...the machine actually runs off a 1GHz Pentium III with 768MB of RAM, a 40GB hard drive and a GeForce 2 MX200 AGP graphics card. Bootup time is horrible, about 5 to 10 minutes!

Quote:

---

...the machine actually runs off a 1GHz Pentium III with 768MB of RAM, a 40GB hard drive and a GeForce 2 MX200 AGP graphics card. Bootup time is horrible, about 5 to 10 minutes!

Quote:

---

> Seriously? You've shown no problem with dumping code from active companies like Sega,
> Namco, Konami, and Taito previously.

Quote:

---

> > So the Mame Devs are interested in ripping machines that may not be arcade
> machines,
> > or arcade machines that might be still sold and relevantly new on a legacy
> platform.
>
> Apparently you're unfamiliar (System16.com can educate you), but a majority of arcade
> games made since about 1997 are on commodity console or PC hardware. That doesn't
> make them not arcade games. Furthermore, this game was sold to arcade operators just
> like any other game. So it's fair game for MAME.
>
> If the company wishes to protect a console version, they can contact us just as Cave
> and Arika have in the past. (In Arika's case, they made more copies of the game than
> Xbox 360s have ever sold in Japan, with predictable 2600 ET-like results, but MAMEdev
> did remove the games as we were asked).

Quote:

---

If I understand the DCMA correctly, the act of backing up purchased media, active
> company or not, isn't illegal. Having Gat help wouldn't be illegal either. As long as
> sales of said company aren't affected, things are pretty much kosher legal-wise.

Quote:

---

On October 12, 1998, the U.S. Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, ending many months of turbulent negotiations regarding its provisions. Two weeks later, on October 28th, President Clinton signed the Act into law.

The Act is designed to implement the treaties signed in December 1996 at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Geneva conference, but also contains additional provisions addressing related matters.

As was the case with the 'No Electronic Theft' Act (1997), the bill was originally supported by the software and entertainment industries, and opposed by scientists, librarians, and academics.

Highlights Generally:

Makes it a crime to circumvent anti-piracy measures built into most commercial software.

· Outlaws the manufacture, sale, or distribution of code-cracking devices used to illegally copy software.

· Does permit the cracking of copyright protection devices, however, to conduct encryption research, assess product interoperability, and test computer security systems.

· Provides exemptions from anti-circumvention provisions for nonprofit libraries, archives, and educational institutions under certain circumstances.

· In general, limits Internet service providers from copyright infringement liability for simply transmitting information over the Internet.

· Service providers, however, are expected to remove material from users' web sites that appears to constitute copyright infringement.

· Limits liability of nonprofit institutions of higher education -- when they serve as online service providers and under certain circumstances -- for copyright infringement by faculty members or graduate students.

· Requires that "webcasters" pay licensing fees to record companies.

· Requires that the Register of Copyrights, after consultation with relevant parties, submit to Congress recommendations regarding how to promote distance education through digital technologies while "maintaining an appropriate balance between the rights of copyright owners and the needs of users."

· States explicitly that "nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use..."

Quote:

---

Translation:
I only like old games so I want all of Mamedev to only work on those old games that I like. I demand that Mamedev cease work on new games or I will have you sued.

Quote:

---

> > Quite frankly, how's this any different than the
> > other 7304 sets preserved in MAME? Why draw the exception now?
>
> That's exactly what I was thinking.
>
> You aren't new around here Bizimonki - you've been active on these forums for about
> 3.5 years and you've got 130+ posts under your belt. You are probably interested in
> MAME (otherwise you wouldn't be here), you possibly have MAME installed, and you
> might even have a bunch of ROMs for games that you don't own.
>
> I read these forums everyday, and have done since the old MAME forums closed down.
> It's one of the very few places I visit / hang out regularly on-line. And I don't
> recall you ever asking about the legality of games / ROMS / MAME.
>
> Why the sudden qualms about legality of one obscure game ?
>
> Is it just because it's x86 ?
>
> Not trying to pick a fight here, just trying to understand.

Quote:

---

> Just in case you missed this yet again, it's a 9 year old game. How many 9 year old
> games make decent sales in stores, let alone the dying arcade industry? I can think
> of Pacman/Galaga, but that's about it.

Quote:

---

> It's a game from 2002, there are games newer than that in MAME already. Seeing as the
> game is 9 years old, it's unlikely to hurt sales of it at this point.
>
> EDIT-Ignoring the fact that even if it worked fully in MAME as soon as it's dumped,
> it would be slow as hell considering its a 1GHz pentium3 with a geforce2.

Quote:

---

If the company wishes to protect a console version, they can contact us just as Cave
> and Arika have in the past. (In Arika's case, they made more copies of the game than
> Xbox 360s have ever sold in Japan, with predictable 2600 ET-like results, but MAMEdev
> did remove the games as we were asked).

Quote:

---

> > If the company wishes to protect a console version, they can contact us just as
> Cave
> > > and Arika have in the past. (In Arika's case, they made more copies of the game
> > than
> > > Xbox 360s have ever sold in Japan, with predictable 2600 ET-like results, but
> > MAMEdev
> > > did remove the games as we were asked).
> >
> > But then nobody decided to ask them first, they just did it, and only did you
> remove
> > it, after the fact. Right?
> >
> > I do not see that as a positive.
> >
> > Sorry no kudos for you.
>
> You might like to rethink things.
>
> Plenty of people have asked the "major" companies. Not a single one as far as I can
> tell has ever said "Yes". There is either no answer (which implies "No") or else
> there is a definite "No".
>
> Here's one example: In the very early days of arcade emulation, Dave Spicer
> (Sparcade) and I exchanged many, many dozens (perhaps 100's) of emails. In 1995/96, I
> offered a lot of money (think 6 figures !) to back him to take his arcade emulator
> and make it a commercial product with 100% legal / licensed games. The BIG problem -
> and the reason the project never went commercial - was the permissions. No-one would
> grant any. No-one even wanted to discuss money / licensing fees. No-one would talk
> about it. The "right person" was never there to talk to. No-one would answer letters.
> No-one would return phone calls. They just wanted to sit on their IP. Their focus was
> the future. Not old or ancient games from their past.
>
> If people asked before emulating, then there would be ZERO emulation. Many of the
> games supported by projects like MAME are preserved ONLY because these projects saved
> them, and often they were saved just in time. Many games would already be lost to
> oblivion if things were left to the IP holders. In many cases, they don't even have a
> backup of their source code.
>
> The fact that there are now some freeware games for MAME doesn't mean anything. These
> were only released long after MAME had become a success (emulating dozens of games,
> with wide distribution).
>
> If MAME had been a project that was still trying to emulate it's first game with full
> permission of the IP owner, and had approached any of the very nice people who have
> now released their games as freeware, then would they have said "YES" ?
>
> I'm all for you doing research about this for your thesis. However, you need to keep
> an open mind. It sounds like you have already decided on what your answers are, long
> before you've done the research and probably long before you have even thought what
> the real questions should be.
>
> Where are your interviews with emulator devs, IP holders, etc ? Where are your
> surveys of these people ? Where's your literature review ? Where have you tested your
> claims ? e.g. write to a selection of IP holders to ask them about licensing their
> games for your own hypothetical emulation project, and see how far you get. Then, and
> only then, will you know what the real situation is.
>
> If you are coming to conclusions, you'd better have solid evidence to backup all of
> your findings, or your thesis wont be worth anything.

Quote:

---

> Everybody has a different perfect world of copyrights and music/movie/video game
> preservation opinion. Why it is that you think yours is better than everyone else's
> to the point of pulling out your dick on our forum and taking a urination that would
> impress a recently thawed out Austin Powers is a better question than the trolling
> horse shit you are producing. If you have a vastly different opinion than everyone in
> a community then you probably don't belong in that community even if you are writing
> a thesis on them. You don't see me ranting on a vegan board about how they should eat
> meat. You think companies should be dead before their games are emulated. Aaron
> thought 3 years before adding to MAME. I guess I'd go with 7ish. Some other people
> would say 10 etc. Whoopidee doo. Why don't you write a chapter on drug companies
> getting less than 5 years to sell their IP before it gets legally bootlegged and how
> video games should still be 100 before there is an emulator for their hardware
> because some retard wrote a law about it before video games even existed. Can't wait
> to read it...

Quote:

---

> > Exactly what a Mame Fanboy troll would come up with.
>
> Quick search, user: Bizimonki. Time consumed: 2 minutes.
>
> Most of your messages are related to how MAME handles itself. Either coding (stupid C
> vs C++ argument), direction (H*z* vs. Aaron Giles), platform (Windows and any other
> OS vs. build your own MAME OS from scratch and make games run faster), performance
> ("every new build should be like running 0.83 on my P3, why upgrade?"), games
> inclusion ("coin pushers on MAME? no way") and now copyright. All of them in the last
> 12 months. In all of them you have lost because your arguments apart from baseless
> and without research, are made for the sole purpose to troll.
>
> Fool yourself if you like thinking this is "constructive criticism", you must know
> it's not because of your lack of knowledge about every topic. If you don't like the
> way MAME is handled feel free to make your own emulator, set your own rules and
> participate in "not your own" forums the proper way. No one is forcing you to post
> here or use MAME. Thanks.

Quote:

---

> Ok you have made your point some might agree, plenty others dont. Either way its time
> to drop it because if you continue to keep it going then it will be clear that now
> your just trying to wind everybody up!

Oh I do believe I have seen more daggers come out on this topic than others, but I have more than enough information from this exchange. In keeping I have more than enough to review and research including the many many other related websites on the subject.

I'm sure those who quietly lurk and do not contribute have their fair share of confirmed knowledge on the subject too.

Quote:

---

Where to start...
> >
> > P3 performance = emulator research (Moore(s) law)
> >
> > C or C++ and optimization = emulator coding background.
> >
> > Project Direction = emulator research (background)
> >
> > Emulator creation = I *will* have to attempt coding a basic emulator.
> >
> > Trolling? I'll let you decide since you are such an expert. But I could write about
> > how the subjects raised in a controlled forum met with some disdain.
>
> Which means you know nothing about the subject, you're just a programmer on paper. I
> stand corrected, you are not only trolling but also have lost every argument because
> you don't have experience and believe everything books teach you work in a real
> environment without flaws. Go grab any open source emulator and optimize it yourself
> with your "emulating coding background" and "Moore's law" skills, then talk later.
>
> However, since you're only a paper programmer. You might like to read this and with
> some luck understand why emulators get slower when the purpose is accuracy:
>
> http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/...s-emulator.ars/

Quote:

---

> Ask your professor if quicksort in C++ is slower than bubblesort in assembly. As we
> tried to tell you last time, algorithm trumps implementation.

Quote:

---

It really doesn't matter if you're talking about an establishment with brand new Arcade machines or if your speaking of a retail store with shelves packed with clothes and other cheap crap with the same inventory retail amount.

The bottom line is, people of today are not spending money or even indulging in the same activities as others did 10 - 30 years ago. People habits have changed.

Quote:

---

If you interviewed most teens around, most couldn't even tell you what an emulator or MAME even is nowadays.

Quote:

---

For people to say the 3 year rule or stuff added to MAME is killing sales is pure bullshit.

Quote:

---

because NOTHING can replace playing the real thing