3 ms·
Well, as an analogy. 1 - You are a painter 2 - someone says makes a copy of one of your paintings 3 - That's wrong you say 4 - you take the copy and sign yo
by jbmorgado 10y ago
Well, as an analogy.
1 - You are a painter
2 - someone says makes a copy of one of your paintings
3 - That's wrong you say
4 - you take the copy and sign your name at the bottom
5 - you sell the copy to someone else
See the thing is, copyright for something that takes basically zero effort to copy (like digital goods), soon enters in these kind of loopholes.
If Nintendo policy was: "ROM dumping is wrong IF you don't own the original cartridge", well, I could be on Nintendo side.
But Nintendo policy is: "ROM dumping is wrong, period! There will be no discussion about it!" Then, they actually become hypocrites if they use a ROM dumping from a 3rd party.
- eridius 10y agoIf someone photocopies your painting, it's indistinguishable from a photocopy that you yourself made. And if you get one of the copies that someone else made, you still own the copyright to the work and it's perfectly fine for you to sell it. You could have made the copy yourself, you just didn't bother because someone else gave you a copy they made. That's the same thing here. For all we know, Nintendo actually did dump the ROM themselves. The evidence suggesting they downloaded it from the internet is all circumstantial. But even if they didn't, they could have done so, and since they own the copyright to the game, it's perfectly reasonable for them to sell the ROM, however it was actually obtained.