Are things that enable piracy allowed?

[LogicalDrm]

4 hours ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

But what if I'm looking for an app that's free, that is modded for a given purpose. For example a modded Spotify apk that doesn't display ads. 

As said, thats piracy. Reading comments in this thread kinda shows that most people don't seem to understand or know what piracy means.

 

In short and not copy-pasted from any source:

Piracy is act where you knowingly take profits from a company/person to whom they would otherwise go.

 

So who does benefit from Spotify ad-revenue? Spotify and artists whose music you are listening. Also to opening post, does it cause harm for Sony/Nintendo if you modify console? Not really, you have already bought console. Where the line is drawn is if one would ask for game ROMs they haven't bought or own. And since we have no way of knowing if someone is telling the truth, there's blanket ban on sharing sites which would offer those ROMs. Or even guides on how-to as they can lead to such sites.

[Vishera]

9 hours ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

things that enable piracy, such as homebrew, cfw

I love the CFW on my PS3,it allows me to install homebrew that let me control the fan speed of the console and other cool stuff,

Like using save games from other people,running a FTP server and web server on the OS of the console while playing games at the same time.

I can even launch games on the console from my PC using the web server! (Java script) and more.

It's a shame that people always associate that with piracy.

[Donut417]

6 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

So I get this right, you can make copies, for personal use, but you can't do that if there's some drm involved? Or, you just aren't allowed to make any copies if you aren't the copyright holder? 

If it falls in public domain you can make copies. But if there is DRM/encryption on it, you are NOT allowed to circumvent the DRM at all. Pretty much all Hollywood movies have some form of DRM/encryption on them to stop you from copying. Studio's expect you to buy a new copy if the old copy gets ruined. 

[AndreiArgeanu]

3 hours ago, LogicalDrm said:

In short and not copy-pasted from any source:

Piracy is act where you knowingly take profits from a company/person to whom they would otherwise go.

That's definitely a bit of a loose definition. By that logic GameStop could sue me if I download a wii ROM and nintendo can't because they don't sell the product anymore. 

[Mark Kaine]

Also this whole copyright stuff went totally out of hand, and is often muddy and contradicting... 

 

I know this is an edge case, but a good example nonetheless... 

 

What about "bass covers" (or any covers for that matter) 

 

Stuff like this 

 

https://m.bilibili.com/video/av33451023

 

Am I a pirate for watching these...? And while it's not copying in the sense we were talking about so far, it's still very much copying - without permission usually...

 

I think youtube gets around this by giving up royalties, but as I said it's all rather muddy and contradicting imo... What if the uploader didn't enable monetization, will youtube still monetize the video anyway? 

 

 

[Bad5ector]

I'm still waiting on the question about PSP custom firmware. 

[zachsa999]

19 hours ago, whm1974 said:

What about Legal ROMs? Or is there such a thing?

I have a buddy that creates Open Source ROMs as a hobby, so, maybe?

[Helpful Tech Witch]

47 minutes ago, Bad5ector said:

I'm still waiting on the question about PSP custom firmware. 

I killed my psp battery when making the pandoras battery, so its gonna be a bit.

[Bad5ector]

18 hours ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

I killed my psp battery when making the pandoras battery, so its gonna be a bit.

Oh yeah? You know you don't need a pandora's battery to load CFW on a PSP anymore. Or were you trying to do something else with the battery?

[Helpful Tech Witch]

39 minutes ago, Bad5ector said:

Oh yeah? You know you don't need a pandora's battery to load CFW on a PSP anymore. Or were you trying to do something else with the battery?

I had a 5.50 psp, and I couldnnt update it (32mb card) and wanted to do the cfw without getting a new card. aall the 5.50 cfw looked like it needed a pandora's battery.

[Bad5ector]

48 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

I had a 5.50 psp, and I couldnnt update it

Why not update to the latest? They cracked the private key and can sign all PSP CFW now so that it installs like any other firmware.  At least that's the way I remember it. I've owned PSP 1000, 2000, and PSPgo all with CFW and never had to use a Pandora's battery. If you don't have a big enough memory stick, not sure how you were going to do the firmware load to begin with? I would link you the site with all the info but fear that might be in violation of the forum rules.

[Sandro Linux]

I guess so

[LogicalDrm]

On 10/23/2020 at 4:19 PM, AndreiArgeanu said:

That's definitely a bit of a loose definition. By that logic GameStop could sue me if I download a wii ROM and nintendo can't because they don't sell the product anymore. 

You are right that the definition is loose. I made that on purpose. Its one way to show that policing this isn't easy.

 

The second part of your post is rather confusing, and makes me really think you don't understand how copyright works. Nintendo, and about any creators/publisher/rights owner has their claim for released work for at least 50 years. Regardless of whether its available or not. Distributing it without consent is against copyright laws. GameStop is licensed seller. Whether they have agreement with Nintendo about reselling old games, I don't know. So you pirating ROM for game which isn't sold anymore, GameStop still wouldn't have any grounds for lawsuit. Nintendo would still be the copyright holder.

 

Since we are siding the used-resale, games had period where resale markets were attacked from developer side, by including one-of codes for stuff in the retail package.

[AndreiArgeanu]

44 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

The second part of your post is rather confusing, and makes me really think you don't understand how copyright works. Nintendo, and about any creators/publisher/rights owner has their claim for released work for at least 50 years. Regardless of whether its available or not. Distributing it without consent is against copyright laws. GameStop is licensed seller. Whether they have agreement with Nintendo about reselling old games, I don't know. So you pirating ROM for game which isn't sold anymore, GameStop still wouldn't have any grounds for lawsuit. Nintendo would still be the copyright holder.

You said that
 

Quote

 

In short and not copy-pasted from any source:

Piracy is act where you knowingly take profits from a company/person to whom they would otherwise go.

 

Ignoring everything else, by that logic

 

On 10/23/2020 at 2:19 PM, AndreiArgeanu said:

GameStop could sue me if I download a wii ROM and nintendo can't because they don't sell the product anymore. 

since Nintendo doesn't sell the product anymore, they wouldn't lose money if I download a Wii rom instead of buying it because they're not the one's selling Wii games anymore, but gamestop would because they are selling those games. Keep in mind that in that I'm only considering your statement and nothing else. That's why I said your definition was loose. Because that on it's own it makes no sense.

[LogicalDrm]

8 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

You said that
 

Ignoring everything else, by that logic

 

since Nintendo doesn't sell the product anymore, they wouldn't lose money if I download a Wii rom instead of buying it because they're not the one's selling Wii games anymore, but gamestop would because they are selling those games. Keep in mind that in that I'm only considering your statement and nothing else. That's why I said your definition was loose. Because that on it's own it makes no sense.

You would be still supporting piracy, and not knowing if the copy was uploaded when the game was still available or not. I really don't understand why this is so hard to understand. Other than you are looking for excuses that make it sound piracy is fine and ok.

[AndreiArgeanu]

2 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

You would be still supporting piracy, and not knowing if the copy was uploaded when the game was still available or not. I really don't understand why this is so hard to understand. Other than you are looking for excuses that make it sound piracy is fine and ok.

You still don't understand my point. I was using downloading a wii rom as an example. I wasn't trying to prove that downloading a wiii rom isn't piracy. I was trying to prove that your statement on it's own didn't make sense.

[LogicalDrm]

8 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

You still don't understand my point. I was using downloading a wii rom as an example. I wasn't trying to prove that downloading a wiii rom isn't piracy. I was trying to prove that your statement on it's own didn't make sense.

Ok, fair. Please explain what piracy is. And where the line goes. Is using emulator to play games you own wrong if your console broke? Is downloading games you haven't ever own wrong because they aren't available anymore? Is taking business from reseller as wrong as taking money from actual creators?

[whm1974]

3 hours ago, LogicalDrm said:

Ok, fair. Please explain what piracy is. And where the line goes. Is using emulator to play games you own wrong if your console broke? Is downloading games you haven't ever own wrong because they aren't available anymore? Is taking business from reseller as wrong as taking money from actual creators?

What about Content that was made by small companies that went belly up a while back, and not only not available but no one even knows who currently owns the Copyright?

[LogicalDrm]

1 minute ago, whm1974 said:

What about Content that was made by small companies that went belly up a while back, and not only not available but no one even knows who currently owns the Copyright?

If there's no copyright owner, then its abandonware or likes. But with many of bankcrupcies, any copyright or patents held will move to creditors. Just like what happened with THQ. This isn't that hard. Unless creators has released it from copyright claims (like abandonware and those 100 year old books and music), the copyright is still active.

[whm1974]

9 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

If there's no copyright owner, then its abandonware or likes. But with many of bankcrupcies, any copyright or patents held will move to creditors. Just like what happened with THQ. This isn't that hard. Unless creators has released it from copyright claims (like abandonware and those 100 year old books and music), the copyright is still active.

Would the Source Code to CP/M 3.x.x count? That is if someone actually found it. And I am thinking that Abandonware is still under Copyright, but the Holder is either not known, or even not enforced by them due to being Worthless.

 

For Example: The Atari 2600 ET game. The sales of the Cartridges were so dismal that the vast majority of them ended up in a landfill somewhere in the US. It is also a gag in Wasteland 2.

[LogicalDrm]

50 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

Would the Source Code to CP/M 3.x.x count? That is if someone actually found it. And I am thinking that Abandonware is still under Copyright, but the Holder is either not known, or even not enforced by them due to being Worthless.

 

For Example: The Atari 2600 ET game. The sales of the Cartridges were so dismal that the vast majority of them ended up in a landfill somewhere in the US. It is also a gag in Wasteland 2.

Really? I mean really? Tell me what this is about? I'm not going to start splitting hairs over what is and isn't under copyright. Our rules are clear, and thats what this thread is about.

[whm1974]

1 minute ago, LogicalDrm said:

Really? I mean really? Tell me what this is about? I'm not going to start splitting hairs over what is and isn't under copyright. Our rules are clear, and thats what this thread is about.

I wasn't trying to justify Piracy, but only using something that a Current holder isn't likely to give a Rat's Arse about. 

[LogicalDrm]

Just now, whm1974 said:

I wasn't trying to justify Piracy, but only using something that a Current holder isn't likely to give a Rat's Arse about. 

And how is that relevant to this discussion? We do not police over what isn't and is copyrighted and should or shouldn't be allowed to distribute. The ban is blanket type. We do not allow linking to sites that offer ROMs or anything which might be under copyright. The rest of the discussion is splitting hairs, or people not understanding what copyright means.

[whm1974]

1 minute ago, LogicalDrm said:

And how is that relevant to this discussion? We do not police over what isn't and is copyrighted and should or shouldn't be allowed to distribute. The ban is blanket type. We do not allow linking to sites that offer ROMs or anything which might be under copyright. The rest of the discussion is splitting hairs, or people not understanding what copyright means.

Nevermind then. Not that I would link to anything that offers Pirated Content anyway.

[thrasher_565]

so becuse say a song on youtube may or may not have ads if i download it then they cant get the ads money? what if i play it on youtube and record my pc audio? im not download it. whats the difrance from watching on youtube vs on non enet? what if i watch it once on youtube then download it? they got there ad money...

 

also there are other froms of money may not be cash but can lead to more cash. say i liked a video and the makeis it get to the front of yt then gets more views that gets more ad money. or when if i link it say thais if good and get more views to it "im advertising it "

Edited October 26, 2020 by thrasher_565