Can we talk about Adandonware here?

Eduardo X · Post by **Eduardo X** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 3:53 pm

I know we wouldn't discuss it at Gone Gold because Rich did not aprove, but now that we're on our own, is it fair game?

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:05 pm

It's a four way tie and it's going to the Supreme Court baby! Who will break the deadlock?

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:34 pm

I'll break it!

Yeah, it's still taboo. We're still operating under the old GGF Code of Conduct (conveniently unavailable in your area -- cue the black helicoptors!) until we release a new one.

However, this is definitely one of those things we're discussing. Please fill this thread with your own opinions on the topic.

~Neal

Eduardo X · Post by **Eduardo X** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:35 pm

I'm glad the moderators have chosen this unofficial poll as the way to decide this all important issue.
I want to be able to link the scratchware manifesto, dammit!

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:36 pm

This is a topic I would really like to see be allowed. I love Abandonware. It's the best.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:36 pm

Hey, no fair switching up the negative/positive response between the post title and the question.

Can we talk about Adandonware here?

Is abandonware taboo?

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:37 pm

Eduardo X wrote:I'm glad the moderators have chosen this unofficial poll as the way to decide this all important issue.

In other news... EddyX was shamelessly BANNED today in an egregous and random act of moderator impropriety...

~Neal

WPD · Post by **WPD** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:40 pm

I'm torn between "Of course not!" and "No!"

Should I vote for "I love my dog" then?

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:42 pm

Why not? It's abandoned.

Eduardo X · Post by **Eduardo X** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:45 pm

The Meal wrote:
Eduardo X wrote:I'm glad the moderators have chosen this unofficial poll as the way to decide this all important issue.
In other news... EddyX was shamelessly BANNED today in an egregous and random act of moderator impropriety...

~Neal

You can't ban me! I boycott!

EDIT: I can't believe I spelled can't wrong. I guess I deserved the banning.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:49 pm

I hope that we can talk about abandonware with reckless abandon. There are some interesting titles out there.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:50 pm

Eduardo X wrote:You can ban me! I boycott!

Good time for a typo, eh?

Oh, and FWIW, *moderators* can't ban anybody. That's administrator territory. (Fortunately, for your sake.)

~Neal

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:51 pm

You've always been able to discuss Abandonware.

Abandonware as a general subject was not taboo at GG. Discussing that a specific game may or may not qualify was not taboo at GG. Discussing a specific game in general had an entire forum dedicated to the task. And people used to discuss the "oldies bug goodies" in that forum.

You couldn't link to abandonware sites. by extention, you couldn't say "I just downloaded a bunch of abandonware games!" since there isn't much that legally qualifies as "free for download" (but the stuff that was legally available, you could).

The "gray area" subject matter might change, from a discussion/link standpoint. The leaked demo thing might change as well.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:55 pm

D'oh! PD, is (of course) correct. I see "abandonware" and instantly assume folks are talking about linking to it. We've never frowned upon *discussing* that kind of stuff.

My bad.

-1 The Meal

~Neal

Exodor · Post by **Exodor** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 5:01 pm

Just want to toss my vote into the 'pro' links to abandonware camp.

As I understood it, GG didn't allow links to abandonware out of fear of offending developers, which might risk the flow of inside "gone-gold" type information.

Information that isn't flowing anymore.

Is there another reason to ban links?

Obviously, some abandonware sites also host pirated software, and linking to those sites would still be a no-no. But why should linking to a well-known abandonware site that shall remain nameless be forbidden?

Asharak · Post by **Asharak** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 5:04 pm

As long as we're posting our opinions, I voted Yes. No strong feelings either way, and I haven't put a lot of thought into it, but since it is, by definition, abandoned, I don't see the harm serious enough to warranting banning it.

- Ash

Mr. Sparkle · Post by **Mr. Sparkle** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 5:06 pm

Asharak wrote:As long as we're posting our opinions, I voted Yes. No strong feelings either way, and I haven't put a lot of thought into it, but since it is, by definition, abandoned, I don't see the harm serious enough to warranting banning it.

- Ash

HaHa! The poll owned you!

Koz · Post by **Koz** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 5:30 pm

Oh man, the poll just pwned me as well.

I blame Eddie for suggestive polling!

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 5:44 pm

Is there another reason to ban links?

Yes. Can you give me a working definition for abandonware? Different people claim it is different things, and there isn't an accepted definition. Even if there was one, it doesn't speak to the IP issue. Much of what is abandonware is still the legal property of someone who hasn't authorized it being available for download. It might suck that this person won't do that, but that doesn't change the issue.

You can rail against the mean ole publishers (they are mean), you can bitch about the state of various IP laws (they do need considerable work), but bottom line is until the owner gives permission, or the copyright runs out, you aren't legally allowed to throw a 20 year old game up for download.

And that's not inconsequential. It doesn't mean the status quo will be kept here, of course.

Napoleon · Post by **Napoleon** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 6:12 pm

I'd vote against linking to it, because technically, according to a number of developers, abandonware is the same as warez. And as we don't allow warez linking (we still don't right, or was one of the ideas for the new site to set up an FTP/FXP forum?

) I don't think we should allow abandonware linking.

Kadoth Nodens · Post by **Kadoth Nodens** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 6:17 pm

I voted yes which used to mean no.

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 6:20 pm

technically, according to a number of developers, abandonware is the same as warez.

If you change "because technically" to "because" and "according to a number of developers" to "copyright law" and "abandonware is the same as warez" to "there's no such thing as abandonware, excepting when a copyright has run out perhaps", then you'd probably be stating things much better (at least, based on US law).

There is no legal abandonware, in the sense it is usually discussed, in otherwords. It is true that you get software that is no longer maintained (and it may well be that there is something under copyright law that deals with this, but I don't think the general public has a grasp of it with the typical Abandonware definition, which is often something like "no longer maintained, more than 5 years old"), but a valid IP is a valid IP. It's within an author's rights to sit on something. That might suck, but that's besides the point.

It's tragic, because too much old, good, software is going to go by the wayside. OTOH, the best way to deal with the problem is not to just illegally claim as many games as possible. Letters (preferrable to email) to publishers can't hurt.

And if the fans call out a reasonable & unified voice, anything can happen. The world needs more legit projects like The Urquan Masters, which has not only made source code and a game freely available, but is now making it so an old game can run on modern OS (which you knew about, but I bet many people here did not).

WPD · Post by **WPD** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:29 pm

After much debate with myself, I decided to go with "I'm in love with my dog"

But then I think. is I'm in love with my dog supposed to be referencing a certain dog-related site?

Eduardo X · Post by **Eduardo X** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:52 pm

WPD wrote:After much debate with myself, I decided to go with "I'm in love with my dog"

But then I think. is I'm in love with my dog supposed to be referencing a certain dog-related site?

Yes. And no.
It is no longer my poll. It is the people's poll.

WPD · Post by **WPD** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:59 pm

Eduardo X wrote: It is no longer my poll. It is the people's poll.

You lost your poll???

//end sophomoric humor mode

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 8:24 pm

Mr. Sparkle wrote:
Asharak wrote:As long as we're posting our opinions, I voted Yes. No strong feelings either way, and I haven't put a lot of thought into it, but since it is, by definition, abandoned, I don't see the harm serious enough to warranting banning it.

- Ash
HaHa! The poll owned you!

HaHa, he can't even spell pwned!

Rip pwned you

Mr. Sparkle · Post by **Mr. Sparkle** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:42 pm

Rip wrote:
Mr. Sparkle wrote:
Asharak wrote:As long as we're posting our opinions, I voted Yes. No strong feelings either way, and I haven't put a lot of thought into it, but since it is, by definition, abandoned, I don't see the harm serious enough to warranting banning it.

- Ash
HaHa! The poll owned you!

HaHa, he can't even spell pwned!

Rip pwned you

Crap. I am clearly not "elite". My humiliation knows no bounds.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:44 pm

Mr. Sparkle wrote:
Rip wrote:
Mr. Sparkle wrote:
Asharak wrote:As long as we're posting our opinions, I voted Yes. No strong feelings either way, and I haven't put a lot of thought into it, but since it is, by definition, abandoned, I don't see the harm serious enough to warranting banning it.

- Ash
HaHa! The poll owned you!

HaHa, he can't even spell pwned!

Rip pwned you
Crap. I am clearly not "elite". My humiliation knows no bounds.

Well if the Sox finish up tonight maybe we can make you elite for a day 8)

Mr. Sparkle · Post by **Mr. Sparkle** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:37 am

Rip wrote:
Mr. Sparkle wrote:
Rip wrote:
Mr. Sparkle wrote:
Asharak wrote:As long as we're posting our opinions, I voted Yes. No strong feelings either way, and I haven't put a lot of thought into it, but since it is, by definition, abandoned, I don't see the harm serious enough to warranting banning it.

- Ash
HaHa! The poll owned you!

HaHa, he can't even spell pwned!

Rip pwned you
Crap. I am clearly not "elite". My humiliation knows no bounds.
Well if the Sox finish up tonight maybe we can make you elite for a day 8)

Can I get a special color, like the kool kids? I'm partial to RED.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:18 pm

Mr. Sparkle wrote:
Rip wrote:
Mr. Sparkle wrote:
Asharak wrote:As long as we're posting our opinions, I voted Yes. No strong feelings either way, and I haven't put a lot of thought into it, but since it is, by definition, abandoned, I don't see the harm serious enough to warranting banning it.

- Ash
HaHa! The poll owned you!

HaHa, he can't even spell pwned!

Rip pwned you
Crap. I am clearly not "elite". My humiliation knows no bounds.

HAHAHA He can't evan spell L337! OMG LOLZ

Actually, I'm not sure that I did either.

dbt1949 · Post by **dbt1949** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:52 pm

I love my dog.

dbt1949 · Post by **dbt1949** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:52 pm

dbt1949 · Post by **dbt1949** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:53 pm

Beer Goggles · Post by **Beer Goggles** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 1:09 pm

I find it funny that the Computer Games' editor, Steve Bauman, can write an entire column about it (even giving a link) yet it taboo here?

Eduardo X · Post by **Eduardo X** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 1:19 pm

Beer Goggles wrote:I find it funny that the Computer Games' editor, Steve Bauman, can write an entire column about it (even giving a link) yet it taboo here?

It is pretty much universally accepted as an okay site, as far as I know. I've seen it featured all over the place, and any company that asks them to take down their games doesn't have to worry about it any more. I think you used to be able to download Transport Tycoon Deluxe, as Chris Sawyer was giving it away for free because it wasn't being sold anywhere. They took it down when it was being published again. (I do think it is still up, but I'm not sure.) They even publish their own independent games now!
But, we can't link to them from here.
I understand why we can't, but I do hope the admin and mods will allow it, as they suggest they might.

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 8:53 pm

I got pwned by the poll as well. I think links to Abandoware sites are fine. OO isn't hosting the games, or offering them for download. A forum link would allow those that are interested to find the game and those who are not can ignore it.

Of course, for most of these games 2 minutes with Google will get you the site anyway, so it's probably no big deal either way.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 10:17 pm

Beer Goggles wrote:I find it funny that the Computer Games' editor, Steve Bauman, can write an entire column about it (even giving a link) yet it taboo here?

It isn't taboo here, at least not as such. It was taboo at Gone Gold, and we're currently following Gone Gold's rules until we get the free time to hammer away on our own FAQ and CoC. It may stay taboo - and it may change. I don't know yet. Keep discussing it. We're listening.

Kael · Post by **Kael** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 10:40 pm

Can we talk about appropriate dinner selections before you allow David Cassidy to take a huge dump on your chest? Because its definitly not "Taco surprise".

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 11:30 pm

I find it funny that the Computer Games' editor, Steve Bauman, can write an entire column about it (even giving a link) yet it taboo here?

I Don't see the humor. Steve Bauman was in no way affiliated with Gonegold, and isn';t affiliated with OO.com. He can do whatever he wants.

And I should probably state this explicitly. There are plenty of reasons to relax the old restrictions. None of those reasons will involve "but X does it!". Beer Goggles, I'm not picking on you here. That's just not a reason we're ever going to do something.

Ænima · Post by **Ænima** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:33 pm

Eduardo X wrote:I'm glad the moderators have chosen this unofficial poll as the way to decide this all important issue.
I want to be able to link the scratchware manifesto, dammit!

I assume you can't link to it because it's located at the Site Which Shall Not Be Named? Why not try here? The Scratchware Manifesto in all its glory

.

If there is any reason this should not be linked, I can take it down, but as far as I know, the only things that make up this document are ideas and links to non-COC violating websites.

Octopus Overlords

Can we talk about Adandonware here?

Is Abandonware still taboo?

Can we talk about Adandonware here?