Jump to content


Nintendo 64 emulator's for Mac?


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#41 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 31 May 2005 - 06:20 PM

The iMac Man, on May 31st 2005, 04:03 PM, said:

ROMs are distributed copyrighted material!  Uh, duh!

And so are MP3s, by your reasoning. What you need is a jump to conclusions mat. You know, it has different CONCLUSIONS on it, and you jump to one. Samir agrees that it's the worst idea ever.

To sum up: N64 emulators are pretty mature, but some still can't quite run certain games. SixtyForce is one of the best ones for Mac, but it's a bit slow, and it doesn't compare totally well with some of the best for PC. Mupen64 is an up and comer. One of the PC cream of the crop is Project64. Use real N64 controllers (Mad Catz are nice) and look up N64 adapters on Lik-Sang. Don't infringe copyright by spreading roms over the internet. Instead, copy your N64 carts directly with a copier, and check with Goodn64.

#42 JonB

JonB

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 31 May 2005 - 07:00 PM

bobbob, on May 31st 2005, 06:42 PM, said:

The law is pretty clear on it, and I don't see any basis for most of your claims. ROMs aren't illegal, distributing copyrighted material without permission is illegal. News at 11.

View Post


I take it you didn't read anything at all on what can be exempt from fair use, and how things like this get put into question ALL THE TIME (the law is hardly ever clear, what are you on about?). I'm getting the impression you're disputing just to quarrel, going to ridiculous lengths about cart copiers and other such desperation (we are talking about downloaded ROMs, didn't you get the memo?). Opposition seems to be taking priority over the information, I've laid out several links and all I've seen in retaliation is "but...but...fair use! clearly!" stubbornness. I don't feel like fighting someone about it, it doesn't take a mastermind to understand that downloading intellectual property from someone else is pretty legally suspect. In fact, you've finally come to that conclusion on your own, bravo! *applause*

#43 JonB

JonB

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 31 May 2005 - 07:13 PM

I'm sorry if that was snide, if you legitimately use cart copiers and aren't just lying to yourself, then you may have ground to stand on. The staggering majority of people do not use cart copiers, and I try to target my arguments towards that.

On the PC side, I've found 1964 with different plugins to be the furthest along.

#44 The iMac Man

The iMac Man

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2422 posts
  • Location:IL (USA)

Posted 31 May 2005 - 07:19 PM

bobbob, on May 31st 2005, 07:20 PM, said:

And so are MP3s, by your reasoning.

View Post


Yep.

If I download them off the internet or get them from a buddy, and they aren't offered for free by the artist/label, then yes, MP3s are illegal.
-iMac

(The PC to Mac CoD Mod Converter)
Heat of Battle
Revolt
SWAT
Others

Get Mac Game Mods: Macologist.org

#45 Eric5h5

Eric5h5

    Minion Tormentor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7160 posts

Posted 31 May 2005 - 07:33 PM

JonB, on May 31st 2005, 11:04 AM, said:

I guess I'm saying that you can harp fair use until your head turns blue, doesn't mean it applies to everything you want it to.

No, but until such time as they change the law (which I'm more or less expecting eventually), it certainly does apply to this case.  Not much more to say really....

--Eric

#46 JonB

JonB

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 31 May 2005 - 08:17 PM

There's no certainty about it, but if it makes you feel more secure...

#47 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 31 May 2005 - 08:38 PM

JonB, on May 31st 2005, 06:00 PM, said:

I take it you didn't read anything at all on what can be exempt from fair use,

I linked to the US Code section in question re: application copies ('ROMs'), and it doesn't give copyright owners exclusive power over copying an app as a means to execution. It's not hard to understand.

Quote

we are talking about downloaded ROMs, didn't you get the memo?

Why say ROMs are illegal if they are perfectly legal and it's only the distribution of copies without permission that's not?

Quote

downloading intellectual property from someone else is pretty legally suspect

Only if it's without permission. Every work's copyrighted (once created) and I don't think you actually think this forum is legally suspect. You keep overstating your claims to be overly broad, and I'm just trying to clear this up lest someone believe your BS.

#48 JonB

JonB

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 31 May 2005 - 10:54 PM

How many times does it need to be repeated? You do not have permission to download copyrighted ROMs from someone else distributing them from the Internet, unless it is from and/or sanctioned by the copyright owner. You even admit this yourself, so why are you arguing? I assumed a level of understanding that the ROM technology in itself is not illegal, I didn't think we needed to take baby steps here. You basically haven't stated anything aside from "I'm allowed" and a bunch of straw-man arguments (cart copiers? forums legally suspect?), so you're really not in a position to criticize post content.

You have the right to your purchased copy and only your purchased copy, and you may make a single backup for archival purposes (for the 3 or 4 with cart copiers), and you may not circumvent any copy protection. Nobody but your own addled mind has given you permission to acquire a second copy from another source, simply because it may or may not be "identical" (say Best Buy, could you hand me another copy for backup?), fair use doesn't apply here. Why do you think we are not allowed to link to this stuff, because it's the moderator's idea of a joke?

#49 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 31 May 2005 - 11:53 PM

JonB, on May 31st 2005, 09:54 PM, said:

You basically haven't stated anything aside from "I'm allowed"

I didn't say I'm allowed to download them without permission. Maybe you're confused.

Quote

You have the right to your purchased copy and only your purchased copy, and you may make a single backup for archival purposes

I thought I linked to the law you seem to be talking about, but now I realised that earlier I assumed you would actually find and read it before saying anything about it.

Let me post the whole section for you. Note how you can make copies other than backup copies. Note how you can make any number of backup copies, not just one.

Release date: 2004-04-30 

(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.— Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided: 
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or 
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful. 
(b) Lease, Sale, or Other Transfer of Additional Copy or Adaptation.— Any exact copies prepared in accordance with the provisions of this section may be leased, sold, or otherwise transferred, along with the copy from which such copies were prepared, only as part of the lease, sale, or other transfer of all rights in the program. Adaptations so prepared may be transferred only with the authorization of the copyright owner. 
(c) Machine Maintenance or Repair.— Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner or lessee of a machine to make or authorize the making of a copy of a computer program if such copy is made solely by virtue of the activation of a machine that lawfully contains an authorized copy of the computer program, for purposes only of maintenance or repair of that machine, if— 
(1) such new copy is used in no other manner and is destroyed immediately after the maintenance or repair is completed; and 
(2) with respect to any computer program or part thereof that is not necessary for that machine to be activated, such program or part thereof is not accessed or used other than to make such new copy by virtue of the activation of the machine. 
(d) Definitions.— For purposes of this section— 
(1) the “maintenance” of a machine is the servicing of the machine in order to make it work in accordance with its original specifications and any changes to those specifications authorized for that machine; and 
(2) the “repair” of a machine is the restoring of the machine to the state of working in accordance with its original specifications and any changes to those specifications authorized for that machine. 


#50 JonB

JonB

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 01 June 2005 - 12:27 AM

Another smarty straw-man reprisal that has nothing to do with obtaining copies from the Internet. Oh please forgive me for using the word "single", even though I've already acknowledged that making copies is legit in the first place, and has nothing to do with this friggin argument unless you're still desperately backing cart copiers or whatever excuse. Downloading Internet ROMs of titles which you own is illegal, the material you've layed out supports this, it is their copy, not your authorized copy (you would need their original cart to complete a legal transfer). I've had enough of this, take the last word, enjoy whatever final pithy rejoinder you craft up.

#51 Eric5h5

Eric5h5

    Minion Tormentor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7160 posts

Posted 01 June 2005 - 11:15 AM

JonB, on June 1st 2005, 01:27 AM, said:

I've had enough of this, take the last word, enjoy whatever final pithy rejoinder you craft up.

Wow, try not to get too worked up.  ;)  This whole thing started when you said the real thing was better than emulation because (among other things) it's legal.

I said: "Emulation is very legal.  (As long as you own the games, obviously.)"

You said: "This is a common misconception, owning the game doesn't make ROMs legal in any way."

But that's just not true.  You can also take your Playstation CDs and make disc images and run them that way.  Whether they're on CDs or cartridges really doesn't make any difference...it's the information that counts, not the physical medium.  I know that in some places like Australia it's actually not technically legal to rip CDs and use the tracks on iPods, but I'm in the U.S., where we have those fair use laws that you don't seem to think much of.  ROMs are, of themselves, 100% legal.

--Eric

#52 JonB

JonB

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 01 June 2005 - 12:16 PM

P.S. Forgive me, I am in error for not keeping my cool, humility is a better virtue to have. I thought it was implied from the beginning that I meant downloaded ROMs of titles in which you own, not the technology and not your own personal backups. In retrospect I should have been clearer on that. I've concluded arguing about it though; I think I'll downgrade to a more modest position here in the community and spare the stress.

#53 the Battle Cat

the Battle Cat

    Carnage Served Raw

  • Admin
  • 17567 posts
  • Location:Citadel City, Lh'owon
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 01 June 2005 - 02:49 PM

You are a good man JonB, well meaning too.  Don't downgrade too far.
Gary Simmons
the Battle Cat

#54 The iMac Man

The iMac Man

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2422 posts
  • Location:IL (USA)

Posted 01 June 2005 - 02:56 PM

Yeah, don't downgrade too far!

Different opinions are what make forums work.... if it weren't for that, we'd all just be posting crap like, "yep, I agree."  ;)
-iMac

(The PC to Mac CoD Mod Converter)
Heat of Battle
Revolt
SWAT
Others

Get Mac Game Mods: Macologist.org

#55 Eric5h5

Eric5h5

    Minion Tormentor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7160 posts

Posted 02 June 2005 - 12:36 AM

The iMac Man, on June 1st 2005, 03:56 PM, said:

Different opinions are what make forums work.... if it weren't for that, we'd all just be posting crap like, "yep, I agree."  ;)

Yep, I agree.




(OK, that was too obvious.)

--Eric

#56 Belcarius

Belcarius

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 387 posts
  • Location:Australia

Posted 02 June 2005 - 12:49 AM

As far as I know, you are allowed to download MP3s, ROMs or whatever for 'sampling' purposes - you are only breaking the law if you don't delete them within 24 hours of download.
"The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his" - George S. Patton

#57 Dr. Geebs

Dr. Geebs

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 685 posts

Posted 02 June 2005 - 03:33 AM

Nah, that's made up.

Don't the "fair use" arguments all ignore the actual software license agreement?

#58 Belcarius

Belcarius

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 387 posts
  • Location:Australia

Posted 02 June 2005 - 06:45 AM

Well it depends who your source is. I've never seen any problem with distributing old games and the like for free, but there are people who have some kind of problem with it so I have to force myself not to do it.
"The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his" - George S. Patton

#59 Eric5h5

Eric5h5

    Minion Tormentor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7160 posts

Posted 02 June 2005 - 01:12 PM

Dr. Geebs, on June 2nd 2005, 04:33 AM, said:

Nah, that's made up.

Don't the "fair use" arguments all ignore the actual software license agreement?

Yep, the "24 hours" thing has no basis in reality.  And yep, fair use does ignore the license agreements, but that's OK since those silly things are not really enforceable except in a couple of states.

--Eric

#60 NeoWolf

NeoWolf

    Heroic

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 364 posts

Posted 03 June 2005 - 06:11 PM

Distributing old games no longer sold is more of a gray area. From the legal perspective until the copyright's gone it's illegal. But no one really cares or enforces in most cases. Which is how sites like http://www.the-underdogs.org/ operates. If a valid copyright holder complains they comply entirely. However if the software is entirely abandoned they'll host it. (This causes some odd things like there are Win 95 games to download there but some of the old Epic Megagames games for DOS aren't!)