Which is precisely what I have been saying Inkmonkey. I haven't questioned whether downloading a Rom is illegal (although I still think that downloaded Roms being illegal could be debatable) but I have said that owning a Rom is not illegal.

isukun
Rot on DVDs and CDs is actually a very rare issue. Most cases of digital media going bad can be attributed to poor care when handling the media. Most of the time, what people write off as rot is actually damage caused by poor handling.

Rot has been found on even the most cleanly, safely stored CDs and DVDs. Poor treatment can accelerate the process, but safe storage is no guarantee that it will not happen. Most rot is caused by deoxidation of the reflective layer or debonding of the adhesives used to keep the layers together.

CD rot is most common in earlier CDs in which the CD layering process was not as advanced. But are you sure your Barry Manilow collection will be safe in 20 years, Isukun? Plus, some tests have shown that DVDs rot faster than CDs.

20 years from now he'll be able to get it off the interwebs for 99 cents.

And I think you completely misread my post. Yes, if you do not own the damn cartridge owning a Rom is illegal, I've acknowledged that and I freely admit I've downloaded Roms I don't own the cartridge to, but if you do own the cartridge I do not believe it is illegal.

What you believe and what the law states are two different things. Like I said, there is a difference between morality and legality. Just because you THINK something SHOULD be legal, that doesn't make it so. If you want to argue personal opinion, argue about the morality of something. Most legal issues have actual laws and set precedent which define them.

Here's a link to a Wikipedia page (not that they're the most trustworthy site on the web) that says the Roms are not illegal. Legality of ROMs.

I actually found the Wikipedia entry kind of funny. It really doesn't support your argument in any way. In particular, re-read the bit about Atari v. JS&A where they basically state that the legal precedent for ROMs is that they aren't protected under section 17 USC 117 (the law which states copies of software for archival purposes are legal). If you go by the Wikipedia article, then we're back to ROMs only being legal if authorized by the original rights holder. Making copies of ANY KIND without authorization would be illegal whether you own a copy of the original or not.

What? I reread that article and it doesn't say anything about owning a Rom being illegal. What you read sounds to me like it's saying that Roms cannot be used as backup with another cartridge. It doesn't say anything to me about owning a Rom on your computer.

Wikipedia
In some countries, it is legal for an individual to personally make backup copies of a game they own. Individuals may make backup copies for various reasons, perhaps as insurance against losing the game or as redundancy in the event that the original game's medium becomes unreadable. See the section on ROMs and Preservation.

However, in the U.S. it has been illegal since 1983 for a user to create their own backups of video game ROMs onto other cartridges. This was decided in the court case of Atari v. JS&A. JS&A manufactured a "game backup" device that allowed users to dump their Atari ROMs onto a blank cartridge. JS&A argued that the archival rule allowed for this. The court disagreed, noting that ROM media was not subject to the same volatility as magnetic media (for which the law was created). Thus, not being so relatively vulnerable, ROMs were not applicable under section 17 USC 117(a)(2).

Some games companies, such as Nintendo, print warnings inside their game manuals that they do not allow users to make backup or archival copies. Whether or not these warnings in this specific form can be considered valid contracts is legally questionable. For an overview of relevant issues, see user agreement (EULA), shrink wrap contract, clickwrap, Fair Use, Fair Dealing and DMCA.

How does that say anything about Roms on your PC?

And I'm asking again, can you please cite some kind of source, even if it's just a "I Hate ROMs" website?

The court disagreed, noting that ROM media was not subject to the same volatility as magnetic media (for which the law was created). Thus, not being so relatively vulnerable, ROMs were not applicable under section 17 USC 117(a)(2).

What this is saying is that the physical hardware of the cartridge is not as fragile as the magnetic media of the time (i.e. floppy disks) and the creation of backup data from the hardware was not protected under law. At a second glance, when I actually look up the court ruling itself, the court ruled that backup data from a cartridge did not protect it from "mechanical or electrical failure" as the law originally intended, but was used to protect it from "accidental physical dangers due to the nature of the unerasable and nonreprogrammable ROM inside each cartridge" which goes beyond the scope of the law. They likened it to accidentally shredding a book, claiming that making copies for that purpose is not protected under USC 117. What the court ruled against was the purpose of the copies, not the media they're copied to.

What this means practically is that even the ownership of ROMs not authorized by the current copyright holder is 100% illegal in the US. As of yet, there has been no legal precedent set to reverse this ruling. The only thing which comes close is Sega Enterprises, Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc., which only protected the use of dumped ROMS for development purposes.

Rot has been found on even the most cleanly, safely stored CDs and DVDs. Poor treatment can accelerate the process, but safe storage is no guarantee that it will not happen. Most rot is caused by deoxidation of the reflective layer or debonding of the adhesives used to keep the layers together.

And I mentioned both problems and their most likely cuases in my previous post (scratches on the backs of CDs and excessive flexing of the disc on DVDs). Most of what I've read on the issue states that it really isn't a major issue. Very few discs have the problem and in most cases, it is more prevalent in earlier discs which were made with more relaxed quality standards.

isukun
And I mentioned both problems and their most likely cuases in my previous post (scratches on the backs of CDs and excessive flexing of the disc on DVDs). Most of what I've read on the issue states that it really isn't a major issue. Very few discs have the problem and in most cases, it is more prevalent in earlier discs which were made with more relaxed quality standards.

You exist to argue with me, don't you? But you know what? Everything I said was right and you're just trying nudge it closer to gray areas. And you're even repeating things I said. Find a new hobby.

Everything I said was right and you're just trying nudge it closer to gray areas.

My point was that rot isn't the major issue people make it out to be. Even on older discs it happens very rarely. Optical media is still fragile, though, and vulnerable to damage done through improper handling. This is why in my initial post about the subject I mentioned corrosion and debonding as examples of problems people often attribute to rot, but are most often the result of how CDs and DVDs are handled.

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to argue at this point. I never denied that rot can and does occur in CD and DVD media, all I've done is say that the problem is so miniscule, it isn't worth worrying about.

.....and this thread....turned into a debate. Eeyup. lol!

Inkmonkey

Wikipedia
In some countries, it is legal for an individual to personally make backup copies of a game they own.

Well, I don't know how important that wording is, personally, but it seems to imply that creating copies of games that one owns is only legal if one creates the copies themselves. This implies that, while owning a ROM is legal, offering one for download is illegal.

This is exactly the case in the netherlands.
copy as much as you want, just dont offer them to others.

I play on an online NES emulator every once in a while. There's no ROMs to download, and that's just the way I like it.

Who PLAYS roms?

heh I do, all the way. It's so much better than the actual console. Although I own a Sega Genesis (covered in dust now) I can't tell you how awesome Emulators are... that "Save State" feature is the best thing ever invented. It allows me to finish the games I could never finish because of lack of time or just getting tired. I can play 10 minutes in a lunch break before getting back to work starting from any point I want. The screenshot and record avi feature are great too, and not to mention the network play... Emulators are WAY better

The only problem with roms is thats hard to find a working emulator or rom that works

Hawk

LIZARD_B1TE
Ha ha loser.

Man, what a stupid reply.

Top Drawer humor.

What an oxymoron.

bloodking153
The only problem with roms is thats hard to find a working emulator or rom that works

True, don't you hate it when you find a working rom that doesn't work?

I have, over time, owned emulators for the NES, SNES, SMS, Genesis, Sega CD (Which I played my official copies on), various Ataris, Colecovision, and Intellivision. I also still have MAME, which emulates an assload of arcade games. I've spent hours playing classics like Zaxxon, Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, Pooyan, Mr. Do, and Zoo Keeper. I have also played more "recent" games like TMNT, Simpsons, X-Men, and the Capcom fighting games. I think I have well over 3000 roms for that thing.