This may be hot take, but I think games are art and are part of our cultural legacy, and making steps that stops us from enjoying us from that legacy should be considered a crime, especially when they put at risk art disappearing forever.

I would start with simple rules:

5 years after last new copies of the game stops being sold, pirating it stops becoming a crime
10 years after platform (console?) stop being produced, if there is no official emulator available, all emulators of that platform become legal
intentionally trying to stop people from buying a game without breaking above rules (for example, selling one copy for price of 9999$) is a crime

As a result, I would expect all companies to either invest in backward compatibility on unprecedented level, or more likely start porting their games to PC (because they will keep being produced), even if that meant selling copies to be used with emulators. When there is money on the table, or perspective of losing money, corporations are really quick to find solutions.

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

This strikes me as weird and unnecessarily convoluted. IMO the best solution would be to limit corporate held copyrights to 10 years after first publication or 15 years after creation, whichever is sooner, and limit individually held copyrights to the life of the creator. After that's up, the work becomes public domain, and people can freely post it without repercussions, meaning the masses will handle archival and distribution essentially without prompting. Simple, with very few loopholes as far as I can see.

[–] hansl@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Emulators are not illegal. ROMs are illegal if you didn’t rip it yourself. If you did rip it yourself it’s a gray area. See https://youtu.be/yj9Gk84jRiE

[–] Ultraviolet@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

We need a use-it-or-lose-it clause for all copyrights. If the rights holder is not making a good faith effort to sell copies, they should forfeit their copyright entirely and the work in question goes straight to the public domain. 5 years is generous, I'd make the grace period 6 months.

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

This is how you get Fantastic Four (1994)

[–] tobier@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Emulators are not illegal, where did you get that from?

[–] Gray@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This isn't necessarily always true. PCSX2, the main PS2 emulator, for example needs a BIOS file that can only be obtained from an actual PS2 (or "illegally"). I'm not sure why that emulator requires it when others don't. The closest thing to an explanation I could find online just said "legal issues", but didn't go into details. That makes me suspect that there was pushback from Sony about the emulator. So if such emulation laws were to be written they absolutely should protect in stone the right to create and use emulators. If a company can find a loophole to block you, they will.

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

It's required because a lot of the functionality of the PS2 is in the embedded software, the BIOS.

The problem is not the emulator itself, it's the BIOS which is copyrighted. The emulator is not illegal, but bundling the BIOS with it would be.

[–] xenonisbad@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are legal problems when creating emulators, sure people work hard to avoid them, but I don't think they should have to do that in those cases, so I specifically wrote "all emulators" should be legal. For example, Dolphin to work requires cryptographic keys that technically belong to Nintendo, so they may be sued for providing them. Some emulators require you to find bios on your own because they can't legally provide them, and their emulator doesn't work without it.

[–] tobier@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

If you bundle cryptographic keys, bios or other copyrighted content then yes obviously it's illegal.

It's not illegal to implement an emulator.