Forum Overview :: Rants
 
Public Domain for Games by Ice Cream Jonsey 02/05/2014, 11:41am PST
Here is an article:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/02/03/editorial-why-games-should-enter-the-public-domain/

Like most of John Walker's work, it is insightful, nuanced and thought-provoking.

Here's how it starts:

A few days ago I inadvertently caused a bit of a fuss. In writing about GOG’s Time Machine sale, I expressed my two minds about the joy of older games being rescued from obscurity, and my desire that they be in the public domain. This led to some really superb discussion about the subject in the comments below, and indeed to a major developer on Twitter to call for me to be fired.

I wanted to expand on my thoughts, rather than leave them as a throwaway musing on a post about a website’s sale. But I also want to stress that these are my thoughts-in-process, and not those of RPS’s hivemind. This isn’t a petition – it’s an exploration of my thoughts on the subject. Let’s keep that in mind as we decide whether I should indeed fire myself.


I said it frustrates me that games more than a couple of decades old aren’t entering the public domain. Twenty years was a fairly arbitrary number, one that seems to make sense in the context of games’ lives, but it could be twenty-five, thirty. It’s not the point here. My point was, and is, that I have a desire for artistic creations to more quickly (indeed, at all) be released into the public domain, after a significant period of time during which the creator can profit.

This annoyed a number of high profile names in the industry, leading to some suggesting that I don’t want developers to get paid, be able to eat, and so on. As this isn’t the case, I want to get into the subject far deeper.

So before we move on to the nuances of the argument, let’s get one thing out of the way: Expressing a desire for a game to enter the public domain, let’s say twenty years after publication, does not in any sense whatsoever suggest a desire for developers to not get paid. I resent having to type this. It’s a bit like finding yourself having to say that you’re not in favour of gruesomely starving children to death because you expressed a thought that they probably shouldn’t get to exclusively eat at McDonald’s. What I am in fact saying is: “developers should get paid for the work they do, and then keep getting paid for the same bit of work, over and over and over for the next twenty years, even though they stopped doing any work related to it many years ago.” It’s not entirely apparent how the two sentiments are being confused.


But I don't want to talk about that, I want to talk about the moronic things George Broussard said. Just kidding, but here is his Twitter feed, which is the #1 place to go for dumb shit said by George Broussard.

I guess there is one I kind of like:



The problem with this is that "developers" aren't getting paid anything for work they did 30 years ago. Is Julian Gollop going to get a check if X-COM goes onto GOG? Publishers and studios won't include a contributor in the end credits of a game if they leave before the game goes gold. I'm sure that Firaxis is going to track down everyone that worked at Mythos games and cut them a check. Broussard doesn't understand this because he's been at 3D Realms and (no offense) couldn't get work elsewhere.

There's a real problem with games dropping away. TOSEC collections solve this to some degree. But let's look at these two cases:


- Brataccas is a 28 year old video game that appeared on the Amiga, ST and Mac. It had a unique control scheme that can't really be replicated in emulation. Psygnosis is out of business. Atari is out of business. Commodore is out of business. There was no DOS version -- Brataccas will never be on GOG. The programmer, David Lawson, appears to have left the industry. It is important historically.

- NHL '94 was developed by EA Canada. EA as a whole still exists. NHL '94 was included in NHL 14 as a special mode. They sell those Sega Genesis-emulated RCA plug joysticks that have NHL 94 (or something close, I can't remember) in them.

Obviously the first game ought to be in the public domain.

Obviously the publisher is still making money off the second game.

There seems to be no legal room to say, "I know abandonware when I see it." But we all know abandonware when we see it. Luckily, none of this really matters because all of us except Paul can download any old PC game we want at any time.

What do YOU think?


ICJ
NEXT REPLY QUOTE
 
Public Domain for Games by Ice Cream Jonsey 02/05/2014, 11:41am PST NEW
    Tempting as it is to bash George, can't we get a study done? Is it that hard? by stupid rookie 02/05/2014, 11:54am PST NEW
        Tempting as it is to bash George, can't we get a study done? Is it that hard? by Ice Cream Jonsey 02/05/2014, 4:06pm PST NEW
            It'd be great if someone with knowledge about industry history and creators did by stupid rookie 02/05/2014, 4:13pm PST NEW
    George has a similarly tough view about paying for music. by A Developer 02/05/2014, 3:16pm PST NEW
        I'd hate to get nickled and/or dimed. *Pays for old games I own on disc* NT by Worm 02/05/2014, 3:26pm PST NEW
    Are "devs" really being paid royalties for the old stuff? by blackwater 02/06/2014, 12:13am PST NEW
        Responses by skip 02/06/2014, 4:03pm PST NEW
    It's the way copyright works that is a problem by Commander Tansin A. Darcos 02/21/2014, 3:43pm PST NEW
        You moron by The Happiness Engine 02/21/2014, 4:51pm PST NEW
            Re: You moron by Commander Tansin A. Darcos 03/14/2014, 9:45pm PDT NEW
            You mean you are the moron by Commander Tansin A. Darcos 04/19/2014, 5:09pm PDT NEW
        The people hurt the most by copyright extension are the creators of work for hir by Jerry Whorebach 02/21/2014, 5:29pm PST NEW
    Gearbox sues 3DRealms for continuing to develop a franchise they sold. by Broussard's Lament 02/23/2014, 10:54am PST NEW
 
powered by pointy