Never forgo your ownership in any purchases or accumulated property from anti-piracy propagandists, read this [EU Citizens]

slimmbo

It is vastly important that you, as a consumer, are protected with rights as well as conditions and guarantees, since they're all part of what you have direct control over (in theory) and benefits you once you've been gifted or exchanged currency for a product (like a game).

That means the law, as it stood at the time of purchase, receipts and physical** goods along with the conditions* (some restrictions claimed by retailers and distributors are merely propaganda, can not be enforced legally, works almost as well as legit legislation) agreed upon or stated "over-all" pertaining a specific product.

Let's say, in this case, a game containing compiled software in a medium capable of transferring the data (CD, cartridge, et cetera) is released and bought. The software is final and you did not obtain any of the aforementioned components digitally, there is no agreement to accept since you're not owed upcoming patches, like a modern NDA-bound online (say Steam) purchase can be said to offer.

You have the right to do as you wish with the matter (the scientific term) and even if that includes lawfully protected source code which you can't reverse engineer with attempt to extract it, you still own the right to use that finalised version of the program (game), or manipulate the distribution of digital information, say, play a PlayStation CD in your stereo. The right to use the program in any way you prefer is protected by law, so. What does that mean?

Some pretext is in order. The following summary is part of an article and can be read in the link below:

Can I Rightfully Download an Emulated Game if I Own a Cartridge?

Advertisement
Let’s say you own a cartridge of the the first Donkey Kong and want to download an emulated version from a ROM site. It turns out that that’s copyright infringement as well. As noted above, while creating your own backup copy is generally okay, downloading someone else’s backup (or distributing your own backup) is not. As the U.S. Copyright Office puts it, “if you want a backup copy of a lawfully owned computer program, back it up yourself.”

Source: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/why-most-roms-are-illegal,37512.html

That's fine. This concerns US citizens differently than EU, however, do make sure your transfers happen on a private secure file transfer protocol server, downloading a copy you backed up. The emulator is legal and open source, the copy and ROM is legally yours to to with as you wish, it is fair use.

A Socratic allegorical anecdotal comparison.

Photographers own their photos, e.g. artists own their artwork.
They can make copies of it but you, without permission, may not.

The artist sells you a copy of a specific photo; a 40 x 30 cm sunset of a beach in Kungälv, Sweden, and states that it is a conditional transaction, so for you to be able to buy it you agree that you will not make copies to sell for profit or as gifts (or worse, free! e.g distribute).

You get one copy and you enjoy looking at it, you photograph it. Even scan it, using it as wallpaper on all your computers.

One day your original copy is destroyed in a fire.
Your proof of purchase, the receipt (or if gifted the art possess a note, explaining that someone transfer their ownership to you) is still in mint condition so you decide to digitally project the backed-up copy on your bedroom wall.

One day someone walks past your house and looks through the window, catches a glint.
Soon and shortly after you get a call from someone that claim you infringe on the photographers copyright.

- Why? You enquire.
- Well, your use of a digital copy seen by someone that give their word proves you've acquired it illegally.
- How so? You ask, politely and preferably smug.
- Why, the artist is very particular with how their art is distributed, and they do not sell digital copies of any artwork, never have!
- But I purchased it from him myself! You exclaim.
Surely, it must be fair for me to thoroughly enjoy in my home, with the means available to me, at the time and by the manner I choose? You pause to signal your wish for a response.
- Ehum .. Can you prove you didn't download a digital copy illegally? He continues.
We certainly have proof that no copy of that artwork is capable of being digitally projected as you have.

You give a moment before you answer;
- Why no, it isn't watermarked and I have a standard scanner, popular indeed. Many copies identical to this must be available, illegally.
- Ha! So you admit it? The audible corpulent sophist shouts back.
- I admit I reallocated and used my digital copy in a way not originally intended, or possibly not conceived as possible, then, in such a way that the nature of the source of my copy is impossible to prove as either or. You pause briefly, and continue;
- But what I do have is a receipt.
- Why you lie! Do you have no respect for capitalism and the right to own as much as one heart desires which our very laws predominantly exist for!? You dog, I shall have you sued before you can hang up the phone! He screams, veins pulsating, sweat showering the oak table followed by a click.

Alternatively:
.. But what I do have is the proof of ownership when I was gifted it on my birthday by my father.

This is, essentially, where we are with roms and emulators, particularly retro, specially before the Internet and a lot of legislation were needed due to it's empowering effect on the spread of history, art and information.

But you don't see or hear a fraction about your rights or, perhaps worse than that, any realistic limitations that might or should exist to restrict copyright owners, protecting civil liberties, which is what we all should prioritise; perhaps more so than ever before now.

All around we see and hear fear; fear for "is or isn't this going to be mistaken for infringement?", "should Leibniz suffer the heretics death from history, dare I mention the fact that Newton stole his idea?". Newton is royalty, Leibniz is an obscure philosopher. Can it be because the same factors played a important role then, as now? Don't be oppressed. Stay free and stay smart, if you can't legally download your copy if someone else made the copy \ - identical \ - make sure he sends you your.

How downloading a ROM for use on a EMULATOR is legal:

How you privately store and/or move your back-up \ - as long as you have ownership and/or proof of purchase, regardless of condition, the prerogative, still, is yours.
Playing a Sega-CD game on your stereo on an emulator is similar in that the usage, fairly doesn't violate the law or furthermore, infringe on the avaricious, nay, rapacious oligarchs due to fair use.

mitu

@slimmbo said in Never forgo your ownership in any purchases or accumulated property from anti-piracy propagandists, read this [EU Citizens]:

How downloading a ROM for use on a EMULATOR is legal:

It's really not - as pointed out above, in the article you quoted, it's not really legal if it's not your backup (at least in the US).

As noted above, while creating your own backup copy is generally okay, downloading someone else’s backup (or distributing your own backup) is not. As the U.S. Copyright Office puts it, “if you want a backup copy of a lawfully owned computer program, back it up yourself.”

saccublenda

@mitu Yes, in the US the law seems clear: downloading a rom is always illegal.
But what is the situation in the EU? Is it always illegal for an EU citizen to download a rom? And if not, when it is not illegal for an EU citizen to download a rom?
Does someone has a straight answer for this (possibly citing the relevant law codes)?

Emulatre71

Anti-Piracy propaganda is likely done by paid shills, and people who have ties to the game industry. People don't see how ugly the video game industry is. Besides we know laws/regulations have been influenced by greedy/corrupt companies. A good point brought up is we archive movies and art, shouldn't we do the same for Video Games? At this point people should be archiving content by physical storage as well, since we have seen people trying to control the Internet tightly.

Clyde

@emulatre71 said in Never forgo your ownership in any purchases or accumulated property from anti-piracy propagandists, read this [EU Citizens]:

A good point brought up is we archive movies and art, shouldn't we do the same for Video Games?

You're free to archive any video game you acquired legally, which is what many video game collectors and associations like the Computerspielemuseum Berlin already do.

Crush

@saccublenda said in Never forgo your ownership in any purchases or accumulated property from anti-piracy propagandists, read this [EU Citizens]:

But what is the situation in the EU? Is it always illegal for an EU citizen to download a rom? And if not, when it is not illegal for an EU citizen to download a rom?

Yes it is, the belief that only uploading is a crime in the EU stems from the situation before 2014.
When Sony and Philips went to EU court against the Dutch government because the gov included downloaded copies in their estimates for calculating the home-copy levy.
It resulted in downloads from unauthorized sources becoming illegal.
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-04/cp140058nl.pdf

saccublenda

@crush Thanks, that is exactly what I wanted to know. Do you know if there is a version of the document that you linked in English?
EDIT: found it
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-04/cp140058en.pdf

Crush

@saccublenda ah well done i could only find the Dutch press release cited in various articles as source.
The pdf also contains a link to the full text of the judgement.
And whilst new laws on the subject on the legality of downloaded media might differ in various EU countries, they all stem from the precedent set by this judgement.