this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
847 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

59179 readers
2124 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
847
Feds Say You Don’t Have a Right to Check Out Retro Video Games Like Library Books (gizmodo.com)
submitted 1 week ago by iN8sWoRLd@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
146 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

"Most of the world’s video games from close to 50 years of history are effectively, legally dead. A Video Games History Foundation study found you can’t buy nearly 90% of games from before 2010. Preservationists have been looking for ways to allow people to legally access gaming history, but the U.S. Copyright Office dealt them a heavy blow Friday. Feds declared that you or any researcher has no right to access old games under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pulptastic@midwest.social 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The same logic would apply to books. ::gestures at library::

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

There is a difference there in that these are digital copies (easy to make more copies) vs physical books (hard to make more copies).

That said, the only reason this is an issue is copyright lasts too long on relatively short lived games. If copyright on games was a more reasonable "15 years since their last major revision", this wouldn't be a problem.

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

There is a difference there in that these are digital copies (easy to make more copies) vs physical books (hard to make more copies).

Libraries rent out ebooks too, also easily stripped of DRM and copied if someone wants to so that. But that is seemingly not an issue.

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

As someone who may or may not have stripped DRM from library books, they certainly never seemed to care about that. And it was never even to share, but rather to store for myself so I could read it at my own pace. And the worst part... I read it for RECREATIONAL USE

[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You wouldn't download a book?

[–] LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I hate when they say, "You wouldn't download a car".

Yes, I fucking would!

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago

it was never even to share, but rather to store for myself so I could read it at my own pace. And the worst part... I read it for RECREATIONAL USE

You disgust me...what a sick and exploitive attitude.

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

What he's saying is not beyond what Congress has previously laid down though. First sale doctrine should let you do whatever you want, but they actually banned renting phonographs because they thought people were recording them on tape. We're lucky they didn't outlaw movie rentals too back in the day. Whole copyright regime needs to die in a fire.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

Libraries rent out ebooks too

Libraries loan out ebooks and other media.

 

/pet peeve.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Stop it man you’re just going to give them ideas