What constitutes a "mod"?

Basically what I'd like to do is remake a really old game because I've always wanted to program a game, but can't draw even the smallest of sprites to save my life.

So I was wondering if I can just go the Doom64Ex route and require the original ROM image, using it's resources. While I'm guessing this gets around some legal issues, there's still the problem of infringing on intellectual property.

I know about hacks, but those can only do so much. Plus I've found them to be a complete pain in the ass and would rather start from scratch.

So is using the original material okay, or do the people that make these things just pray the lawyer squad doesn't show up?

This may interest you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_engine_recreation

Maybe make the game and then be all like.. who me? I didn't make it.. I just found it on the internet.. yeah.
I think that was how the creator of fatchicksinpartyhats.com sidestepped libel crap.. by blaming it on some made up dude named miguel, heh heh.

gggmork said:

Maybe make the game and then be all like.. who me?

That's probably what I'll do if I ever decide to make buzz.wad.

I'm pretty sure reverse engineering, in the US ayways, is perfectly legal.

A person would need to have a license to the original game/program files of course to be legal. For instance, some people mistakenly believe that because the "source" to something has been made open they then have the rights to the game/program "data" files.

Just because the Quake 1 source is open does not mean your legally allowed to download the game ISO.

In the case of ROMs, there is no legal way to obtain one, as they were never released in "digital" format to begin with. Someone dumped it, and then shared it illegally.

The issue here is different, though, since the ROM for the original game would be required in order for this to work. In my (albeit limited) view of things, this should be no less legal than Doom64EX as long as no ROMs or mass resource rips are distributed with the package.

As for ROMs, sure it's possible to legally obtain one: rip it yourself. Granted, that's not what the majority of people do, but it does validate their existence to some point.

That depends on jurisdiction, like anything else. Copyright infringement for personal use is becoming less and less of a crime in Canada. Even with the mental law each government keeps trying to pass to reform copyrights, copying things like ROMs for personal reasons and even remains legal. Weirdness. So in Canada we can't give you roms, but we can take them if some Russian guy uploads them. Yay! We actually have institutionalized freeloading.

Even in America it is probably usually legal to rip them yourself (assuming no copy protection) -- not that most people could. If you have the rom legally then you could write the code and leave it to people to get their own rom. Should be legal. We are of course not lawyers. Code at your own risk.

E.J. said:

I'm pretty sure reverse engineering

There wouldn't be any reverse engineering. All the resources are unencryted and I have no interest in decompiling it, I want to make the game mechanics myself.

E.J. said:

Someone dumped it, and then shared it illegally.

Well yes, obviously I can't distribute the ROM with my program. It would be up to the user to violate any laws, pretty much the same situation as emulation I suppose.

Aliotroph? said:

Copyright infringement for personal use is becoming less and less of a crime in Canada.

A couple months ago I saw an article on some conservative nut about making a bill to make it illegal to bypass DRM for personal use. I don't know what happened to it, but these things always get struck down by wither other parties or the senate. Still I don't expect the free-ride to last forever.

Edit: For any Canadians check out Bill C-32. Seems it's still being debated.

Scet said:

Well yes, obviously I can't distribute the ROM with my program. It would be up to the user to violate any laws, pretty much the same situation as emulation I suppose.

I personally found the premise behind a mod that requires you to use a ROM image ridiculous. It can't work as intended (legally speaking) because:

• Let's even assume that everyone using it actually is law-abiding and has a Doom64 or whatever "original material" is required. How many people do you know that have a ROM dumper at home, just for this occasion?
  
• There's no legal way to acquire a ROM image of any console, at least not in the open and well-documented formats used by known freeware emulators, which is what the authors of such a mod are more likely to use/require. Sure, if you buy e.g. TAITO Memories or download a Virtual Console games, the image must be there somewhere...right? But is it in e.g. MAME compliant format? Is it unencrypted? Which distribution (legal or otherwise) will the mod actually support?
  
• Even if someone is a stiff-lipped, anally retentive, law-abiding Joe Q. Public and does indeed have a cart and a ROM ripper, he's more likely to say "fuck it, I have the actual cart" and download the ROM from some emu warez site. Exactly who's gonna verify he's in the "right" or not to do so?
  

I don't really have a sophisticated answer, but when do I?

Yes, Bill C-32 is what I was referring to. That's at least the third version of it in the third consecutive government trying to pass it. The Liberals tried the same thing. It makes it legal to downgrab anything, but illegal to break encryption for any reason. It will die again or get amended to have exceptions similar to the DMCA.

Maes makes good points.

Maes said:
I personally found the premise behind a mod that requires you to use a ROM image ridiculous. It can't work as intended (legally speaking) because:

• Let's even assume that everyone using it actually is law-abiding and has a Doom64 or whatever "original material" is required. How many people do you know that have a ROM dumper at home, just for this occasion?
  
• There's no legal way to acquire a ROM image of any console, at least not in the open and well-documented formats used by known freeware emulators, which is what the authors of such a mod are more likely to use/require. Sure, if you buy e.g. TAITO Memories or download a Virtual Console games, the image must be there somewhere...right? But is it in e.g. MAME compliant format? Is it unencrypted? Which distribution (legal or otherwise) will the mod actually support?
  
• Even if someone is a stiff-lipped, anally retentive, law-abiding Joe Q. Public and does indeed have a cart and a ROM ripper, he's more likely to say "fuck it, I have the actual cart" and download the ROM from some emu warez site. Exactly who's gonna verify he's in the "right" or not to do so?
  

There's some truth in this because console games don't tend to have more liberal licenses like the ones for some PC games that generally allow mods as long as the game content is required. ROMs aren't necessarily illegal, and aren't necessarily an issue if the mod requiring them is hosted on a server in any country where you can make copies of copyrighted works for personal use, but if you can't make mods in the first place, ROMs aren't going to be of much help. The altenative engine itself, based on the original one by careful inspection of reverse engineering, would easily be classified as derivative. You need permission to work from there, as given by many PC games these days ever since DOOM and others established the mod craze.

It is legal to download ROMs (for backup purposes) as long as you own the original game

No, it's legal to make backup copies (in cases where you're not breaking DRM). Downloading something in the US for backup purposes is not legal, has never been legal and doesn't look like it will be for the foreseeable future. Also, the person uploading it so you can download it is definitely doing something illegal.

Mr. T said:

It is legal to download ROMs (for backup purposes) as long as you own the original game

Assuming that those making those ROMs available have a hard copy of each and every ROM they publish online, which likely isn't the case. It's a Catch-22 kind of situation here:

• To legally download a game from a non-authorized channel (ROM site, warez sites, torrent trackers, P2P), you need to own it in a legitimate form a priori.
  
• Even if you're (self-righteously, most of the time) entitled to download a ROM from a warez site because "you own it", good luck trying to explain that to the anti-P2P voltures a posteriori. Everyone's gonna assume the worst.
  
• Conversely, those publishing/sharing those games through those channels must both own it legally (yeah right...) AND control who is entitled to download them. Yeah, they all put a disclaimer saying "download only if you own the game/ROM/album" etc. and we all know how effective that is. Don't forget, those sites went on for years with the "delete within 24 hours" clause, which proved to be utter bullshit from a legal point of view.
  

Maes said:
Even if you're (self-righteously, most of the time) entitled to download a ROM from a warez site because "you own it", good luck trying to explain that to the anti-P2P voltures a posteriori. Everyone's gonna assume the worst.

Oh, yeah, that happens all the time. The vultures came into my apartment and took my roommate the other day, who's still in some dungeon being interrogated.

myk said:

Oh, yeah, that happens all the time. The vultures came into my apartment and took my roommate the other day, who's still in some dungeon being interrogated.

Well, you and me live in copyright shitholes -relatively speaking. Computer magazines over here routinely bundle full MAME ROM sets with their CD/DVD editions, and none ever even got reprimanded for that.

OTOH, I know that in the USA they are much more strict and anal about enforcing them (e.g. Nintendo of America pretty much has an anti-piracy legal task force on US territory, and won't even tolerate Famiclones, while e.g. I own about 10 or so different models and carts, and they are cheerfully sold by any major toy store).

Did you guys have a law banning video games in the first place? How long did that last?

What you're referring to is the infamous law 3037/2002, whose original purpose was banning illegal electronic gambling (many "arcade" rooms actually had roulete and poker machines disguised as normal arcades).

Unfortunately, due to poor wording (and, more realistically, police bribery) it came to be interpreted as banning ALL forms of electronic games. Several cyber cafe and arcade shop owners saw their property confiscated and even vandalized by the police, while others went entirely untouched (the police only acted upon "tips", so you can imagine how e.g. an unscrupulous competitor could send you law-sanctioned financial ruin, for free!).

It is still in place (I think) though not as aggressively "enforced". The victims were mostly shop arcade and cyber cafe shop owners, as I mentioned (probably those without strong enough connections and/or a "name" in the streets), and indirectly it caused a crash in the arcade machine market (which has been mostly replaced by cyber/lan/net cafes anyway).

Unlike what you may have heard, personal and home gaming, consoles, toys, cell phones etc. were not affected, and any police raids were almost always malicious in nature.

Today it would be ineffective for ruining a competitor (if you're in the net/cyber/lan business), you're much better off sending them the IRS with a BSA representative.

TL; DR: it was originally an anti-gambling law soon bent to the needs of micro-business and micro-politics.