!?!?!?!?!?!)

[StanJr]

to be fair, I think a lot of DP regulars just have a different perspective on the issue. Unless they are AA-ers, they probably don't live and breathe Atari Hacks and Homebrews the way some of us do. Therefore the issue doesn't impact them the way it might us.

[Zach]

That's a good point, Stan. I can see how selling hacks would look like piracy to people outside the hobby. I don't dispute that Infogrames has legal control over the games, but I did take it a little personally when the hacks were called "wrong".

[StanJr]

yeah, its kind of like going "look, I love your product SO much that I did this," and Infogrames going "gee that's nice, but who really gives a fork, stop doing it."

discouraging to a occasional hacker (and former award giver) like myself.

But ah well, you can't fight the almighty $$$$

[Beer Monkey]

My opinion is somewhere in between most of the AA faithful and the DP guys. And I know it's not a popular one.

My question remains: have we seen anything to indicate that Infogrames is against any 'homebrew' games other than those that use their trademarks, their copyrighted code, or are near-pixel-accurate clones of their games?

Because to me, the heart of the homebrew scene is original and 'inspired-by' games. And I haven't seen anything to indicate that it is in danger.

[mos6507]

Zach said:

That's a good point, Stan. I can see how selling hacks would look like piracy to people outside the hobby. I don't dispute that Infogrames has legal control over the games, but I did take it a little personally when the hacks were called "wrong".

I think it depends on how the hack is circulating.

Legalities aside, posterity is best served by clearly separating the hacks from the originals within the digital domain.

The great thing about AtariAge is the database which provides metadata/context to the ROMs you can download. The ROMs themsleves tell you nothing other than their digital signature and their filename. People trust AA's database. It's a definitive resource. Once you download them and it's just a file on your hard drive, the meaning is lost unless your emulator has an integrated game database and can identify the games properly. [I have suggested to them some kind of Web Service interface to their database which emulators could use.]


The situation is similar in music. When you download MP3s it's very easy to get mislabeled songs. You'll see people "guess" who the artist is, for instance. You'll see Human League filed under Spandau Ballet, stuff like that. Even before that I used to collect Led Zep boots and there was once a song going around on tape that people thought was an acoustic version of Black Dog but which was kind of a half-original half-sampled track created by Michael White of "The White".

If file-trading becomes the predominant method in which these assets are consumed, and carts fall by the wayside (as they have done for a large chunk of those who still play classic games) then it's important not to muddy the gene-pool as it were.

It would be very easy a decade down the road for nobody to be able to identify the original Space Invaders with all the various hacks out there. A file spreading around on the internet takes on a life of its own and truth is in the eyes of the beholder. If the majority of people believe file X is genuine, it's hard to somehow magically change everyone's mind because there is no way to proactively communicate to everyone who is using that file all at once, and even if you did, they need to trust your opinion.

It's important for sites like AA and emu authors to editorially lock down the mindshare so that future generations (ok, I sound pretentious now) will not get the wrong story.

That's not to say hacks shouldn't be available. In some cases they are IMPROVEMENTS over the originals (like Thomas J's enhancement hacks). But we owe it to the original programmers to make sure people know where the original is.

This is even more of a sore point with me when you have graphical hacks taken to such an extreme (with backstories and all) that they are unapologetically presented as if they are completely new games.

The game I felt really crossed the line for me was x3v0lux.

My main beef was the story webpage on Lee's site:

http://nwcge.org/x3v...cge_x3v0lux.htm

Nowhere does the word "hack" or "Astroblast" or "M-Network" appear on that page. The link to this URL from ResQsoft mentions it as a "clever hack" but does not identify the original game. Despite the original arguments from years back, Lee still hasn't touched up that webpage to make this clearer. The link page also has a Space Invaders hack listed which is more clearly described. I don't know what the motivation here is but I think it's wrong.

At the time the game originally went on sale I don't think it had an AtariAge link in there. AA now correctly classifies it as a hack. So the uninitiated would think it's a completely new game unless they clicked the AA link and read the game description completely.

[gdement]

Beer Monkey said:

My opinion is somewhere in between most of the AA faithful and the DP guys.  And I know it's not a popular one.

My question remains:  have we seen anything to indicate that Infogrames is against any 'homebrew' games other than those that use their trademarks, their copyrighted code, or are near-pixel-accurate clones of their games?

Because to me, the heart of the homebrew scene is original and 'inspired-by' games.  And I haven't seen anything to indicate that it is in danger.

I agree, though "inspired-by" gets into a gray area that Infogrames might start challenging if they get too aggressive.
I admire the near perfect ports, and would prefer if Infogrames would leave those alone, particularly if they are ports of 20 year old games. But in the current environment it looks like those might not be safe anymore.

[Andrew Davie]

Beer Monkey said:

My question remains:  have we seen anything to indicate that Infogrames is against any 'homebrew' games other than those that use their trademarks, their copyrighted code, or are near-pixel-accurate clones of their games?

I desperately want to do a Boulderdash for the '2600. I wrote to the owners of the copyright and asked for permission. Their terms were too limiting, so we couldn't come to agreement. So I don't write Boulderdash, end of story.

First Star own the copyright to that title/concept. Likewise, I own the copyright to my own game, Qb. I wouldn't expect a big company to come along and appropriate my game without my permission -- so I wouldn't use someone else's game (company or individual) without first seeking their permission.

I come down on the side of Infogrames. Though I do think they're quite silly jumping on the incredibly small market that is '2600 homebrewing, they are well within their rights to do so. Indeed, it's probably in their interest to enforce the protection of their intellectual property.

Despite recent events, homebrewers are going to continue doing homebrew. And they are going to continue using previous titles to hack, and they are going to continue breaching others' copyright. But hopefully they will be more judicious in what they write. This could be a good thing for the community. More original titles, anyone?

Cheers
A

[Albert]

I just want to clarify a few of the things that are being said in this thread.

First, Atari's actions only affect the AtariAge Store, and specifically, the items that were removed. The selling of hacks and reproductions has always been a grey area, and we always knew that the possibility existed that at some point Atari might come along and say, "Hey, stop selling these." While I am disappointed this has now occurred, it is not surprising. Atari is well within their rights to do this, and while I feel they are misguided in their actions (and not just against us, but others), they are in the right and it's difficult to build a plausible legal defense against it.

That said, original homebrew games with carefully selected names are in no danger by Atari's actions. My advice to homebrew authors is to avoid using Atari trademarks (names like "Pong", for instance) in your game's title and avoid doing direct ports of old Atari titles they still own the copyrights to (such as Warlords). I also would not stick the Atari logo on any labels, manuals, and boxes. But outside of that, there's nothing Atari can (or would) do to try and prevent someone from publishing an original game for any of their console systems. Original homebrew games such as "JoustPong" can be renamed to avoid conflicts with Atari.

Atari's actions do not affect any other areas of AtariAge (remember, the site is much more than just the store) and no, they are not going to come after us for using "Atari" in the site's name. Atari seems primarily concerned with the unlicensed sales of items infringing upon their trademarks and copyrights. The homebrew/repro/hack scene is just one small corner of that world.

I have always been a strong proponent of the homebrew scene (we had a large number of "in development" homebrews on display at the OKGE two weeks ago), and will continue to be so. I also encourage the 2600 hacking scene to continue, it will just be more difficult to get these hacks in cartridge form. But the primary motivation for creating homebrews and hacks has not been for monetary gain, but for the enjoyment and challenge involved in writing an original game for the 2600, or by tweaking around in an existing game and changing/improving it in some fashion.

The possibility exists that we will be able to work out an arrangement with Atari that will allow us to once again sell some subset of the titles that were removed. When or even if that will happen I cannot say right now. But now that Atari has "waken up", it is the route I would prefer to go. These things take time, however, so I ask that people be patient.

..Al

[Lemmi]

good post Albert

i was bored and did a search on google "boycott atari infogrames"

and 2 Atariage posts were on the first page everything else seems to be over 4 months old