Search

[Hi]

The rule doesn't really bother me at all. I know of plenty of rom sites, and I love this site a lot. But I don't understand why so many sites (each site I've found that isn't a rom site itself) has rules about linking to rom sites.

If it's illigal to link to rom sites, is it illigal to link to sites that have links to rom sites?

what about linking to sites that have links to sites that have links to sites that have links to sites that have links to sites that have links to sites that have links to sites that have links to rom sites?

Hey, google has links to rom sites if you type in the right thing, so is linking to google illigal?

I don't really care, but I also don't understand, and I don't like not understanding. And after all, who does?

[fls_27]

What he said.

[DeVS]

If you upload a copyrighted video to Youtube, you don't get in trouble with the law and neither does Youtube because they delete the video. If they left the videos up they would get a nice little note with a warning of legal action. Were not going to host or have links to roms/warez period. No discussion will change this rule believe me. It's not something we have ever or will ever think about allowing, were not gonna open those doors here. And to answer the question about Nintendo copyright running out on games:

Haven't the Copyrights for Old Games Expired?

U.S. copyright laws state that copyrights owned by corporations are valid for 75 years from the date of first publication. Because video games have been around for less than three decades, the copyrights of all video games will not expire for many decades to come.

And this law will be changed too due to corporate greed. Google Disney and copyright laws. Disney's copyright on Mickey Mouse has by law expired due to the time limit (it actualy expired in 2003), but the courts are allowing them to keep it by filling "extensions". Money buys everything.

Also by doing a quick Google search you will alot of discussion about linking to illegal material and it's legality, it is a very grey area that leans toward copyright holders. Here are 2 of the first pages that comes up in a Google search about linking to illegal content:

http://www.webtvwire.com/linking-to-infringing-content-is-probably-illegal-in-the-us/

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061201/004047.shtml

[Hi]

You still haven't told me thought, devs, why you can't link to rom sites. As I said, if you can't link to rom sites, can you link to sites that have links to sites that have links to rom sites. Hey, google has links to rom sites if you know what to type in. So, are we allowed to link to google?

[DeVS]

Read my above amendment. It has 2 examples of discussions of linking to illegal content. Here is a quick exert from one of the articles:

Is Linking to Infringing Content Illegal in the US? Like it or not the short answer is yes.

It turns out that QuickSilverScreen (QSS) is in fact illegal for linking to TV shows on video sharing sites; the site wouldn’t stand a chance in court. Before you jump in to disagree with me please read the whole article.

That is not too say the wider issue of linking to infringing content is an open and shut case, the whole linking issue is very much a grey area.

Please note: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice
Background Cases

As far as I’m aware there are three solid cases in the US where a court ruled that a website could not link to infringing content.
Plaintiff Intellectual Reserve (IR) vs Utah Lighthouse Ministry (ULM)

ULM is a religious organization that often criticized the Plaintiff’s Mormon religion. IR won an injunction against ULM to stop them posting its copyrighted Mormon "Church Handbook of Instructions". ULM’s response was to simply link to other websites which held a copy of the copyrighted works, these websites did not have permission to host the copyrighted book.

The court found ULM’s linking to be ‘contributory infringement’ and therefore it granted a preliminary injunction preventing ULM from linking to the copyrighted "Church Handbook of Instructions".

The court found that ULM’s linking to the unauthorized material was likely to be found "contributory infringement" of IR’s copyright. Therefore, it granted a preliminary injunction preventing ULM from linking to the sites in question.

[Perseid]

You still haven't told me thought, devs, why you can't link to rom sites. As I said, if you can't link to rom sites, can you link to sites that have links to sites that have links to rom sites. Hey, google has links to rom sites if you know what to type in. So, are we allowed to link to google?

Would the site owners get sued if they linked to ROM sites? Probably not. Do we know for sure? No. Is it worth the risk? No.

[DeVS]

Being sued would be the final step. Most likely it would be a letter to the host of the site who would in turn pass it on to Socket telling him to remove it, if he didn't the hosting company would shut the site down before being sued. I would bet my lunch that such activity is also outlined in the user agreement with the hosting company of this site.

[Hi]

Hmm... interesting devs. Thanks for that. I can't say I really understand. No dobt, like the article says, this aria is really gray. Seriously, if yahoo wants to get rid of there rival, google, they should acuse google of linking to illigal nds rom sites :lol: Of corse, google would counter sue yahoo for also linking to nds rom sites. And before we know it, the internet would have no search engins!  :lol:

How am I supposed to get my history report done without search engines? :cry:

[Gleasonator]

How are videos illigal you ask?

not to be rude but, newsflash...

videos are copyrighted just like video games.

People upload copyrighted videos onto youtube all the time.

*smacks head* Duh! I wasn't thinking about that. Stupid. :lol:

Haven't the Copyrights for Old Games Expired?

U.S. copyright laws state that copyrights owned by corporations are valid for 75 years from the date of first publication. Because video games have been around for less than three decades, the copyrights of all video games will not expire for many decades to come.

Forget what I said then. I thought it was 20 years.

[Haoie]

It's the same with most forums I think. We should all be used to it.

[tenba]

Haven't the Copyrights for Old Games Expired?U.S. copyright laws state that copyrights owned by corporations are valid for 75 years from the date of first publication. Because video games have been around for less than three decades, the copyrights of all video games will not expire for many decades to come.

Forget what I said then. I thought it was 20 years.

Actually, you're only 1 off -- it's 120 years now.  :lol:

They've extended the copyrights yet again, and it's now 120 years after creation or 95 years after publication, whichever is shortest.

[Perseid]

Jeez. Do you suppose that in 120 years the great-great grandkids are going to be able to even run the games they own the copyright on?

[zektor]

Jeez. Do you suppose that in 120 years the great-great grandkids are going to be able to even run the games they own the copyright on?

They will still use the copyrights. They will simply inject the roms into your kids brains.

[Perseid]

Jeez. Do you suppose that in 120 years the great-great grandkids are going to be able to even run the games they own the copyright on?

They will still use the copyrights. They will simply inject the roms into your kids brains.

Really? Then I'm sure porno games will enjoy a new surge in popularity...

[tenba]

The copyrights include the rights to any derivative works.  So, that holodeck version of Final Fantasy that our grandkids are going to want still has to come from or pay royalties to Square-Enix (or whatever company buys the rights).