Print

[feflicker]

QUOTE

You may not distribute binaries which support games with copyright dates less then three years old;

I am not a lawyer, but how are drivers that are over 3 years old deemed "legal", and those that are under 3 years said to be "illegal"? What is the legal precedence for the "3 years" that is mentioned? (Forgive me if if there is precedence behind this, that I simply do not know about...)

I know the authors of FBA post this policy on their website, but it really isn't their job to "enforce" this stuff, right? Aren't those simply *guidlines* for using their source? There is no *legal* action that can be taken, right?

I am not saying what is right/wrong (I agree it is probably *wrong* to download source and not adhere to the authors usage terms). I am just speaking to what is legal/illegal. I think the "legal" word is getting tossed around without weight behind it?  

Sometimes I think it is all taken a little too seriously. I mean, if you want to download someones source freely off the internet, and do what you want with it, who cares if a rule or two is broken here or there. That is "innovation", and having some balls IMHO... If GoGo is willing to take a risk that the FBA authors are not, good for him  

[Prican24]

QUOTE (lantus @ Aug 8 2004, 09:57 PM)

now run along to 1emulation forums and have a cry about it

1emulation.com has nothing to deal with this or fba-xxx so i don't know why you mention the site. this is basically between this forum and gogo and co. to deal with that issue.

funny how you didn't bother to mention about the "drivers" early on to any mod here as even the source has them in it but i don't set the rules so i leave that up to the man that runs this forum and supports gogo's work.

[Thraxen]

QUOTE

any other talk about illegal XDKs, modchips, hacked bioses are moot

Haha... dodging the issue.  You well know that everything I said is true.  Virtually all of the emulators are compiled with the XDK and are thus illegal.  Period.  You can't debate that and that issue is NOT moot.  Also, this whole "3 year" deal is completely arbitrary.  There are no legal grounds supporting this limit.   Most ROMS older than 3 years are no more legal than ROMS newer than 3 years.  Again, this is not debatable.  

QUOTE

now run along to 1emulation forums and have a cry about it

Spare me... who is acting like the child here?

[sp1200]

)

cheers to the squares and blacksheep in the emulation scene.

[Prican24]

QUOTE (lantus @ Aug 9 2004, 12:06 AM)

i was led to believe that gogo's build did not have any > 3 y/o drivers in place. Certainly his older source tree didnt have them. this new ini file switch has only been implemented in recent builds yes? i make mention to 1emulation forums because, you and i both know its a haven for neo kiddies who want hacked builds.

the ini switch is new but older sources when x-s supported him did have the drivers, only the binary that was posted in "you know where" didn't have them (not the sources that was posted in your forum a while ago)

i'm glad you notice 1emulation is a happy place for freedom of speech but as of now theres rules in effect that change that.

thraxen its a dead issue man, just let it be

fba-team allows the source to availible and to be used in good terms, doing something as such goes against them and they're willing to stop it

sp1200 where the hell do you get 10,000 from  thats mame not fba which is in question

i too like gogo's work to the fact it even beats lantus's last fba-x (sorry but its true, but you still rock lantus and tmaul )

[lantus]

QUOTE (Thraxen @ Aug 9 2004, 04:09 AM)

Haha... dodging the issue.  You well know that everything I said is true.  Virtually all of the emulators are compiled with the XDK and are thus illegal.  Period.  You can't debate that and that issue is NOT moot.  Also, this whole "3 year" deal is completely arbitrary.  There are no legal grounds supporting this limit.   Most ROMS older than 3 years are no more legal than ROMS newer than 3 years.  Again, this is not debatable.  Spare me... who is acting like the child here?

ok so because code is built with an xdk, lets no give a shit about what policy/licence agreement the original devs have in place, because by your argument its all illegal anyway? How about i break into my neighbors car, because i compile code with an xdk.

listen buddy, source code is source code - even if OpenXDK was the main development environment of choice, people would still be providing hacked binaries, id still be preaching and you'd still be debating this with me.

the fact that xbins provide binaries is a discussion that is out of scope with this one and goes back to the beginnings of xbins, its purpose and why it was formed.

the fba devs know about this, why do you want to piss them off even more?  its only going to make things worse for the future.

[Thraxen]

QUOTE

By the way, very nice logic "since you xbox emulators developers break the law, why not screw over the guys providing you with the source for your ports".

That's not the point.  Lantus was jumping on GoGo for his version using "legality" of the drivers as the basis for his argument.  I was just pointing out how absurdly hypocritical that argument is.

QUOTE

even if OpenXDK was the main development environment of choice, people would still be providing hacked binaries, id still be preaching and you'd still be debating this with me.

Yes I would... because the 3 year rule would still be arbitrary and newer ROMS are no more legal than most older ROMS.  You like to to point how emulators themselves are not illegal, well, neither are drivers for newer games.   Which leads us back to the authors wishes and then back to the legality of any ROM and back to the wishes of the developers of the actual games... and right back to hypocrisy.

[edit] Let me add that I do appreciate the work that you do, Lantus.  Along with XPort, all the other emulator porters, and the people that originally developed the emulators.  But it's just my personal opinion that no one involved with the emulation scene whether you be a developer or end user has ANY moral high ground to be harassing other scene members over ANY issue of legality.  It's simply the height of hypocrisy.

[lantus]

) say in this.

i will speak with gogo about this offline and ensure he removes any such ini flag from future builds

[Prican24]

QUOTE (Danjuro @ Aug 9 2004, 12:37 AM)

And to those of you trying to push Gogoackman on the front line, putting him in a very uncomfortable position just as to prove your point, I'll just say shut up and die. I'm glad to be immature.

all i can say is that he did to himself and it up to him to fix it. someone like you wouldn't care about the problem at hand cuz you get what you want you are just saying that so nothing happens.

no one put the gun to his head to add the drivers in the first place so you think about that

i only hope for the best that things get worked out with fba team and gogo

lantus, have you heard anything about the new version of fba? been so long since an update so just wondering if you heard anything about it

[GogoAckman]

QUOTE (lantus @ Aug 9 2004, 01:26 AM)

please remove this thread. people can't seem to follow even the simplest of rules - we dont care what you do with FBA, but distributing binaries with illegal drivers - yes Gogo, a flag in an ini file is meaningless because the binary has been compiled with those drivers is unacceptable. ive shown this thread to the FBA devs and they agree.

I am sorry lantus, but you can speak for you first   :

CODE

You may freely use, modify, and distribute both the FB Alpha source code and binary, however the following restrictions apply to the FB Alpha original material (see below for a list of libraries with differing licenses, please consult their respective documentation for more information): - You may not sell, lease, rent or otherwise seek to gain monetary profit from FB Alpha; - You must make public any changes you make to the source code; - You must include, verbatim, the full text of this license; - You may not distribute binaries which support games with copyright dates less then three years old; - You may not distribute FB Alpha with ROM images unless you have the legal right to distribute them.

I discussed it with loop too not so long ago, he said he ll speak to you but he didn t, is there a thing we don t know?
As for the ini, it is not my idea, I totally agree with you when you say it is an illegal binary but apparently manto has discussed about it on emulation forum/news and it is on the illegal limit (it would be illegal if you had only to press some buttons).

EDIT : by the way, I love and respect your work, I just don t agree with this 3 year things, as emulating a rom we don t possess is illegal, and I am sur at least some ppl have the original SS5,Mslug4 or other .

[Jan_Klaassen]

QUOTE

As for the ini, it is not my idea, I totally agree with you when you say it is an illegal binary but apparently manto has discussed about it on emulation forum/news and it is on the illegal limit (it would be illegal if you had only to press some buttons).

Manto's opinion is as irrelevant as could possibly be. Mine and Lantus' are relevant, and FBA's license is relevant.

The license says this:

QUOTE

You may not distribute binaries which support games with copyright dates less then three years old;

This is about as clear as it gets, and nowhere does it say "but if you make an ini variable to enable/disable newer games that's fine too." Please remove that option.

As to the general attitude about FBA or MAME not allowing new games to be played with them, it's not about us, the authors of the emulators, it's about trying to make sure the games developers and publishers can earn their income while the games are profitable in arcades. I can hear the shrill cries of "Hypocrisy!" from the usual "g1mme free g4mez" crowd a mile away, but I won't waste any more breath than I already have.

[Silentjay420]

I'm just curious.. does it really ruin anyones day that you can't play certain games..? There are thousands of other games you can play when ya want..

[Prican24]

[VampX]

QUOTE (Prican24 @ Aug 9 2004, 11:19 AM)

games like svc or mslug5 should support the makers and give them the time to earn what they worked for. svc is coming to xbox soon and will have live support for those that use that service and i hope some of you are willing to buy it a kof2002/3 collection is also coming soon for xbox also mslug4/5 collection is coming in january

Screw those, real MVS cartridges is where its at!

I'd be so buying slug 4&5 if it werent for the fact that they are about $250 each if not more.

but i can wait.. and FBA-XXX makes the waiting so much less anoying.

[GogoAckman]

Prican, you ve down well as I said by posting this here, you re embarassing me, so if Jan Klassen or loop pm me in fbaxxx forum and say me to pull out new drivers, I ll do it, after all, it is the deal, don t think because thousands of people love this emu, I have all right