The Reality of Patent Expirations for the NES 259
Tashimojo writes "Gamasutra's running a feature entitled 'Nintendo Entertainment System -
Expired Patents Do Not Mean Expired Protection', an interesting read. From the article: 'This article originated when the Gamasutra editors noticed a number of online sources such as Wikipedia stating that it was now completely legal to make NES 'clone' consoles, because all of Nintendo's patents regarding the NES had expired. How true was this statement? We asked game IP lawyer S. Gregory Boyd the question: Are the NES patents expired? If so, is a company free to build and sell new NES-like systems?'"
mmmm... Ikari Warriors (Score:2, Funny)
Re:mmmm... Ikari Warriors (Score:2, Informative)
ROMs? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:ROMs? (Score:4, Informative)
Not until 2080, unless the MPAA/RIAA^W Congress extends copyright again.
Re:ROMs? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:ROMs? (Score:2)
Re:ROMs? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:ROMs? (Score:4, Funny)
"We copied the Nintendo Entertainment System! Play all your old Nintendo games! Buy the Clonebox today!"
Re:ROMs? (Score:2)
Basically, NES On A Chips are now 100% legal. They're a full 98% (actually, they may not have violated the patents if they're not 100% compatible) NES-compatible chipset on a single chip. Wire in the display on the display pins, the controllers on the controller pins, power on the power pins, and the game on the ROM pins, and you have an instant NES.
Re:ROMs? (Score:2)
Otherwise, no.
A case of Intellectual Property brainwashing. (Score:2)
Comments like these just go to show how effect the powers that be (e.g., corporations, government) have been at confusing the issue of so-called “intellectual property” with people. This fundamentally makes people less informed and more vulnerable to abuses of patents, copyrights, and trademarks. For example, this reality distortion could easily cause a lay-person to think that if something is patented, they cannot copy it (which is entirely false).
Better writings exist [gnu.org] on this particular t
Re:ROMs? (Score:3, Insightful)
That I don't buy for a second, if for no other reason that a GBA cart can hold at least 128 megabits(FF:DoS) and the largest NES game is 8 megabits (Dragon Quest/Warrior 4). The emulation code takes apparently takes up 31 mbit (I found this by looking at rom sizes for the original NES Zelda (1 megabit) and the Classic NES Series (32 mbit). It's pretty clear by pl
Where's the business rationale to protect the IP? (Score:4, Interesting)
If anything, the title familiarity may help them in selling similar titles/lines for Gamecube and Revolution.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Keeping an eye on the money... (Score:4, Informative)
Producing a binary-compatiable console that is hardware-compatiable to the NES should (by anything remotely approaching fair and civilized rights) be legal, especially as Nintendo would still be making money off all the things they still make money from. However, the US is dubious on both counts, so don't count on it.
Re:Keeping an eye on the money... (Score:2)
I agree with your post; however,
Missing the point (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, the basic idea in the story is only about their old hardware, but you don't need an imagination to see the money.
If I have a ton of legal roms laying around, and CompanyA makes a clone console for $20, and CompanyN makes a new console that plays everything under the sun, plus my old legal roms, but charges $300, which will I buy. That depends on if I want to play
Re:Missing the point (Score:4, Interesting)
So a modern clone of an older game system can provide a nice retro-gaming feel while adding features that make the system more fun to use, i.e. perhaps a built-in library of games, or game-saving features, or wireless controllers, or better integration with home theatre setups, etc etc. Is it worth potentially hundreds of dollars for all these features? Not to me, since I never owned an NES, but maybe to you or someone else who fondly remembers Super Mario 3.
Re:Where's the business rationale to protect the I (Score:2)
Re:Where's the business rationale to protect the I (Score:2)
And as the system gets older and older, perhaps the nostalgia crowd will want an NES like they did the old 2600. (The NES being very popular as well..)
Re:Where's the business rationale to protect the I (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have old carts, go at it. If not DL them ala iTunes onto a CF card and play them on your console. 99c a game for old games is cheap enough that people might pay it (or if you're scared of piracy, scramble the DL roms and make the CF socket require scrambled roms). Give a fair cut to nintendo as a licencing fee and they likely will go along with you on the venture. In this case playing nice is good, because even if y
Re:Where's the business rationale to protect the I (Score:2)
Yes, I know you aren't advocating perpetual patents for the good of Nintendo.
Re:Where's the business rationale to protect the I (Score:3, Interesting)
I also think there's a big opportunity for Nintendo to pre-emptively turn this into a cash cow. If they release their OWN "clone" system, they could clean up. They could put together a $35 bundle that had 2 controllers, a small hard drive that had all original Nintendo games, and beat the clone makers at their own game. Even if it was just all games Nintendo made, what gamer geek wouldn't see that as an attractive investme
Re:Where's the business rationale to protect the I (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Where's the business rationale to protect the I (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Where's the business rationale to protect the I (Score:2)
If anything, the title familiarity may help them in selling similar titles/lines for Gamecube and Revolution.
Isn't the Revolution supposed to be backward compatable with all the previous consoles?
Hmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
I know a guy with a shop that sells upright and cocktail-style arcade games. He sells on eBay and some of his products include 39-in-1 boards with classic games combined into one board - he slaps the board into a cabinet and they sell like hotcakes. (Even better is his customized PC-in-a-cabinet-and-load-whatever-you-want-box.) A while back, his eBay account was suspended because eBay was sent a cease and desist letter from Namco. Apparently they do not approve of these multi-game boards and figh
Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hmm... (Score:2)
nes knockoffs bundled with a huge rom full of nes games will be as illegal as ever.
Marketability? (Score:2)
a system that only played nes carts would be of somewhat limited marketability.
Oh really? What makes you think that?
nes knockoffs bundled with a huge rom full of nes games will be as illegal as ever.
Not if the "huge rom full of nes games" is actually "The Best of PDROMS.de". There's a project going on over at nesdev.com called "Garage Cart" to do just that, and I'm contributing a tetramino game.
Re:Marketability? (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh really? What makes you think that?
1: it would have to be quite bulky and/or not enclose the cart (nes carts aren't exactly small)
2: if you started seriously marketing them in any one area you'd cause a run on stocks of old nes carts locally. Maybe this wouldn't be a problem if you only sold them online though.
nes knockoffs bundled with a huge rom full of nes games will be as illegal as ever.
Not if the "huge rom full of nes gam
This hasn't stopped some! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:This hasn't stopped some! (Score:2)
I owned one as a kid. They used cartridges that were incompatible with real NES, but the ROMs inside were direct copies of genuine NES ones.
Re:This hasn't stopped some! (Score:2)
There are adaptors to plug NES carts into a Famicom.
Re:This hasn't stopped some! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I'm Colombian (Score:2)
You can get VHS, DVD, SVCD, CD, Games, etc, all copied. You can go into a legit store and have the choice of paying full price for the real version, or a fraction for the copy, what is the word in Colombia, achiviado?
But the parent poster should have realized, that Colombians due to povert
I still fail to see something. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should -any- restrictions last beyond the period of time that Nintendo is actively manufacturing and selling the system and/or games for it? What "incentive to create" would Nintendo lose if someone did make clones of an old, obsolete system that stopped making them money over a decade ago? TFA talked about "being aware of comprehensive protections" or some garbage like that-I'd say the more important advice is "learn when to let go." And since that's apparently not possible, the law needs to change.
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
And eliminating IP laws entirely would destroy innovation and capitalism as we know it. What's the point of R&D if you are just donating the time and money spent to your competitors?
The issue of IP is complicated. I am all for reform, but the problem is coming up with reform that doesn't end up harming good companies or the people.
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
Not knowing much about the patent system, isn't that how it's supposed to work? Either you make money selling an invention yourself, or license the rights to somebody else to make it. Preventing others from making something entirely s
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
And oddly enough, it's the only thing there actually should be a law against.
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
Except it would be unconstitutional, since being a jerk could easily be constued as a form of Free Speech, be it verbal or otherwise.
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
Real property law has completely different goals.
That's more like spliting hairs.
The intent of real property law is to produce the most efficient utilization of those (limited) resources which is expected to ultimately benefit society more than any other system would.
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
Well, it -seems- like splitting hairs, but "IP" (meaning "intellectual property") is a misuse of language. Even the Constitution, which establishes copyrights and patents, makes clear that they're not property, they're government restrictions. If we look at them as totally separate from real property, we can easily see the difference-land is naturally scarce, ideas are not. Property rights are necessitated by land's natural scarcity, but copyright and patent are an attempt to impose artificial scarcity wher
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
In general, "IP Law" is designed to acknowledge that there is value to things other than purely physical objects. Many refer to our current "era" as being the "Informa
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
Land and ideas are very different concepts.
It is more like me getting the idea of putting a swimming pool on my land, then preventing you from putting a pool on your land, then deciding not to put a pool on my land.
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
Remember that any individual oil company only owns a small part of the market, but by owning a fuel-reducing patent, could get *all* of the revenues from that product.
Keeping the sales cycle going (Score:2)
Re:Keeping the sales cycle going (Score:2)
And I'm sure it would very nicely protect Ford's "upgrade revenue stream" if only they were allowed to make parts for their cars, and they stopped doing so after a few years. That doesn't mean we should implement that situation and allow them to do so. So why should we do it for Nintendo? If they want to protect "upgrade revenue", let 'em come out with a product that's worth upgrading to, and a Zelda 5003 that blows away the original. THAT, is encouragement to innovate!
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
If Consumer #2472843 [1] spends 100 Pepsi Credits on Nintendo Clone, then that's 100 fewer Pepsi Credits that consumer has readily available to spend on Nintendo New Product.
[1] I am not a number!
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
1214 of 930500, you are a number. resistance is futile.
besides, nintendo is also planning on selling old 'nes/SNES' games online via a p2p sharing program on the Nintendo Revolution, to try and avoid loosing more market share to sony and microsoft.. At least that's my understanding of part of their strategy to avoid being completely crushed by sony and microsoft. Which considering that the PSP being the awsome portable movie player and porn viewer that it is (and a crappy portable "
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
I agree with you in theory, but the line of reasoning that Nintendo would use is that they might want to design new products based on their old patents, and they should have exclusive right to do so. For example, they might theoretically introduce a miniature retro-NES which contains NES guts + 200 popular oldschool games all bundled inside a single controller with a TV-out (like the other retro games machines in controller form factor we've seen lately).
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:3, Insightful)
While I agree with you on the general point, Nintendo *is* selling NES games, just resently there was the NES classic series for GBA, soon there will be plenty of NES games for the Revolution for download and the Gamecube also had at least all the NES Zelda titles. While the games maybe old, Nintendo is still using them to make money. Sure, they probally won't s
Re:I still fail to see something. (Score:2)
IP & QM (Score:4, Funny)
I had a lot of trouble in QM. Now I know why all this IP stuff confuses me too. I guess the new expression is "It doesn't take a IP lawyer" rather than "It doesn't take a rocket scientist" SIGH.
oh i don't think so (Score:5, Insightful)
Ha ha. What he's done, basically, is give a long-winded "it depends" while strongly implying that anyone who even thinks about getting into this business should begin by hiring a top-notch IP lawyer, such as his own humble self. Golly, what a surprise.
Patents from 1995? (Score:4, Insightful)
I also suspect that the 10NES cartridge authentication system is not additionally a console authentication system: the clone NES consoles shouldn't need to verify that the cartridges are authentic to get them to work.
That leaves it up to trademarks, which I'm sure that it's not to hard work around. You could say that your console "plays games which are designed for the Nintendo Entertainment System (a trademark of Nintendo of America."
As always, IANAL, though, so take these words with a grain of salt.
Re:Patents from 1995? (Score:3, Interesting)
Development on the NES didn't stop in 1985. Many of the controllers, such as the light gun, were developed afterwards, and have their own patents. Also, mapper chips that gave cartriges features such as additional ROM, battery-backed storage, more sound channels, and so on, were being developed for years afterwards.
Re:Patents from 1995? (Score:2)
Also, mapper chips that gave cartriges features such as additional ROM, battery-backed storage, more sound channels, and so on, were being developed for years afterwards.
How would that apply to cloning the console? All those things are on the cartridge.
Lockout chip is unnecessary (Score:2, Informative)
I also suspect that the 10NES cartridge authentication system is not additionally a console authentication system: the clone NES consoles shouldn't need to verify that the cartridges are authentic to get them to work.
In fact, the top-loading version of the NES doesn't contain the lockout chip at all; it just leaves the lockout chip data pins unconnected.
The Super NES, on the other hand, did use the lockout chip in both directions in some cases. Games using the SA-1 chip (Super Mario RPG; Kirby Super
Patents are gone, but copyrights live on (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Patents are gone, but copyrights live on (Score:2)
Any good NES clones out there? (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, the best part about the NES knock-offs is the hilarious the packaging. "Best Quality" "Super Graphics" "Super 8-Bit Technology"...usually spelled wrong, and abound the box. One particular box had Spider-Man 2 promotional movie graphics and the device was labelled as Spider Game. Infringing upon Nintendo and Marvel IP...now that's some balls!
Re:Any good NES clones out there? (Score:4, Interesting)
Your friend needs to chop it up and build one of these [ladyada.net].
Re:Any good NES clones out there? (Score:2)
Still for $40.00, you can't beat it!
Console Repair (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Console Repair (Score:5, Interesting)
Check out: http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/theseus. html [washington.edu]
Sony.... (Score:2)
TFA mentions that executives of companies can be held personally liable in cases of copyright infridgement (prison!). If that is true and if it can indeed be shown that Sony's CD contains LGPL code from LAME, then they have gotten themselfes into deeeeeep sh*t (although I doubt that anything that drastic would happen).
Re:Sony.... Brrr! (Score:5, Funny)
Pffft.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Just a thought.
Revolution (Score:2)
Given Nintendo's announced plan's for a Revolution download service [slashdot.org] for older Nintendo games, I would say that is a big yes.
On another point, I went to a major mall in the Phoenix area and saw a retailer selling the Power Player Super Joy III Emulator [wikipedia.org]. I was quite shocked to see such a blatant case of copyright infringement at a major retail
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
Why?
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
You don't have a problem with this?
Sigh (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh please. How about actually doing something useful for society instead? Give blood, write your congressman about how unfair DRM is, adopt a highway, volunteer to help the less fortunate this Thanksgiving, etc.
Writing letters to rat on some retailer who actually provides jobs for people in your area so some multi-billion dollar company can collect a few bucks and also enforce the idea that IP lasts forever is about the last thing you should be doing. If your so insistant on doing something for nintendo how about you look up actual coders and people who made the artwork for those old games and send them a few bucks. At least then your heart would be in the right place.
IP will be the downfall of society as we know it.
Who needs an NES clone? (Score:3, Informative)
The vast, vast, vast majority of non-functioning NES systems have nothing wrong with them except worn-out connectors. The ones you can get on eBay today are much more solid and long-lasting than the ones that were in the system originally.
ninetendo should sell old nes's (Score:2, Interesting)
The law only applies to you and I (Score:3, Insightful)
But nothing really happens this way anymore it seems. Nowadays, when the public is supposed to see some benefits from something entering the public domain, the big, money hungry companies [disney.com] just find some greedy, two-faced politician [georgebush.com] who's willing to sell out the people who elected them for some easy cash, and they extend protections, and enact new laws to prevent people from getting what they're legally entitled to.
And it's sad actually... Do you think that when the cpoyright laws were put into place, the lawmakers were thinking planning for this to happen? If so, then why set a duration in the first place?
Actually, the fact that they did enact patent laws to protect the little guys (never mind that it's the guys with the money to twist the laws who are reaping all the protection these days), and they did set terms on copyright shows that at one time, politicians and lawmakers were there for the benefit of the people. Nowadays, it's only millionares(sp?) who get elected, largely due to they're having more money, which gives them more visibility. The laws are now so twisted and full of holes that they're totally meaningless.
And I've seen some arguments in favor of laws extending copyright, and granting new rights to content owners, wherein it's argued that the original types of copyright, and patent laws aren't meaningful anyway, as the people who wrote them couldn't have envisioned what technology would bring to the world, but I think that's fucking insane! This is essentially saying that people who were smart enough to found and develop countries, who studied law, and who developed the world in which we live had no vision, or sense of the future? That's crazy talk...
And this Nintendo thing's a great example of the problem: They made lots of money off the NES, knowing all the while that the patent laws would eventually expire, allowing anyone to build an NES machine, and now that they have (or are, as the case seems to be), they're suddenly saying "but, but, but..." as they see that people still are interested in this technology.
I think it's about time that the laws started working for the people again, and those who try to circumvent these laws should be held accountable for violating them. Copyright limits were not put into effect just so that some wealthy, never-worked-a-day-in-their-lives people, who've inherited millions from their ancestors inventions, can use some of that money to keep you and I from getting what we're entitled to.
But me ranting on my virtual soap box isn't going to change anything, and the population as a whole is too wrapped up in their reality TV, and Paris "Dog face" Hilton sexcapades to realize what they're losing out on. It's just so depressing where we as a society have let ourselves be led to. And the whole while, those passing the laws continue to claim that they're doing so for our best interests.
George Carlin said it best in last weekends HBO special (and more people should watch it, and listen to what he's saying!): "They (the politicians) don't care about you. They don't." It's up to we, the people, to dig us out of the mess that we've let others make of our legal system.
Ok... I'm done. the soapbox is free for someone else to rant on. I'm off to download all the NES Roms I can get my hands on! 8)
Kenyon & Kenyon... the CueCat Litigators (Score:3)
BTW - although I'm sure they just meant it as an example, the "10NES" copyright case would have no bearing on developing your own clone console, unless you were specifically designing said console to reject unlicensed cartridges as the actual NES did. The CIC chips on the cartridges authenticate the cart to an official NES, but have no internal connection to the ROMs - failure of the console to implement the authentication would have no effect on playability (you can verify this by cutting the clock pin to the CIC chip in the console*...and play unlicensed carts
*ironically, this is the same method used in many of the CueCat hacks.
Actual patent coverage and status (Score:4, Interesting)
That's the lockout system for non-Nintendo game cartridges. You don't want to include that in an emulator. Expires January 24, 2006, anyway.
Covers the physical design of the game controller. Irrelevant for an emulator.
More lockout system stuff. Expires January 24, 2006, anyway.
Still more lockout stuff. Appears to expire December 23, 2005.
This is about how to make a cheap four-direction arrow key switch.
The design patents cover the "ornamental design" of the case and cartridge. They're irrelevant to an emulator.
The copyright issues are a separate problem, and probably a bigger one.
Re:See Digg.com (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:See Digg.com (Score:3, Insightful)
Digg, or Slashdot? Honestly, I can't tell which site you're referring to.
Linus Torvalds himself said "Slashdot is this big public wanking session" where people who don't know what they're talking about come together.
Re:See Digg.com (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason people come here is for the bloody comments, and that's why subscribers continue to put up with the "editors", the dupes, the time delay, the left-wing slant, CmdrTaco's whining, and the atrocious color scheme. Digg doesn't have the volume of interesting comments that Slashdot does, and until that happens, you're not going to see a mass exodus.
I don't usually even read these stories as they "break", I let Slashdotters bitch about Sony/Microsoft/eggplants for a day or two and then come back and read what they have to say.
Newsflash: not everyone has the same views and/or wants as you do.
Re:See Digg.com (Score:3, Funny)
I don't know about you, but I come here for the hot chicks.
Re:See Digg.com (Score:2)
I'm not here for the "broken" mod system or the karma whoring, I explicitly told you I was here for the interesting comments, in BOLD and I couldn't have made it any more clear without thro
Re:See Digg.com (Score:2)
You point out that "Slashdot's comments are widely considered the weakest part of the site". I beleive I called it a worthless anecdote, not only because such a thing is subjective, but also because you presented it as a fact while citing squat.
You call it "broken", I call it flawed. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Usually it
Re:Remember Compaq? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Remember Compaq? (Score:2)
That uses an NT6578. Made by Novatek. Single chip NES. Don't know if it's legally reverse engineered.
I also give you a legally reverse engineered NES clone [lik-sang.com].
Phoenix BOIS (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Remember Compaq? (Score:3, Informative)
There were several reasons:
Re:Remember Compaq? (Score:2)
I have an unauth clone of the original Compaq. Less than 50% hardware match (has to be patent infringed on keyboard tho) with some improvements. Surely the software was stolen and certainly had a unpurchased version of DOS when new. Actually had some good improvements that may have stood on their own.
Terribly interesting as NOTHING inside or outside is labeled above the chip level. Not even any part numbers on anything, eve
Re:Must... protect... innovation... (Score:4, Informative)
The term of a century for copyright law is chosen more or less just to correspond to the artist's lifetime. Patent law is limited to about 20 years, that being the time it's considered "fair" to let you dominate the market for your invention. After that, the generics come, and you better have moved on to something new.
Patent and copyright law was explicitly written into the Constitution in 1787 probably because the Founders had unpleasant experience with a world in which patent and copyright law was weak. The result was that the only way for an inventor to control his invention enough to make a decent living from it was to keep the details a deep dark secret. That sucks on many fronts: (1) The invention may well die with the inventor, unless he chooses otherwise, has sons to carry on, et cetera. (2) Good ideas that might be indirectly inspired by details of the invention don't occur. There's no cross-fertilization, where one clever invention (e.g. the electric motor) inspires a related invention (e.g. the electric generator) or a supporting structure (e.g. batteries for small electric motors). (3) The practise of the new invention spreads very slowly, since the inventor must personally trust everyone to whom he teaches the invention. He has no ability to teach strangers to use the invention, or even allow strangers to teach other strangers, because he has no legal way to force anyone to stop using his invention if they start to do so unreasonably. Patent law gives an inventor specific and limited rights to control his invention, and that predictability allows him to trust people more easily and spread the new practise faster.
Patent law is basically a bargain struck between inventors and the public. The public agrees to give the inventor a limited and specific set of rights to profit from his invention, and in exchange the inventor agrees to make the details of his invention public immediately. The key aspect of the patent is the fact that the invention must be completely and thoroughly described before a patent is granted. That means everyone can benefit from understanding the precise details of the invention. Indeed, engineers quite often search existing patents for good ideas that can be developed elsewhere, and frequently find them. It's rare that a good idea leads to only a single worthwhile invention.
Re:Must... protect... innovation... (Score:3, Insightful)
It should be added that the laws don't just protect a creator from slackers, it protects him from corporations. As much as Disney and Microsoft ab
thank you (Score:2)
Not true any more (Score:3, Insightful)
That may well have been the intention from the start, but the length is now a lifetime PLUS 70 years: a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countri es'_copyright_length">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
There is now dispute wether current copyright will ever expire, since the media companies like Disney seem to extend the period when the next deadline is coming