Another method for avoiding using a Microsoft account during setup

[nlinecomputers]

Still using my 30+ years old games

But you still don't own it. You can't legally make copies and charge people for it. And before you claim that people do that doesn't make it legal just what is practical to try and enforce.

 

[Sky-Knight]

But you still don't own it. You can't legally make copies and charge people for it. And before you claim that people do that doesn't make it legal just what is practical to try and enforce.

Not to undermine your point, because you're right he still doesn't "own it". But there is a classification of "abandonware" that's legal, and once stuff hits that point things do change what you can do with the software.

But you still don't "own" it in any real sense.

 

[britechguy]

But there is a classification of "abandonware"

Might you have any pointers to materials that clearly delineate what is legally considered to be abandonware?

Such a classification is, in my opinion, essential, and the term gets tossed about a lot, but I have never found much that clearly identifies how something gets a formal abandonware classification.

 

[Sky-Knight]

It's a subcategory of Orphan Work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_work

The legal specifics vary nation to nation, and in the US state to state. But in general the work is still considered copyrighted, and owned by whomever originally produced it. So you cannot profit off these works in any way without potentially getting sued into oblivion.

One of the oldest sites I know of that focuses on abandonware games is http://www.abandonia.com/

The site has been online since 2003, and it's got its own detractors and knockoffs. WIKI has the drama detailed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonia

The site isn't worth much in the grand scheme of things, but if there was legal cause to kill it, it should have happened long before now. The site will be old enough to drink soon enough.

But yeah, the definition is very weak. Except in a few cases where creators have openly declared their product as such and released it in some way. Specific examples escape me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure they're buried in here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commercial_video_games_with_available_source_code

 

[Sky-Knight]

It's been hosted in Sweden since 2003, so it's *already* old enough to drink.

(Legal drinking age in Sweden is 18. Yes, I do have too much time on my hands.)

Fair enough! It's 21 here in AZ, I can't even say 21 is uniform across the states.

 

[Porthos]

I remember when the age to drink here was 19. Then soon after I was of age to drink for about a month, they jacked it to 21.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Not to undermine your point, because you're right he still doesn't "own it". But there is a classification of "abandonware" that's legal, and once stuff hits that point things do change what you can do with the software.

But you still don't "own" it in any real sense.

Might you have any pointers to materials that clearly delineate what is legally considered to be abandonware?

Such a classification is, in my opinion, essential, and the term gets tossed about a lot, but I have never found much that clearly identifies how something gets a formal abandonware classification.

There really is no such thing. Copyright law is pretty locked up. Even if a company goes bankrupt the original author usually still owns the copyright. He/she may not have the resources to sue poachers of the code but it is not abandoned Unless they surrender the copyright and place it in the public domain. Sometimes the code gets turned over or sold to creditors but that doesn’t make it abandoned either.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Fair enough! It's 21 here in AZ, I can't even say 21 is uniform across the states.

It is Because it’s tied to Federal Highway funding.

 

[Blues]

Yeah @nlinecomputers stated it best anywhere copyright laws re acknowledge there is no such thing legally as Abandonware with the exception possibly being where there is truly no copyright holder anymore but this would be rare.

 

[Sky-Knight]

There really is no such thing. Copyright law is pretty locked up. Even if a company goes bankrupt the original author usually still owns the copyright. He/she may not have the resources to sue poachers of the code but it is not abandoned Unless they surrender the copyright and place it in the public domain. Sometimes the code gets turned over or sold to creditors but that doesn’t make it abandoned either.

True, but in the states at least, owning a copyright doesn't mean others can't distribute your work, it means if they profit from that distribution you can sue for the balance.

That definition includes ad revenue supporting a website that does such too.

 

[nlinecomputers]

True, but in the states at least, owning a copyright doesn't mean others can't distribute your work, it means if they profit from that distribution you can sue for the balance.

That definition includes ad revenue supporting a website that does such too.

That’s not correct either. As a copyright owner only I gets to decide who can replicate it. If you copy my software and give it away at your expense I’m still harmed by it as I charge people for the copies. Why buy from me if you are giving it away? Obviously this hurts me. Only Open Source licenses permit you to copy and distribute someone else’s work.

 

[britechguy]

Only Open Source licenses permit you to copy and distribute someone else’s work.

Not arguing this point at all. But there really needs to be more legislative work done around the concept of abandonware. In the assistive technology world there is what amounts to tons of this stuff. IBMTTS being a synthesizer that there appears to be no legal way to use anymore as IBM has abandoned it (and, in fact, it sits on an entirely open server just begging people to download it, gratis). No amount of trying to get IBM to license it, or even acknowledge its existence, has gotten any response for years now. Yet it remains a favorite synthesizer in certain segments of the AT community and has a couple of distinctive characteristics that make it so.

Having software that is "readily available" from many sources, which is no longer sold, and which is no longer maintained by its originators be "untouchable" by anyone else makes no sense whatsoever. Much like patents run out and copyright on books run out (though over a length of time that would be ridiculously long in reference to software) we need to have copyright run out on abandoned software. Such does exist, and anyone reading these forums knows such does exist.

 

[Philippe]

But you still don't own it. You can't legally make copies and charge people for it. And before you claim that people do that doesn't make it legal just what is practical to try and enforce.

Sure, but my point was on the "timed lease" part...

 

[Sky-Knight]

That’s not correct either. As a copyright owner only I gets to decide who can replicate it. If you copy my software and give it away at your expense I’m still harmed by it as I charge people for the copies. Why buy from me if you are giving it away? Obviously this hurts me. Only Open Source licenses permit you to copy and distribute someone else’s work.

Yes, but you will not get a monetary response from the court, all you can issue is a cease and desist order.

It's trademark that does the rest of what you're thinking...

The laws in this space are utterly bonkers.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Not arguing this point at all. But there really needs to be more legislative work done around the concept of abandonware. In the assistive technology world there is what amounts to tons of this stuff. IBMTTS being a synthesizer that there appears to be no legal way to use anymore as IBM has abandoned it (and, in fact, it sits on an entirely open server just begging people to download it, gratis). No amount of trying to get IBM to license it, or even acknowledge its existence, has gotten any response for years now. Yet it remains a favorite synthesizer in certain segments of the AT community and has a couple of distinctive characteristics that make it so.

Having software that is "readily available" from many sources, which is no longer sold, and which is no longer maintained by its originators be "untouchable" by anyone else makes no sense whatsoever. Much like patents run out and copyright on books run out (though over a length of time that would be ridiculously long in reference to software) we need to have copyright run out on abandoned software. Such does exist, and anyone reading these forums knows such does exist.

Well copyright laws are a joke compared to the original intent of the framers of the Consitution who patterned our laws based on British law, the Statute of Anne which gave you 14 years of copyright protection and you could extend it once for 14 more years after which it became public domain. That changed on both sides of the pond over the years with laws and treaties passed to sync up the systems. So we now have the ridiculous life+70 years limit and 95 years sometimes 120 years for commissioned works.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Yes, but you will not get a monetary response from the court, all you can issue is a cease and desist order.

It's trademark that does the rest of what you're thinking...

The laws in this space are utterly bonkers.

Really. Tell that to napster.

 

[britechguy]

Tell that to napster.

What napster was doing involved "properties of value" that their owners can and will defend against unlicensed (illegal) use no matter who does it.

In order to get financial damages from "the offender" you do have to prove that what they did deprived you of income you might otherwise have had.

No one is making money on abandonware, so it's almost impossible to prove any financial damage from someone else using it.

 

[Diggs]

I remember when the age to drink here was 19. Then soon after I was of age to drink for about a month, they jacked it to 21.

Did you guys know there is no minimum drinking age in Wisconsin if you are accompanied by your parent(s).

 

[britechguy]

Did you guys know there is no minimum drinking age in Wisconsin if you are accompanied by your parent(s).

No, I certainly did not. But I wish that were the case in many more venues.

When kids are taught how to drink responsibly, and alcohol is not forbidden fruit, a lot of the binge drinking nonsense we have here in the USA simply does not happen.

 

[Sky-Knight]

What napster was doing involved "properties of value" that their owners can and will defend against unlicensed (illegal) use no matter who does it.

In order to get financial damages from "the offender" you do have to prove that what they did deprived you of income you might otherwise have had.

No one is making money on abandonware, so it's almost impossible to prove any financial damage from someone else using it.

This...

These laws are so convoluted that I'm not sure if they function this way because they're actually written that way... or they're just so darned vague and bonkers that no one bothers to retain a lawyer to run the suits in question unless there's a certain amount of money involved.