Is ther a Custom Gameboot thread out ther if not lets making 1.
Printable View
Is ther a Custom Gameboot thread out ther if not lets making 1.
This site doesn't allow them because they can only be created using leaked sony tools.
ooga booga were crazy dcemu ooga booga blah blah we dont let ooga ooga naw sorry man gameboots arent allowed here :P get a pm
Interesting way of stating the rules. I believe some are leagel. In the Theme Psp thread there are some gameboots. http://www.dcemu.co.uk/vbulletin/sho...ighlight=theme
oh yeah im on my msn for right nowso if anyone needs something they can come on msn i got everything
Gameboots (which are .pmf files) are legal if "ripped out" of a PSP game. (If you don't know how to do that, sorry but the site rules will not allow me to discuss that here :( ) Any "homemade" gameboots are techniquley illegal, b/c the only way to produce one is with the Infamous leaked UMD Tools. (Leaked from SONY). Although, I really wish this site would change it's rule on the "no custom gameboot" thing. What really is the big deal anyway? It's not legal to host the bios to an emu, so this site hosts them without them. Therefore making everything "legal". So why, if this site don't host the leaked UMD Tools (which it doesn't) why can't we post gameboots that were found around the net, and then integrated into themes? (MODS - can I get an answer to this plz?) Obviously there would have to be a No umd tool discussion rule. Becuase we couldn't actually promote the use of stolen tools. Hell, you guys lightened up on the DevHook thing. A DevHook Mod was on the front page of the news page yesterday. I've been thinking about posting something like this for awhile now. I think it's time DCemu made a policy change on custom gameboots.
i agree w/ shizzy....as long as the leaked sdk doesnt get released here, ppl should be able to share ther work...
but it encourages using the leaked tools and that is illegal...
to be honest, i do question the legality of using ripped gameboots....
Quote:
Originally Posted by accordian boy
Not if it were just used for themes, and not threads show casing ppl's Custom gameboot collections they made. I said in my earlier post, we would use custom gameboots "we found surfing the net". SONY obviously does not give a crap about the fact ppl are using 2.5 second, low quality,video clips for there PSP's to use on bootup. lol. I think they have bigger fish to fry. ;)
EDIT: Oh, btw "ripped gameboots" are 100% legal bro. :)
I dont see how ripped gameboots are any more legal than ones created with pirated software. It's either not ok to pirate, or it is. There is no "grey area"
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDX
LOL. What are you talking about dx? To use the stolen tools to make one would be "pirating". But how would it be pirating to sample a clip off something I own, It is not illegal to custumise your PSP. lol Being a coder you should know that...
yes, but you are then distributing something you 'own', to people who do NOT own it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Shizzy
No it isnt illegal to customise your own psp, and I didn't suggest for a second that it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Shizzy
It *IS* however illegal to distribute and copy copyrighted material - HENCE COPYRIGHTED, whether you are ripping a sample from an audio cd or a gameboot from a umd.
unfortunately i think we have just destroyed a great idea. which i have taken advantage and i am soory mr.shizzy to have brought it up after all your help. however it would be safest to end using ANY copyrighted material for distribution. perhaps stick to p.d. music files....
nah ...oh crap....
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDX
Thats why XFlash has the original XMB backgrounds, and bootsounds, and XMB sounds in it? And what about shadow-evillinks thread right here on DCemu, where he offers AT3's for homebrews? lol C'mon dude...I think your speculating a little too much. Not to be rude, but do some research...
Everyone who is using XFlash already has the original backgrounds on their PSP, as it's default. However, it isn't legal to own another copy of a UMD you have in a computerised format, such as an ISO, as you only own a licence to that UMD, and that copy only. So it is, in fact, to even rip it from the UMD, nevermind distribute it across the internet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Shizzy
Cloudy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudhunter
LOL. Sorry but your wrong bro... It is NOT illegal to make a backup of a UMD you own. And for another thing, if you have overwritten the bg's or bootsound on your PSP's flash, than you do not have the originals backed up on your PSP anymore...but you can re-apply them with XFlash b/c they are built into the program.
i think custom gameboots should be alowed. it would make the themepsp thread alot better.
Ok my two cents they should be aloud to be used. Just no mention of how or information on how they did it.
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n...0502/mouse.gif
STOP
really stop this now, we have too many threads on piracy already
I agree AcidBurn. But by the time these guys are done picking me apart, we won't even be allowed to have a theme thread... lol (I'm serious - what's up with all the negetive attitudes?) Hell, why don't we just declare any background containing a trademarked image (mario, sonic...) illegal, have the mods shut down my theme & bootsound threads, and everybody will be happy...wow
like i said before that was not my intention
Its true if thats the case all you mentioned is then has to go as well. Funny how the people that creticise the most are probably the firsts in line to download.
I'll give you 24 hours to provide proof that it is legal to "backup" your sony UMD and then I'm going to issue you a warning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Shizzy
We know where to turn when the sony lawyers come knocking on the door :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Acidburn05
what? I think this whole thing has gotten a little out of hand. All I ever did was try to contribute the best I could. And I've always been a fan of yours MikeDX. Why am I a "bad guy" all of the sudden?
EDIT: Where am I gonna find proof that it is legal to backup a game? I didn't even want to discuss that on DCemu. Thyat would only promote piracy !!!
STOP!!!
please !!!
lol
im just trying to make a point that either copyrighted material is illegal, or it isnt. i'm not trying to single out anybody.
i just think its ridiculous that some things are allowed to be copied whilst others arent...
Well, I feel like I'm being picked on here. And quite frankley my feelings are very hurt...I've contacted Wraggster to try to clear all this up...
Hey mike thats a little bold statement for a coder who makes games. here are some of the us rules for corporate and private use the first one is corporate and they are reall laws because mi wife is an atourney and the second is manufactures laws see the loop holds in bouth of them its a no win no win situation.
Private
The idea for a game is not protected by copyright. The same is true of the name or title given to the game and of the method or methods for playing it.
Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. Copyright protection does not extend to any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in the development, merchandising, or playing of a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles.
Some material prepared in connection with a game may be subject to copyright if it contains a sufficient amount of literary or pictorial expression. For example, the text matter describing the rules of the game, or the pictorial matter appearing on the gameboard or container, may be registrable.
To register the copyrightable portions of a game, you must send the Library of Congress, Copyright Office, 101 Independence Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20559-6000, the following elements in the same envelope or package:
A completed application form. If your game includes any written element, such as instructions or directions, we recommend using Form TX, which can be used to register all copyrightable parts of the game, including any pictorial elements. When the copyrightable elements of the game consist predominantly of pictorial matter, Form VA should be used.
A nonrefundable filing fee (Current Fees)
A deposit of the material to be registered. The deposit requirements will vary depending on whether the work has been published at the time of registration.
If the game is published, the proper deposit is one complete copy of the work. If, however, the game is published in a box larger than 12 x 24 x 6 inches (or a total of 1,728 cubic inches) then identifying material must be submitted in lieu of the entire game. (See “identifying material” below). If the game is published and contains fewer than three 3-dimensional elements, then identifying material for those parts must be submitted in lieu of those parts.
If the game is unpublished, either one copy of the game or identifying material should be deposited.
Identifying material deposited to represent the game or its 3-dimensional parts shall usually consist of photographs, photostats, slides, drawings, or other 2-dimensional representations of the work. The identifying material shall include as many pieces as necessary to show the entire copyrightable content of the work, including the copyright notice if it appears on the work. All pieces of identifying material other than transparencies must be no less than 3 x 3 inches in size, and not more than 9 x 12 inches, but preferably 8 x 10 inches. At least one piece of identifying material must, on its front, back, or mount, indicate the title of the work and an exact measurement of one or more dimensions of the work.
Corporate
A design in the very early stages (e.g., "I want to make a game about taxi cabs in New York City") is not actually that valuable. It's very easy to come up with an idea for a game, and many designers have several such new ideas every day. Much more valuable is a game that has gone through most of the steps in the design process, including heavy playtesting.
Games are expensive to produce and yield very little profit. The majority of self-published games are produced in a print run of a few thousand copies or less, and if they manage to make a profit, it is often minimal. Thus, there is little incentive for a fellow designer to steal your game and try to publish it. There's even less incentive for a publisher to steal your game; the potential of a lawsuit that cuts into their margins is unattractive, and most are swamped with submissions. They will pay for an idea that they want badly enough.
Secrecy will kill your project. To make your game as good as it can be, you are going to need help from others at some point. At a minimum, you'll need folks to playtest your game, but many of us have found that discussing details of our games openly here at BGDF has resulted in very useful feedback. Asking your friends to sign a Non-Disclosure? Agreement before testing your game could make them feel you don't trust them, and publishers will not want the hassle of your project if you demand they sign an NDA before evaluating your submission.
Parallel development is common. Even if you successfully keep anyone from every hearing about your game, it's still quite possible that you'll see similar concepts emerge in a published game at some point. It's very common for two designers to be working on similar ideas without either of them knowing it. Tom Jolly wrote an article on this subject, and gives some examples. Several of us here can attest to having come up with mechanics we thought were very original, only to see the same mechanics used in published games.
Borrowing in game design
So, does the above analysis mean that you should just speak freely about your game? Well, yes and no. You should only talk publically about your game if you feel comfortable doing so. It is very common for fellow designers to appropriate aspects of your ideas that they believe will be useful in their projects. For example, starting a thread saying "I'm going to make a game about being a lifeguard at the beach" could certainly inspire others to make a game about a similar subject, and such occurences are very common at BGDF.
This borrowing and give-and-take of design concepts is a healthy part of the design process, and in general, the game design community accepts it and even thrives on it. Games like Citadels and Puerto Rico have borrowed very liberally and openly from other pre-existing games, and the games are considered to be the better for it. The key distinction is roughly that borrowing a mechanic (eg, using a trading mechanic like that in Settlers of Catan) and using it in a different way in your game is permissable, but borrowing entire collections of mechanics (e.g., using the die-rolling for resource production, trading, and conversion of resources to buildings) could cross the line into plagiarism. The gaming community generally knows the market very well, and will quickly identify a game that has "stolen" from an existing game. This too can help protect your ideas, provided your games see publication.
Of course, if you have aspects of your projects that you'd prefer to keep close to the chest, of course you should be selective about how much you disclose and to whom.
Copyrights
Copyrights grant the holder the exclusive right to copy, distribute, perform, or profit from an artistic work. It protects the particular expression of an idea, but not the idea itself. With respect to game design, this covers little more than the game's rulebook and the visual appearance of its components. Copyrighting your game will not protect you from any aspect of the actual game design from being borrowed or stolen.
Any work that has been "fixed" (e.g., the rulebook for your game) is automatically copyrighted under U.S. law, but there may still be benefit in officially registering your rules for copyright. To do so, you pay $45 to the U.S. Copyright Office.
My two sents is people dont realise that you have to pay a patent fee in this great world for everything made no matter what it is. If you want to profit from it you have to pay the patent. Now heres the trick with all pattents they are not permanent the longest pattent you can get is a ten year. After that you have to enter legal fees and battles to try to keep your product strictly yours. Normally never happens. So even though it is still the ownership of that specific person they dont take legal matters after such patent expires. There for thats the reason a lot of gaming companys dont do anything about there roms and such. Oh and im not making this up just get a law book if you dont believe me.
still off-topic...
but acidburn forgot the whole deal with software patents.... now that is messy, as 'creative' proved in the apple fight
I meant uk law :P
Anyways, it doesnt deter from the original intention that I have desperately been trying to get across.
We *cannot* make a choice between what is copyrighted and what isnt just because it suits us.
What is the deciding factor when it comes to copyrighted material? ISO Talk?
Whats the difference between talking about ISOs, and talking about ROM compatibility under an emulator? I dont see any difference.
This isnt about a holier than thou attitude, I just feel that sometimes its made too easy to talk about copied tgames just because they run under an emulator.
Software patent
One possible definition of a Software patent, supported by the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII), is that it is a patent on any performance of a computer realised by means of a computer program.[1] However, the term does not have a commonly recognised meaning.
A related term is Computer-implemented invention (CII), which is used by the European Patent Office (EPO). Although the term is again not well defined, One EPO definition of a CII is "an invention whose implementation involves the use of a computer, computer network or other programmable apparatus, the invention having one or more features which are realised wholly or partly by means of a computer program." [2]
There is intense debate as to what extent either software patents or patents on computer-implemented inventions should be granted, if at all.
Patent what is it.
A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to a patentee (the inventor or assignee) for a limited period of time.
To obtain a patent, inventors must file patent applications in each and every country that they want protection in, such as Japan, China, the US or India. Some regional offices exist, such as the European Patent Office (EPO), which act as supranational bodies with the power to grant patents which can then be brought into effect in the member states.
Patent applications also have one or more claims which set out the boundaries of the invention that the inventor asserts is his/her original and non-obvious invention. The claims also describe what third parties are not allowed to do without permission from the patent proprietor. A patent claim is a one sentence definition of a given invention. For software inventions, such claims are often in the form of a computer-implemented method or a system for implementing the invention.
Patents are not granted automatically in most countries but must usually undergo an examination process in which a patent examiner determines if the applicant is entitled to the patent claims they are requesting. If so, then the claims are allowed and a patent issues, often only on payment of a grant or issue fee.
Once a patent issues in a given country, the patent owner can prevent others from making, using or selling the claimed invention in that country. Patents are generally enforceable for up to 20 years. Different countries have different standards for allowing patents. This is particularly true of software or computer-implemented inventions. Thus a particular computer based patent application may be granted a patent in one country, such as the US or Australia where such applications are more likely to be accepted, but be deemed unpatentable by other patent offices such as the EPO
Dude, I think whatever it is your trying to prove, has somehow turned into an unfair ultimadum for me? I will not post any information about how it is legal to backup your own games for your own use. (I think that would promote piracy) I can't believe we have talked about it this much... Like I said, I feel I am being unfairly picked on here. And that it not right. I have PMed Wraggster, and reported your little ultimadum to me as a bad post. Hopefully we can all just drop this, and get back to getting along. We all are "good" members on this site...I hate fighting, and I won't do it...
And i totaly agree with you mike there should be no talk period what you should do is close this thread i was looking at you guys go at it back an forth for a long time and all you really need to do is close it you have the autority right. I just got a little offended when you made the comment about Mr. Shizzy so thats why i brought the rules out well my wife emailed them to me. Any ways i respect you dcemu and the gaming industry in general so please close this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDX
well said. good closing comment. thread closed.
Just to add something, heres a link on backing up games....Though it says its illegal in the U.S. it is legal in other countries.