Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....

phulshof

I think this discussion triggers heavily on the moral grey and legal black area of playing copies of (nostalgic) games on your computer for which you did not gain permission from the copyright holder, e.g. by buying a copy. Let's be honest: most of the games played by people on emulators are illegal copies, no matter how good of a moral argument you could make for getting a copy of a game that is no longer sold on a machine that you can hardly find anymore.

We all build on the materials that others have provided, like this project heavily builds on the emulators and operating system components that others have written. The more convenient you make the result towards allowing people to use it for playing illegal copies of games, the more legal troubles you might run into, even if you don't provide actual copies of the games. Just look at what's happening in the world of KODI add-ons these days. While I'm highly grateful for all the work that @SIMPLY-AUSTIN has done for the emulation community, I also recognize that exposure isn't always a good thing for projects like this. So, where does one draw the line?

Personally, I feel that the line should be drawn at actually distributing the games. Yes, not doing that might still land you in legal trouble, but you certainly cannot be held accountable for the actions of others. Simply Austin distributing an image of his own might not have your preference, but considering the work this project has been building on top of, I hardly feel that it has a legal or even moral standing to deny others the same courtesy. After all: that's what licenses like the GPL are all about. Of course it's wise to preach caution with regards to distributing these images, but to say: "Well, we may have used a lot of work by others, but you should not be able to do the same with our work." is highly morally questionable in my view.

So, let's regard my own work for instance. I'm the main author for RetroFE, a front-end not that much different from many other front-ends. While I understand that it can be helpful to provide an installation script for RetroFE on the RetroPie platform, why should it be unacceptable if I were to release a fully set-up image in stead? Certainly, users should not come here expecting help to solve the mistakes that I may have made, but should it be forbidden? On what grounds?

I highly respect Simply Austin's work, and I think the reaction he got for asking a simple user question was out of order, no matter how you personally feel about him or his work.

BuZz

@phulshof said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

We have no issue with people building their own images so long as they follow the licences and don't distribute with copyrighted content. We just don't offer support for this.

Not sure why you think it's forbidden ? We just don't want links / references to 3rd party images on this forum, or in this case a link to a youtube channel that tells people how to get premade images with roms. It's our forum and our choice.

psyke83

@phulshof said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

I think this discussion triggers heavily on the moral grey and legal black area of playing copies of (nostalgic) games on your computer for which you did not gain permission from the copyright holder, e.g. by buying a copy. Let's be honest: most of the games played by people on emulators are illegal copies, no matter how good of a moral argument you could make for getting a copy of a game that is no longer sold on a machine that you can hardly find anymore.

Agreed. I always try to purchase licensed copies (digital or physical) of retro games, but in many cases it's not even possible or feasible to find one.

We all build on the materials that others have provided, like this project heavily builds on the emulators and operating system components that others have written. The more convenient you make the result towards allowing people to use it for playing illegal copies of games, the more legal troubles you might run into, even if you don't provide actual copies of the games. Just look at what's happening in the world of KODI add-ons these days. While I'm highly grateful for all the work that @SIMPLY-AUSTIN has done for the emulation community, I also recognize that exposure isn't always a good thing for projects like this. So, where does one draw the line?

This is precisely about exposure; unwanted attention from one of several large corporations that can shut down the project with a single cease and desist letter.

Personally, I feel that the line should be drawn at actually distributing the games. Yes, not doing that might still land you in legal trouble, but you certainly cannot be held accountable for the actions of others. Simply Austin distributing an image of his own might not have your preference, but considering the work this project has been building on top of, I hardly feel that it has a legal or even moral standing to deny others the same courtesy. After all: that's what licenses like the GPL are all about. Of course it's wise to preach caution with regards to distributing these images, but to say: "Well, we may have used a lot of work by others, but you should not be able to do the same with our work." is highly morally questionable in my view.

Let's make clear the different issues with the types of third-party images:

a) modified images which include ROMs
b) unmodified images bundled with hardware
c) modified images, provided freely

The first is completely unacceptable, for obvious reasons. Directly linking the RetroPie name to piracy and puts the project at extreme risk.

The second violates the license of several of the bundled emulators, and is, IMO, also ethically objectionable. This is an attempt to add perceived value to a (hardware) product by the seller for self-gain. The RetroPie project is a shared collaboration of many people and projects, and we ask that the image is not distributed to monopolize that effort - but it's absolutely fine to include a note explaining where/how to download & install RetroPie for your customers.

The final case is not really a problem (assuming there's nothing nefarious added, as I said earlier), but it's a massive headache to support third party images and IMO, unfair to burden the official forum staff / contributors with such requests.

So, let's regard my own work for instance. I'm the main author for RetroFE, a front-end not that much different from many other front-ends. While I understand that it can be helpful to provide an installation script for RetroFE on the RetroPie platform, why should it be unacceptable if I were to release a fully set-up image in stead? Certainly, users should not come here expecting help to solve the mistakes that I may have made, but should it be forbidden? On what grounds?

Forbidden is a strong word, but I contend that it's not fair to expect the official forums to provide support for your image. No, I think that if you distribute a custom image, then you need to assume all responsibility for technical support.

However, if you are an active user on this forum and have a forum topic dedicated to supporting your image, it's feasible that such an exception would be allowed, of course. But for users to post new support topics for your image? I think that's not a fair burden to place on the forum, to be honest.

I highly respect Simply Austin's work, and I think the reaction he got for asking a simple user question was out of order, no matter how you personally feel about him or his work.

Again, I didn't intend for this to be an attack on Simply Austin. Sorry if you feel piled on, but we have to maintain higher standards to keep a barrier between casual discussion of piracy with the RetroPie name.

Here's an example; Simply Austin posted on his site regarding a ZX Spectrum Classic image: "This one includes NO ROMS! I cant share that Im afraid. But Im sure someone will make and upload a loaded version.... they always do. But at least for now you can have a dabble!"

Apart from the fact that we wouldn't support third-party images, the "wink-and-nod" to casual piracy (i.e., what can be interpreted as an encouragement for others to make such an image) that's inferred here would not meet the standards of the forum. This is nothing personal against Simply Austin, but as I said, it would take one cease and desist letter from a corporation to cause this site to be shut down.

Even if you think that the RetroPie developers are a bunch of stuck-up assholes, it's still not a good thing, as it would cause unwanted attention to the associated projects. RetroArch devs are hard-asses about piracy too, because it endangers their work at hardware preservation through software.

phulshof

@psyke83 said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

This is precisely about exposure; unwanted attention from one of several large corporations that can shut down the project with a single cease and desist letter.

I'm aware of this, and they're just going down the list based on exposure, so I can understand why exposure can often be a bad thing. That doesn't make it right though. We've seen that in the past, where developers of emulators have had to defend themselves (and often successfully I might add) in court for creating the emulator. It's rather tricky to build something like that, and yet hope that it doesn't get too much exposure. That's the price we pay for having this hobby I fear.

Let's make clear the different issues with the types of third-party images:
a) modified images which include ROMs
b) unmodified images bundled with hardware
c) modified images, provided freely

The first is completely unacceptable, for obvious reasons. Directly linking the RetroPie name to piracy and puts the project at extreme risk.

Though I agree that it's unacceptable, I'm not entirely sure that I agree with the risk. I'm sure the MPA would love to shut down the KODI project, but they also realize that it's completely legal as is, and attacking it would be a PR nightmare with powerful parties standing up to offer support to the KODI development team. People that distribute/sell these images probably run a huge risk of getting caught, but I'm not sure it will actually reflect back on this community.

The second is, IMO, also ethically objectionable. This is an attempt to add perceived value to a (hardware) product by the seller for self-gain.

I think this is a matter of perspective. While I often feel that I would agree with you here, there are also times I think that if you're selling your own work (e.g. an arcade cabinet), helping people get a working installation isn't a bad thing. It's a service you provide to your customer, like installing an operating system on a computer you sell. Including the roms is of course a NO-NO to me.

The final case is much less objectionable, as I said earlier, but it's a massive headache to support third party images and IMO, unfair to burden the official forum staff / contributors with such requests.

I can certainly see that as problematic, and if I were to ever produce such an image I would make certain that the support for it lies with me. :) It's like people downloading/buying a HyperSpin harddisk, and coming to the HS forums to ask for help. The answer's generally: install from scratch, and let us know what problems you encounter; then we can help you, but not now.

Forbidden is a strong word, but I contend that it's not fair to expect the official forums to provide support for your image. No, I think that if you distribute a custom image, then you need to assume all responsibility for technical support.

I can certainly understand that; perhaps it was merely my misconception that such images were not allowed, but I'm fairly certain I got that response to some of my questions in the past. It may not have been on this forum though, and I'm hard-pressed to find an example at the moment, so I'll just note is down as a misconception on my part.

Here's an example; Simply Austin posted on his site regarding a ZX Spectrum Classic image: "This one includes NO ROMS! I cant share that Im afraid. But Im sure someone will make and upload a loaded version.... they always do. But at least for now you can have a dabble!"

I'm not sure that was meant as a wink-nod to be honest. Just like your images are often used to create exactly that, so are his, and the more helpful your base is (and SA provides very helpful bases for people to work from), the more likely it is that it will be used as such. I already know that there are people delivering complete HyperSpin and RetroFE setups containing the roms, and I won't deny that's happening either. I don't consider it my concern though. RetroFE is F/OSS, so people can use it as they see fit within the GPL, and if other copyright holders wish to protest the use of their copyrighted material combined with RetroFE, then that's their choice.

There's a large degree of images available these days:

bootable operating system
bootable operating system with front-end
bootable operating system with front-end and emulator(s) (like RetroPie)
bootable operating system with front-end, emulators, and artwork
front-end, emulators, and artwork (I have something like this for RetroFE on EmuMovies)
bootable operating system with front-end, emulators, artwork, and roms
Out of all of those, only the last one is something I truly object to, but it's not up to me to be the SJW that brings these people to court. I'll leave that to organizations like BREIN (the Netherlands). The rest of the people are just being helpful to users, and yet we all recognize that most of these will be used for illegal purposes by a large portion of the users. Then again: so was the VHS, so where do we draw the line?

phulshof

@psyke83 said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

Even if you think that the RetroPie developers are a bunch of stuck-up assholes, it's still not a good thing, as it would cause unwanted attention to the associated projects. RetroArch devs are hard-asses about piracy too, because it endangers their work at hardware preservation through software.

I figured this deserved a separate reaction. :)
I certainly do not think that. I know what an ungrateful and time-consuming task putting something like this together can be at times, and I know the legal risk we all run by working on projects like these, and how exposure can be a problem. On the other hand: most of us also publish this work because we want people to use it, and make it as easy as possible for them to do so. That alone can be construed as promoting "piracy" by some of the software houses, even though our intentions may be good.

psyke83

@phulshof said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

I'm aware of this, and they're just going down the list based on exposure, so I can understand why exposure can often be a bad thing. That doesn't make it right though. We've seen that in the past, where developers of emulators have had to defend themselves (and often successfully I might add) in court for creating the emulator. It's rather tricky to build something like that, and yet hope that it doesn't get too much exposure. That's the price we pay for having this hobby I fear.

Maybe it's not right, but to err on the side of caution seems prudent.

Though I agree that it's unacceptable, I'm not entirely sure that I agree with the risk. I'm sure the MPA would love to shut down the KODI project, but they also realize that it's completely legal as is, and attacking it would be a PR nightmare with powerful parties standing up to offer support to the KODI development team. People that distribute/sell these images probably run a huge risk of getting caught, but I'm not sure it will actually reflect back on this community.

I don't think we can assume support or success if such a thing happens to us. We are not the primary developers for the "meat" of what's included, i.e. the actual emulators. Also, didn't KODI resolve the issue by disassociating themselves from the plugins? Users are free to install whatever plugins they like, as long as it has nothing to do with official channels.

I think this is a matter of perspective. While I often feel that I would agree with you here, there are also times I think that if you're selling your own work (e.g. an arcade cabinet), helping people get a working installation isn't a bad thing. It's a service you provide to your customer, like installing an operating system on a computer you sell. Including the roms is of course a NO-NO to me.

I'd ask you to re-read my post, as I amended this paragraph just before you replied. It's actually a violation of the license for several of the bundled emulators by including them with hardware. You should familiarize yourself with that issue if you intend to sell hardware, and it's not a condition placed by the RetroPie team. I understand that it makes users' lives more difficult, but respecting the licenses is important.

I can certainly see that as problematic, and if I were to ever produce such an image I would make certain that the support for it lies with me. :) It's like people downloading/buying a HyperSpin harddisk, and coming to the HS forums to ask for help. The answer's generally: install from scratch, and let us know what problems you encounter; then we can help you, but not now.

That's pretty much what we say here. Third party-image? Oops, try re-installing the latest official release and come back if you still have problems.

I can certainly understand that; perhaps it was merely my misconception that such images were not allowed, but I'm fairly certain I got that response to some of my questions in the past. It may not have been on this forum though, and I'm hard-pressed to find an example at the moment, so I'll just note is down as a misconception on my part.

We're not going to ban or demonize people for using third party images. We just don't support them on the forum, that's all :)

I'm not sure that was meant as a wink-nod to be honest. Just like your images are often used to create exactly that, so are his, and the more helpful your base is (and SA provides very helpful bases for people to work from), the more likely it is that it will be used as such. I already know that there are people delivering complete HyperSpin and RetroFE setups containing the roms, and I won't deny that's happening either. I don't consider it my concern though. RetroFE is F/OSS, so people can use it as they see fit within the GPL, and if other copyright holders wish to protest the use of their copyrighted material combined with RetroFE, then that's their choice.

There's a large degree of images available these days:

bootable operating system

bootable operating system with front-end

bootable operating system with front-end and emulator(s) (like RetroPie)

bootable operating system with front-end, emulators, and artwork

front-end, emulators, and artwork (I have something like this for RetroFE on EmuMovies)

bootable operating system with front-end, emulators, artwork, and roms
Out of all of those, only the last one is something I truly object to, but it's not up to me to be the SJW that brings these people to court. I'll leave that to organizations like BREIN (the Netherlands). The rest of the people are just being helpful to users, and yet we all recognize that most of these will be used for illegal purposes by a large portion of the users. Then again: so was the VHS, so where do we draw the line?

Let's agree to disagree re: "wink and nod". My point is that such language is open to interpretation, and we need to err on the side of caution.

As I said, the third-party images are not "forbidden", but we don't support them. Also keep in mind my edit re: emulators forbidding any kind of hardware bundling.

phulshof

@psyke83 said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

I'd ask you to re-read my post, as I amended this paragraph just before you replied. It's actually a violation of the license for several of the bundled emulators by including them with hardware. You should familiarize yourself with that issue if you intend to sell hardware, and it's not a condition placed by the RetroPie team. I understand that it makes users' lives more difficult, but respecting the licenses is important.

True, but how do you draw the line? So you can't sell them with the hardware. Ok, but are you allowed to install it for a customer after a product has been purchased? Are you allowed to help them install it (sit down with them and install it with them, either with you or them behind the keyboard)? Are you allowed to provide instructions on how to install it? This is not a simple legal matter, because you, as a copyright holder, cannot prove which way it happened, which is what's needed in order to successfully sue someone for violating your copyrights. If you allow users to freely install your software, but not deliver it installed with hardware, then how do you enforce that sliding scale? This may be part of the reason why the MAME team went fully GPL in stead.

PS: Just to be clear: I don't build or sell hardware; I'm not that handy. :) I'm having mine built by someone else, and doing my own software installation.

PS: I used to be spokesman on copyright issues for the Foundation for Open Source in the Netherlands. As such I've been rather active in the whole copyright debates in the past, so it's a rather important topic to me; please forgive me if I ramble on a bit at times. :)

psyke83

@phulshof said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

@psyke83 said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

I'd ask you to re-read my post, as I amended this paragraph just before you replied. It's actually a violation of the license for several of the bundled emulators by including them with hardware. You should familiarize yourself with that issue if you intend to sell hardware, and it's not a condition placed by the RetroPie team. I understand that it makes users' lives more difficult, but respecting the licenses is important.

True, but how do you draw the line? So you can't sell them with the hardware. Ok, but are you allowed to install it for a customer after a product has been purchased? Are you allowed to help them install it (sit down with them and install it with them, either with you or them behind the keyboard)? Are you allowed to provide instructions on how to install it? This is not a simple legal matter, because you, as a copyright holder, cannot prove which way it happened, which is what's needed in order to successfully sue someone for violating your copyrights. If you allow users to freely install your software, but not deliver it installed with hardware, then how do you enforce that sliding scale? This may be part of the reason why the MAME team went fully GPL in stead.

PS: Just to be clear: I don't build or sell hardware; I'm not that handy. :) I'm having mine built by someone else, and doing my own software installation.

PS: I used to be spokesman on copyright issues for the Foundation for Open Source in the Netherlands. As such I've been rather active in the whole copyright debates in the past, so it's a rather important topic to me; please forgive me if I ramble on a bit at times. :)

Well, there are many ways one could answer your query. Rather than looking at the legalistic aspect, let's approach the topic from the viewpoint of respecting the intended spirit of the license.

My guess would be that hardware bundling is forbidden by emulator authors presumably to avoid the situation in which hardware makers appropriate their hard work, intended to be used freely, but for selfish commercial gain. I hope that the RetroPie project is looked upon favorably by these developers, as we don't try to appropriate the work of these projects by attempting to sell software or bundled emulators with hardware, and try our utmost to contribute patches upstream, etc.

I can't precisely answer where one would draw the line, but outright bundling of RetroPie is not even attempting to respect the intent of the emulator licenses. I think that providing a nicely formatted note with a clear link to RetroPie, and some steps to install, might be a good compromise. If you're meeting customers in person, you can offer to go through the steps in person.

Perhaps by spending two minutes to explain why you're jumping through hoops with your customer, and informing them of the wishes of the emulator developers, is enough to respect the spirit, if not the letter of the license? I don't know.

SIMPLY AUSTIN

I am starting to loose patience with both @psyke83 and @BuZz . I have been nothing but reasonable on here and yet even still each post is just another personal attack on both me and my reputation.

All this over a simple request for help on a simple tech issue? Not once even a "sorry, slight over reaction there".... instead just an echo chamber of "you are damaging RetroPie and Emulation.".... "But dont take it personal", we dont mean any of these sly digs, things taken out of context to try and move away from the fact you was just asking for help. To map a ESCAPE button....? "again, its not personal, not sure why you would think that?"

You can police and talk about anything you want, its most definitely your forum. I have done nothing but respect your wishes and play by your rules. But when you make things personal, use double standards with your own platform and idiolagies, try to use things as ammunition on YOUR public platform to justify your villainy of me and complete over reaction to this... I do take it very personal.

Would you like it if I did the same on my platform, treating you guys as exactly how you have treated me in public?

psyke83

@simply-austin said in Exiting a Game from a Keyboard with no Escape Button....:

I am starting to loose patience with both @psyke83 and @BuZz . I have been nothing but reasonable on here and yet even still each post is just another personal attack on both me and my reputation.

I don't understand your reply, Austin. I have not attacked you - personally or otherwise - or impugned your reputation. In fact, I was not trying to make a value judgement on anybody's stance on the topic of piracy. However, when we are representing the RetroPie project, we have an obligation to distance ourselves from casual discussion of the topic like I see on many sites, YT channels, etc.

All this over a simple request for help on a simple tech issue? Not once even a "sorry, slight over reaction there".... instead just an echo chamber of "you are damaging RetroPie and Emulation.".... "But dont take it personal", we dont mean any of these sly digs, things taken out of context to try and move away from the fact you was just asking for help. To map a ESCAPE button....? "again, its not personal, not sure why you would think that?"

Come on man, the topic clearly veered off topic, after you resolved your original issue. The attention from moderators came because your post was flagged, and since you ignored @buzz's original request on your channel, he used this opportunity to talk to you about the promotion of compromised ROM-laden images.

You can police and talk about anything you want, its most definitely your forum. But when you make things personal, use double standards with your own platform and idiolagies, try to use things as ammunition on YOUR public platform to justify your villainy of me and complete over reaction to this... I do take it very personal.

You are free to continue using this forum as long as you don't break the rules. If you were to post a YT video that talked about third-party images with pirated ROMs, in the same way as the video cited earlier in this topic, we would have to take measures by at least removing the links. We were simply trying to open a dialogue with you on the potential problems. We were not making a judgement on your character.

Would you like it if I did the same on my platform, treating you guys as exactly how you have treated me in public?

Please try to read our dialogue with you charitably, just as we're trying with you. We never insulted you, and I'm sorry, but we did not make any kind of judgement on you personally, but only some of your past content. If we saw people attacking you on our forum, we would take action to prevent harassment.

Maybe you should be aware that people who post to your Facebook page are making personal attacks on members of this forums, using slurs such "c*** wombles". Those kind of ad hominem attacks are not really helpful, wouldn't you agree?