Re: Old games and copyrights


24 Mar 1995 01:55:32 GMT

In article <BkHc3c1w200w@alcyone.darkside.com>
max@alcyone.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis) writes:

] What does the copyright
] holder have to lose? A good deal, if you take into account factors
] such as discreding the company name, misunderstood association of the
] port of the game to the company itself, as well as possible fraudulent
] acts on the part of the porter, if he or she decides to try to make
] money at it after all.

I think you're being overly pessimistic. I agree that the gain
involved is next to nothing -- at most the copyright holder would gain
goodwill from a bunch of hopeless nostalgics, which probably isn't
worth very much on today's market -- but I don't think they have
anything to lose.

If Monarch Avalon required to review the game and its built-in
disclaimers before accepting, they could easily avoid the first two of
your factors. If they're paranoid and believe there still is a big
market for text adventures, they could deal with the last factor with
a simple contract.

] Over all it's a big mess, and probably,
] speaking from an logical viewpoint, the correct answer for a copyright
] holder when asked such a question is, "No."

I don't think it has to be a mess, and "no" isn't necessarily the
right answer. When a company makes a decision of this kind, I think
there are two steps involved:

First, it's a question about being realistic. It is obvious that
Monarch Avalon is never going to sell another copy of a game
originally published in 1981. Sure, they might make a souped-up
version that runs on today's hardware, but they're not going to earn a
single dime selling the old 8-bit version.

Second, it's a question about caring to think it over and realize
whether the free distribution would hurt your company. It's a lot
easier to categorically say "no" than to think, and it's a lot cheaper
in terms of time. On the other hand, the tiny amount of goodwill
you'd earn might be worth more than what you'd otherwise get, namely
nothing. And in some situations that goodwill might not be so tiny
after all.

For example, Amstrad who is the current holder of the copyright to the
Spectrum/Timex ROM has agreed to make it freely distributable with
certain free Spectrum emulators. They have realized that they're not
going to sell anymore Spectrums, and they have taken the time to think
the legal aspects over. This means that nostalgic persons can benefit
from Sir Clive's original work, and Amstrad gets the credit. A wise
move, IMHO.

Monarch Avalon could easily license Bruce Barnett's version and
maintain the right to make a new one themselves. Heck, they might
even gain some good publicity: "This game is a hi-chrome version of
[...], first published in 1981 and in 1995 ported to [...] by
enthusiastic fans. This version features the same unique setting but
has 200+ new locations, hi-res graphics, surround sound and numerous
new twists to the plot."

Why didn't Monarch Avalon do that? Well, either they think they can
earn money on selling 8-bit games or they didn't take the time to
think it through. Probably the latter.

--
Mads Haahr [<haahr@cs.ubc.ca>,<maze@diku.dk>] | Humour
Department of Computer Science                | may be
University of [British Columbia,Copenhagen]   | unmarked