Is game emulation unethical? (was Re:Linux has driven me to buy Windows Vista)

[Evan Leibovitch]

D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> | Best emulators for 'nix:
> | Zsnes on 'nix is pretty good for most games. I believe you're still
> | legit if you own the original carts.
>
> No, this would not be legit in a strict reading of copyright legislation.
>
> I do think that it would be unethical and immoral to do so.
>   
I was with you until that last sentence.

I find it highly unethical that a purchase of any copyrighted content is 
bound to a specific delivery mechanism. You had legally purchased the LP 
but then had to pay full price to get the same content that you already 
purchased again on cassette, then CD. Not so much as a discount offered 
to existing licensees.

Obsolescence of playing devices is even worse. Once they stop making and 
supporting players for the software for which you have legitimate 
license to use, you have been derprived your right to enjoy the product 
you have paid for. It is IMO ethical for you to be able to make a 
reasonable attempt to play your legally licensed software by another 
means. Whether it is legal is for courts to decide but you went beyond 
legal definitions. I would personally hope that no court would rule 
against someone with a legal license for something who is simply trying 
to maintain enjoyment of that license. The original licenses in most CDs 
would not permit their ripping of CDs to digital files, yet that is 
exactly what tools such as iTunes do. Yet what court would convict 
someome for ripping a legitimately-purchased CD to digital? It maybe 
strictly against the letter of the law, but -- compared to larger issues 
of piracy -- is a comparative waste of the legal system.

I personally don't believe that it is unethical to transfer your own 
copy of something legally acquired to another media, providing you 
either destroy the original or save it as an unplayed backup (and/or as 
proof of license).

Of course, there are other issues involved if the rights owner can no 
longer be found or identified. Who, then, is being wronged by the copying?
Do property rights extend to ghosts?

> The new Canadian copyright Act (which died on the order paper when Harper called the last election) would have made that illegal because it involves circumvention of Digital Rights Management measures.  This act is likely to appear again in the next session of parliament.
>   
Maybe, but it may too fall when the next election is inevitably called. 
Copyright "reform" has thankfully a very low priority, as the only ones 
asking for it are Hollywood North and the US government. In the current 
economic and political climate its priority will decline further still. 
An increasing number of Canadian artists are coming to the conclusion 
that the current reforms do not benefit them, so the critical "cultural 
protection" argument of would-be reformers is melting. The delays may 
indeed help buy some time to gain momentum against the reforms.

- Evan

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists