this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
926 points (98.2% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54565 readers
447 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Image description: a screenshot from the Wikipedia page for the Doctor Who TV series, with a user-added caption that reads "Preserve the media you can before it's gone forever." The Wikipedia article reads, "No 1960s episodes exist on their original videotapes (all surviving prints being film transfers), though some were transferred to film for editing before transmission and exist in their broadcast form. [88] Some episodes have been returned to the BBC from the archives of other countries that bought prints for broadcast or by private individuals who acquired them by various means. Early colour videotape recordings made off-air by fans have also been retrieved, as well as excerpts filmed from the television screen onto 8 mm cine film and clips that were shown on other programmes. Audio versions of all lost episodes exist from home viewers who made tape recordings of the show. Short clips from every story with the exception of Marco Polo (1964), "Mission to the Unknown" (1965) and The Massacre (1966) also exist."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had the brilliant idea the other day of passing an amendment to the copywrite laws to include "independent distributors" for media that is abandoned or removed from active sale/distribution by its copywrite holder. The stipulation is that "independent distributors" are not allowed to make money in any way from the provided service and if the holder wants to rerelease something or remake it, the ID has to pull that title until the holder pulls it from circulation again. I would also put the stipulation on holders that any release has to be materially similar and at a fair market price. They are not allowed to re-release a game from 30 years ago at full modern retail, remakes have to be the same game to count (FFVII:remake would not count, but the updated PC releases of FFVII would), and the sales must be readily available to all citizens in the country (so releasing something on your JP store exclusively does not preclude the independent distribution in the states).

The concept is exactly this. Legalize the preservation of media and art for future generations and allow free access to it, something akin to a digital online museum of games, movies, television shows, and commercials. If a content owner is not willing to make money from it, then there can be no damages.

[–] eggdaddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My mans... you just described GOG.

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I hadn't ever checked out GOG. Cool stuff, but looking at their free stuff, I beg to differ on your interpretation. I am describing the legalization of the distribution of ROMs, movies/tv shows that are either unairing or undistributed in modern formats, or package software that is either abandoned or has had support dropped for it. Essentially, being able to get a copy of Windows 95 or an old version of Photoshop.

Also, GOG looks to primarily be a storefront for game sales, not a free-access repository. The major stipulation in my idea is that the "independent distributor" is not allowed to profit from the content. So no selling it. It has to be done entirely at their own expense.