Support NeoGAF

[Krejlooc]

You might want to unknot those knickers mate.

This is what I was referring to:

"It has always been our intention to release the relevant source code for the open source emulators used within RetroN 5. We have not been as quick as we could have been, since we have been busy improving the RetroN 5 user experience. The relevant source code has now been released. From this point forward we will not only keep our copy of this code updated for those who wish to obtain the latest version, but also submit patches for any fixes that we implement back to the original projects so that the entire community may benefit. Hyperkin will continue to endeavor to fulfill the licenses of any project used within RetroN 5 and any other software we write."

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/20...infringing_on_the_rights_of_emulator_creators

"Back to the original projects"

That is admitting guilt in my book.

And my comparison is perfectly apt and suitable. If you choose to ignore it, good for you.

Way to prove my point. This isnt at all what we are talking about. We are talking about the retron 5 selling code whose gpl license forbids commercial use.

Your compariosn is poor, as is your comprehension of the situation. SUPPORTING THE RETRON 5 IS SUPPORTING THEFT.

 

[RenegadeXV8]

That would be really cool. My Game Gear died a couple of years ago and didn't really feel like paying $50 for a used one.

 

[Cody_D165]

as dumb as this sounds that might actually be the tipping point to get me to buy a Retron 5

I've been leaning toward buying one anyway for convenience but this would be the definitive way to play Game Gear carts. The Game Gear is seriously the only console I've ever owned where it's flat out more preferable to play its games via emulation than the original hardware...

 

[runnin_blue]

Way to prove my point. This isnt at all what we are talking about. We are talking about the retron 5 selling code whose gpl license forbids commercial use.

Your compariosn is poor, as is your comprehension of the situation. SUPPORTING THE RETRON 5 IS SUPPORTING THEFT.

Lol.

Actually the thread is about Game Gear support coming to the Retron5.

My comprehension is fine as is my comparison.

I really enjoy my Retron5 and I am not a thief haha.

You really seem like you need a holiday or something

Enjoy your day.

 

[tim_pkmn89]

Way to prove my point. This isnt at all what we are talking about. We are talking about the retron 5 selling code whose gpl license forbids commercial use.

Your compariosn is poor, as is your comprehension of the situation. SUPPORTING THE RETRON 5 IS SUPPORTING THEFT.

And supporting the emulators isn't?

 

[FSLink]

Lol.

Actually the thread is about Game Gear support coming to the Retron5.

My comprehension is fine as is my comparison.

I really enjoy my Retron5 and I am not a thief haha.

You really seem like you need a holiday or something

Enjoy your day.

Man, do you really lack that much reading comprehension? It's supporting theft, not you being a thief. You're okay with a company stealing other people's hard work.

And supporting the emulators isn't?

Emulation is not illegal nor is emulation theft.

 

[Krejlooc]

Lol.

Actually the thread is about Game Gear support coming to the Retron5.

My comprehension is fine as is my comparison.

I really enjoy my Retron5 and I am not a thief haha.

You really seem like you need a holiday or something

Enjoy your day.

This is the equivalent of sticking your ears in your fingers. It's fine if you are ok with buying stolen goods, but in no way has this been settled, hyperkin hasn't "come clean," and your comparison is terrible.

And supporting the emulators isn't?

No, it isn't.

 

[SmiteOfHand]

Way to prove my point. This isnt at all what we are talking about. We are talking about the retron 5 selling code whose gpl license forbids commercial use.

That isn't true. GPL allows commercial uses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Terms_and_conditions

People's beef with the Retron is other aspects of its uses of the code and it looks like they are making efforts to meet those requirements.

 

[runnin_blue]

Man, do you really lack that much reading comprehension? It's supporting theft, not you being a thief. You're okay with a company stealing other people's hard work.

No I don't lack reading comprehension, but thanks for asking. I'm happy with my Retron5 and glad I ordered one.

This is a tricky situation as Hyperkin is not taking food out of the emulator author's mouths as they chose not to monetize their emulators. If they were selling their emulators, then the situation would be different imo. As per my original post, I ordered my Retron5 before this info came out. I already mentioned I think it's a shady practice though, is your comprehension ok or did you miss that bit?

As a customer in my situation, I don't feel guilty one bit.

There is also the issue of how legally binding these licenses are. I'm no law expert but where are the court cases? I don't buy the "we don't have enough money to litigate" line. I'm sure if their case was so watertight they could find a solicitor who would take payment after the case is won and Hyperkin are forced to pay damages and a cut of their profits.

But anyway, we've derailed this thread enough I think.

This is the equivalent of sticking your ears in your fingers. It's fine if you are ok with buying stolen goods, but in no way has this been settled, hyperkin hasn't "come clean," and your comparison is terrible.

Buddy. I'm not going to go back and forth with you, repeating the same bullshit. I love my Retron5 and you enjoy not having one up their on your high horse.

 

[Krejlooc]

That isn't true. GPL allows commercial uses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Terms_and_conditions

There are several GPL models, like AGPL, that explicitly prohibits commercial use. Retroarch actually details the violations and points out which ones were not licensed for any commercial use:

http://www.libretro.com/index.php/retroarch-license-violations/

Genesis Plus GX
1. It uses the open-source emulator ‘Genesis Plus GX’ by author Eke-Eke for its Sega Genesis/Mega Drive module (https://github.com/ekeeke/Genesis-Plus-GX). This core has been licensed under a non-commercial license. It can therefore not be sold as, or part of, a commercial product.

SNES9x Next

2. It uses the open-source emulator ‘SNES9x Next’, which is itself a derivative of SNES9x (https://github.com/libretro/snes9x-next). I (Squarepusher) personally made this version of SNES9x. It has a few differences compared to normal SNES9x. It has SuperFX overclocking code and it has certain game speed hacks that make games run faster on slower hardware. This comes at the expense of some graphics inaccuracies though.

We could tell it was the SNES9x Next core because the exact same strings for variables to do with the speed hacks and the SuperFX overclock code popped up in their SNES core.

SNES9x is licensed under a non-commercial license. Like Genesis Plus GX, it can therefore not be a part of a commercial product.

People's beef with the Retron is other aspects of its uses of the code and it looks like they are making efforts to meet those requirements.

No, the beef is that retron is selling emulators which explicitly forbid commercial distribution.

This is a tricky situation

Only for those trying to justify why they support thieves.

Buddy. I'm not going to go back and forth with you, repeating the same bullshit. I love my Retron5 and you enjoy not having one up their on your high horse.

How much you love the goods that were ill gotten is irrelevant. There is no bullshit here, other than claims that hyperkin "came clean."

 

[FSLink]

No I don't lack reading comprehension, but thanks for asking. I'm happy with my Retron5 and glad I ordered one.

This is a tricky situation as Hyperkin is not taking food out of the emulator author's mouths as they chose not to monetize their emulators. If they were selling their emulators, then the situation would be different imo. As per my original post, I ordered my Retron5 before this info came out. I already mentioned I think it's a shady practice though, is your comprehension ok or did you miss that bit?

It is, and I read that, but thanks for asking.

As a customer in my situation, I don't feel guilty one bit.

I don't think you are obligated to return it or anything, but I do think it's basically pissing on emulator developers' good work. That stuff isn't easy to do, and if I had one, I'd probably keep it because I already paid for it, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone to buy. That's just me.

Buddy. I'm not going to go back and forth with you, repeating the same bullshit. I love my Retron5 and you enjoy not having one up their on your high horse.

It's not much of a high horse, they're using stolen code and they're profiting off of it.

 

[SmiteOfHand]

No, the beef is that retron is selling emulators which explicitly forbid commercial distribution.

Thanks for the info, I had missed the modified licenses with my first glance at this months back and mostly heard about the closed system.

They are making efforts to rectify the situation, though, you can't deny that. They'd have to gut those cores and replace them, obviously, to be fully be complaint, but I will take any effort over "Fuck you, sue us if you want anything done."

 

[Krejlooc]

They are making efforts to rectify the situation, though, you can't deny that.

No they aren't. They wont even acknowledge they have stolen the cores. Their rebuttle to people saying "wait a sec, you are stealing these cores not meant for commercial distribution, and on top of that, you haven't even disclosed the modified source codes for those who fall under the normal gpl" was "oh my gosh, thanks for pointing that out. Here is our source :v" then staying quiet for a year and a half.

And here we are now, all this time and they still havent acknowledged the stolen code, they keep selling it, and on top of it all, they are evidentally spending their time developing more hardware instead of making the one they have legal.

They aren't making good on this at all, and thats the problem. And thats why people keep bringing it up over and over again, because this is extremely wrong. This is blatent theft.

 

[SmiteOfHand]

I hear you. They are not doing enough, quickly enough. By all means continue the social pressure of yelling about it anytime their products come up.

I still think it is commendable that they are making any effort at all and I think terms like blatant theft are overly dramatic.

 

[NyMartin90]

Don't have a retron 5 but I'm seriously thinking about one now, all of the LCD mods on the Game Gear don't have the full results I wanted when I did them. This would make some games crystal clear.
It may be counter productive but I know I can't connect my Game Gear to my BVM, if I could connect a Retron to my BVM it would make my GG games even better.

 

[Uhyve]

And my comparison is perfectly apt and suitable. If you choose to ignore it, good for you.

You're trying to equate patent infringement and copyright infringement. Barely comparable. Patents can suck it, copyrights make sense.

Someone spent time writing code, released it for free under the conditions that it's not used for profit, then someone used it for profit. That's wrong and encourages people to not be so charitable.

It's not like they have no recourse either. Whenever I've released code as open source, anyone can use it however they want as long as it's not for profit. But people can still contact me to get permission for commercial use, possibly with some sort of royalty agreement (generally I wouldn't care but if it's a big project then yeah, I'd want a cut). Retroarch probably didn't want to risk having to pay royalties to the people who actually did the work.

 

[Krejlooc]

I hear you. They are not doing enough, quickly enough. By all means continue the social pressure of yelling about it anytime their products come up.

I still think it is commendable that they are making any effort at all and I think terms like blatant theft are overly dramatic.

What effort? It's not that they arent going fast enough, its that they aren't doing anything. They won't even acknowledge this. They have done nothing to fix the situation.

 

[runnin_blue]

You're trying to equate patent infringement and copyright infringement. Barely comparable. Patents can suck it, copyrights make sense.

Someone spent time writing code, released it for free under the conditions that it's not used for profit, then someone used it for profit. That's wrong and encourages people to not be so charitable.

It's not like they have no recourse either. Whenever I've released code as open source, anyone can use it however they want as long as it's not for profit. But people can still contact me to get permission for commercial use, possibly with some sort of royalty agreement (generally I wouldn't care but if it's a big project then yeah, I'd want a cut). Retroarch probably didn't want to risk having to pay royalties to the people who actually did the work.

I'm interested to hear your opinion on what I wrote before:

There is also the issue of how legally binding these licenses are. I'm no law expert but where are the court cases? I don't buy the "we don't have enough money to litigate" line. I'm sure if their case was so watertight they could find a solicitor who would take payment after the case is won and Hyperkin are forced to pay damages and a cut of their profits.

Do you have any experience with this?

 

[Krejlooc]

I'm interested to hear your opinion on what I wrote before:



Do you have any experience with this?

You are asking about the legality of the gpl? It holds up.

http://blog.getmiro.com/2008/08/open-license-upheld-in-us-court/

Project I am working on, legal just came in and demanded we switch to a different fast fourier transform library because their gpl license didnt allow for commercial distribution and, while our project technically isnt commercial, the worry was we could get sued based on precedent.

 

[runnin_blue]

You are asking about the legality of the gpl? It holds up.

http://blog.getmiro.com/2008/08/open-license-upheld-in-us-court/

Project I am working on, legal just came in and demanded we switch to a different fast fourier transform library because their gpl license didnt allow for commercial distribution and, while our project technically isnt commercial, the worry was we could get sued based on precedent.

I wasn't asking you mate.

 

[Massa]

There are several GPL models, like AGPL, that explicitly prohibits commercial use. Retroarch actually details the violations and points out which ones were not licensed for any commercial use:

Just to clarify some bits here.

GPL is one specific license. AGPL and LGPL are slightly different software licenses also published by the Free Software Foundation but what they have in common is "The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0)." (that includes commercial use).

That said, one thing the GPL requires is that you publish any modifications you make to a program when you redistribute it. What happens when you don't is that you lose the rights to redistribute that software. It's perfectly fine for you to still use software released under the GPL even if Retron is violating the license, they lose their distribution rights, but you as a user is not affected.

The quotes you added that I snipped, from licenses of emulators that don't allow commercial use, are another case of Retron violating copyright law. But those emulators are not "open source" or "Free Software", the restriction on commercial use doesn't exist in either model.

 

[Krejlooc]

I wasn't asking you mate.

Then ask next time in a pm.

 

[runnin_blue]

Then ask next time in a pm.

Are you a mod now too or do you just like the sound of your own voice? Don't tell me what to do. And don't backseat mod.

 

[Uhyve]

I'm interested to hear your opinion on what I wrote before:



Do you have any experience with this?

Honestly, I'm just a programmer that tries to stay as far away from lawyers as possible. That's where the entirety of my law knowledge comes from (i.e. not being sued). So I don't know much about enforceability of GPL, but I certainly wouldn't be the one who tries to test it, because from what I understand, the wording in the licensing is very specific.

Project I am working on, legal just came in and demanded we switch to a different fast fourier transform library because their gpl license didnt allow for commercial distribution and, while our project technically isnt commercial, the worry was we could get sued based on precedent.

Heh, this is what I'm talking about, we stay as far away from this stuff as possible if money is involved.

 

[Krejlooc]

Just to clarify some bits here.

GPL is one specific license. AGPL and LGPL are slightly different software licenses also published by the Free Software Foundation but what they have in common is "The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0)." (that includes commercial use).

That said, one thing the GPL requires is that you publish any modifications you make to a program when you redistribute it. What happens when you don't is that you lose the rights to redistribute that software. It's perfectly fine for you to still use software released under the GPL even if Retron is violating the license, they lose their distribution rights, but you as a user is not affected.

The quotes you added that I snipped, from licenses of emulators that don't allow commercial use, are another case of Retron violating copyright law. But those emulators are not "open source" or "Free Software", the restriction on commercial use doesn't exist in either model.

Section 7 of the agpl v3.0 license is what makes non commercial provisions acceptable. The "additional terms and restrictions" section. It is why gens ex plus, as an example, claims "modified agpl v3"

Are you a mod now too or do you just like the sound of your own voice? Don't tell me what to do. And don't backseat mod.

You posted a question on a public forum, I am free to answer however I please. Thats how forums work.

 

[runnin_blue]

Honestly, I'm just a programmer that tries to stay as far away from lawyers as possible. That's where the entirety of my law knowledge comes from (i.e. Not being sued). So I don't know much about enforceability of GPL, but I certainly wouldn't be the one who tries to test it, because from what I understand, the wording in the licensing is very specific.

Fair enough. Thanks for the reply.

 

[FSLink]

Are you a mod now too or do you just like the sound of your own voice? Don't tell me what to do. And don't backseat mod.

It's not like he was being rude, he was providing information.

 

[NoFaceNico]

Are you a mod now too or do you just like the sound of your own voice? Don't tell me what to do. And don't backseat mod.

Wow, some people are so respectful to others when they know they're wrong, aren't they? It's adorable.

 

[Kai Ozu]

Neo Geo pocket PLEASE.

 

[Krejlooc]

Heh, this is what I'm talking about, we stay as far away from this stuff as possible if money is involved.

That's what legal is for, protecting our money. Legal is the second biggest month-to-month expenditure at my company. The fear of legal recourse is extreme.

Just to clarify - actually licensing a technology is fine, that's why commercial licenses exist in the first place. But you'll spend way more fighting a violation than you would have spent just paying for a license in the first place.

And, contrary to what someone else said in this topic, "they didn't offer it for sale in the first place!" isn't justification for ignoring their license. Sometimes things simply aren't for sale.

 

[runnin_blue]

Wow, some people are so respectful to others when they know they're wrong, aren't they? It's adorable.

I haven't been proven wrong about anything champ, but thanks for your 2 cents. I have been called pretty cute & adorable before though *blushes*

 

[RedSwirl]

Might need to check it out then. The screen on my Game Gear went out a while ago and I was contemplating buying a new one.

I fucking HATE Sonic 2 on Game Gear.

Triple Trouble on the other hand was good.

Thank God somebody agrees with me.

 

[SteveWinwood]

lol don't tell me what to do

 

[Rich!]

Jesus fuck.

This thread is a prime example why talking about anything emulation related, especially when it comes down to rights and legal ramifications, is a goddamn nigh on impossible nightmare.

Yes, you may be happy with your device. No, that fact does not magically turn what Hyperkin are doing into something that can be deemed acceptable. And yes, people as sure as hell should be made aware of exactly what they are buying into (theft from hard working hobbyist programmers) when they buy a retron.

 

[Krejlooc]

Jesus fuck.

This thread is a prime example why talking about anything emulation related, especially when it comes down to rights and legal ramifications, is a goddamn nigh on impossible nightmare.

It's also a prime example of why selling things you don't own and aren't legally able to sell isn't good for your business.

 

[Stabby McSter]

I thought Sonic Chaos was pretty good too.

i hate sonic chaos because it had the ugliest sprites

 

[Irnbru]

I haven't been proven wrong about anything champ, but thanks for your 2 cents. I have been called pretty cute & adorable before though *blushes*

The beauty of enjoying theft.

 

[runnin_blue]

The beauty of enjoying theft.

 

[Rich!]

Sorry, but you're coming off as disrespectful, arrogant and quite simply rude here.

Krejlooc is one of the most respected members here, and he has been posting quite well thought out and insightful posts, of which you have responded with an immature rebuttal for each one.

It's a shame, and seems to be happening more and more here on GAF.

 

[Pandy]

Are you a mod now too or do you just like the sound of your own voice? Don't tell me what to do. And don't backseat mod.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Game gear sucks though.

I had one as a kid, it was neat playing color games on the go, but the game boy had far better games.

 

[PAULINK]

hey guys what's going on in here

 

[Timeless]

Only took 6 posts.

Haha, those Retroarch people are such dorks for caring about copyright law! Who cares if they work for free and then have other people illegally sell their work?

 

[c0de]

Haha, those Retroarch people are such dorks for caring about copyright law! Who cares if they work for free and then have other people illegally sell their work?

Because of copyright violations. The people who wrote the code don't want it to be part of a commercial product, retron doesn't care.

 

[Rich!]

Because of copyright violations. The people who wrote the code don't want it to be part of a commercial product, retron doesn't care.

He was being sarcastic

 

[Durante]

Jesus fuck.

This thread is a prime example why talking about anything emulation related, especially when it comes down to rights and legal ramifications, is a goddamn nigh on impossible nightmare.

Yes, you may be happy with your device. No, that fact does not magically turn what Hyperkin are doing into something that can be deemed acceptable. And yes, people as sure as hell should be made aware of exactly what they are buying into (theft from hard working hobbyist programmers) when they buy a retron.

This has nothing to do with emulation really, and everything to do with a shady company violating the license agreements on code they use.

If you look at e.g. the Xenia thread you can see that there's no problem talking about emulation in general.

I wasn't asking you mate.

I think in addition to learning how the GPL and its variants work you should learn how discussion forums work.

 

[djtiesto]

Back on topic, some good games to check out for the Game Gear:

Defenders of Oasis - An awesome turn-based RPG with an Arabian Nights inspired setting.

Sylvan Tale - A great action RPG where you can turn into different animals. May very well be my favorite on the system. Japan only but a fan translation exists.

Ax Battler - If Golden Axe Warrior was a Zelda 1 rip, this is the Zelda 2 rip. Pretty fun even if the encounter rate is high.

Kishin Douji Zenki - really nice looking platformer, Japan only.

Psychic World - an early game in the system, it's a platformer with a number of cool abilities and slightly nonlinear levels.

 

[-Tanooki-]

Sad shame this thread partly broke down into the usual crybaby droning on about shady tactics. What's done is done, most people don't care and few do. The only ones who really should care are those who made the programs, and if they're not going to bother, it's pointless to keep waving flags about it. I'd buy another, hell if I were loaded I'd buy them for anyone who could use one. They're great systems and do the job very well, short of some pirate games and copier carts not working.

This is great news. I had a GG towards the end of its life and there are a good supply of games, and most often you find a system these days it has cap issues (screen, speaker, both), no battery covers, or is scratched to hell. It also gives one hope when company periods end on other systems, like the N64, something like that could be added too. If anything that system needs it the most since 1st gen 3D systems work like garbage off CRT screens for one reason or another making even some games just entirely unplayable. Rogue Squadron is a good example on the N64.

 

[p_xavier]

hmm, I might end up grabbing a Retron 5 just to use as a Game Boy/Game Gear machine on my TV.

Famicom mini's are still not supported for FDS based titles. Pisses me off.

 

[protomouse]

People get GPL mixed up in all of this. First of all, AGPL is based on GPL. Neither license precludes commercial distribution. I'm not sure where Krejlooc is getting his information, but there's AFAIK no GPL variant that prohibits commercial use. Furthermore, by imposing your own restrictions on top of the GPL you are sure to create a license that is not GPL (as permitted by FSF), nor GPL-compatible. So there's no "their GPL".

Now, a legal team may have other objections against GPL. Linking GPL'd code in your project means you have to distribute your own code under equal terms. This is a big no no for many corporations, and for this reason LGPL exists - to allow interoperability between proprietary projects and free software (though FSF actively discourages it).

The provided examples are not GPL:

Genplus looks like it's using a modified Xiph license. The authors added a non-commercial clause. Thus, it's not free software.

Snes9x, again, is not free software. It uses a modified MIT-like license. Again, the authors themselves have added a non-commercial clause.

If the makers of Retron do not distribute whatever GPL'd source they use/modify, they are indeed violating the GPL. Whether they run a for-profit operation is irrelevant as far as the GPL is concerned. They are violating the ad-hoc non-commercial clauses provided by some authors, but that has little to do with free- and open source software in general. Other companies continually sell such code on a much greater scale.

Again, selling code under GPL (or many of the non-modified permissive licenses) is not a violation in and of itself.