Is emulating retro games a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter somethingtodo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

somethingtodo

Guest
I love retro games like the original mario series, etc. In the past I have always just downloaded the games online to play on a computer. I know stealing is a sin, and that digital piracy is considered stealing and therefore sinful as well. But what about playing old games that are no longer produced and sold? I also do not have any of the original consoles, so emulation has been my only option so far. I haven’t given it much thought until now, so I have decided stop playing them altogether until I have a definitive answer.
 
I’m not 100% sure, but I’m pretty sure it would be a sin, especially nowadays with things like Nintendo’s virtual console to legally purchase and download the games. (I know there’s something similar on Playstation, and I’m assuming there’s something similar on Xbox as well). Retro games are also periodically released in disk form as collections (50 classic games in 1, etc.) That’s my 2 cents.
 
It seems clear that the violation of a copyright is not precisely the same thing as stealing, since it does not involve depriving another of his or her property. That does not automatically make it acceptable, however.

In principle, the violation of a just civil law (e.g. copyright) is wrong. However, many modern laws are purely penal, meaning that their violation does not involve a direct moral fault, but simply subjects one to the possibility of judicial punishment. It is not always clear whether a given law is purely penal or not.

Since copyright is simply an grant to a private entity of sovereign authority’s right to regulate commercial transactions, one could argue that royalties and the like are equivalent to indirect taxes, which are purely penal according to the most common view of modern theologians.

If one accepted this analogy, then while it would clearly follow that any behavior which caused notable harm to a copyright holder (e.g. making a copyrighted work publicly available without paying royalties) would be a form of unjust damage, it would seem that simple personal use of pirated software would not be morally illicit.

However, the argument is tentative, and I’m not entirely sure of it myself.

Another factor that complicates your situation is that you already have these games downloaded, so it is simply a question of actively playing them. Possession and use of pirated materials is not against the law, but the process whereby a computer activates a program may legally constitute “copying”, depending on certain technical considerations.

Reference for the premsies I’ve drawn from moral theology:

 
If there’s a legitimate way to still buy and play those games then yes it would be a sin to pirate them. Now if it was a game where the consoles and games where no longer available, then it would be "out of print " so to speak and and downloading it would be fine.

But since Nintendo still lets you download most of their old games on their newer consoles, than yes, it’s stealing.
 
Last edited:
I do not know if it is always pirating, and thus the sin of stealing. The old emulator games I have played, which aren’t too many, have been games I have already purchased and paid for the intellectual property.

There are also many other considerations. The EU is ahead of the United States in addressing the legal limbo of “abandonware.” In some cases there is no longer a company that even holds the copyright. In others, there simply is not desire to enforce the rights of programs they abandon.

If you are concerned, talk to a priest. I have no more conscientious issue with this than I would picking up an item someone left at the dump.
 
I have a similar situation sometimes.
I translate things, and I have been asked to translate works that are not available in English to English, though not for a official company or such, but fan sites. It is a complex issue as on one hand it is unavailable to those reading, and I am making it available, and even providing links to buy the original language version to provide money to the author, etc. I am not hindering the sale of the original product. It is possible I am even helping it. But, on the other, I don’t think it’s legal.
But, I feel like this is a little different from having ie am r4 card (which I do have) and downloading games on it when you can purchase them if you had the money. Usually you can buy a lot of these games. what retro games are you playing? It might depend on the answer
 
somethingtodo said:
I know stealing is a sin, and that digital piracy is considered stealing and therefore sinful as well.
Click to expand...
It is called stealing in order to get people to judge it as a particularly bad thing to do. But it isn’t stealing. Stealing deprives someone of his property. Making a digital copy of something in no way deprives the owner of his property.

It is a violation of copyright law. But modern copyright law itself is offensive and unjust.

Personally I don’t know that it is sinful or if it is I don’t think it is a serious sin. I definitely don’t think it is a sin for something which is no longer produced by the copyright holder.
 
The answer depends on copyright law, since sometimes the owners of a copyright fail to renew it and the item goes into the public domain.

Copyright law is how we have decided to justly compensate people who do the work to produce something like a means of entertainment. That is all these games are. You have no need of them and have no excuse to violate a law meant to compensate the persons who did the work of producing the games for the purpose of generating revenue from people’s disposable income.

Consider that the time spent playing these games rather than making better use of your time may be a bigger spiritual issue than compensating someone who has no expectation that anyone will pay to use their game any more. That isn’t to say it is OK to violate copyright law. It is to say that even being on this forum is something we need to do with a question about whether it is eating into better ways of using our time (and even better ways to spend recreational time).
 
Last edited:
exnihilo said:
It is called stealing in order to get people to judge it as a particularly bad thing to do. But it isn’t stealing. Stealing deprives someone of his property. Making a digital copy of something in no way deprives the owner of his property.

It is a violation of copyright law. But modern copyright law itself is offensive and unjust.
Click to expand...
It’s s stealing because it is depriving somebody of the revenue they’d make off their intellectual property. Just because it isn’t physical doesn’t mean it can’t be stolen.
 
Laura_N said:
It’s s stealing because it is depriving somebody of the revenue they’d make off their intellectual property
Click to expand...
This may be true in some cases, but the one described here is a situation where property used is no longer for sale, and in most cases, no longer in the inventory of the copyright owner. I think it should cause us pause about being very dogmatic about this when this type of use is never a crime (it is not legally stealing or fraud), and in which the limits of the actual rights can only be determined by case law.

I have found that what Nintendo (for example) says is its legal rights is not always what the courts will say are their legal rights. In fact, they themselves have lost copyright suits. Here, we are not dealing with something that one can go and pick up at Game Stop.

Then there is the issue of fair use which permits one to use intellectual property purchased for personal use. I think in some of these issues the rather shady tactics used by corporations are far more morally questionable than that use by the end user who is trying to be honest. (cough, cough, Microsoft)

Again, though, none of this stuff is criminal. It is only a matter of civil litigation.
 
Last edited:
pnewton said:
Here, we are not dealing with something that one can go and pick up at Game Stop.
Click to expand...
Game Stop actually sells used copies of vintage games on their website. https://m.gamestop.com/pages/storefront/retroclassics But that also brings up the fact that you could buy a used copy from 3rd parties like a friend for example. Playing on the original hardware is always the best way to go in my opinion, but there is something nice about having all of you games a click away on a computer with a large high resolution display that makes it easier to see and play.
 
It depends on how it’s done. Some retro games have been donated to online libraries, allowing emulation legally and free of charge. Digital piracy is sinful, but making use of freeware libraries is not.
 
Add the beginning of the Book of Mark to your reading, the parable about the corn. Then, make your decision.
 
I used to agree with the position that modern copyright law is unjust, but I don’t think it’s fully defensible. The state has a right to tax transactions, so there’s no reason in principle why it can’t delegate that authority. Even if it is admitted that the laws are purely penal in character, and that it is therefore not sinful for an individual to violate them, those who inflict positive economic damage on a copyright holder (by making the work publicly available illegally) would still be acting seriously wrongly.
 
If an individual illegally copies something for their own personal use, the copyright holder is in the same position as if the individual had done nothing. This is incomparable with theft, which inflicts positive damage on the property owner.
 
Last edited:
Laura_N said:
It’s s stealing because it is depriving somebody of the revenue they’d make off their intellectual property. Just because it isn’t physical doesn’t mean it can’t be stolen.
Click to expand...
No, you can only steal physical things. Stealing is depriving someone of his use of his property. You can’t deprive the use of something digital (we’ll actually you can, that is what the media companies try to do to us).

The taking of potential revenue argument isn’t a good one. That means then anytime you turn down someone for work you are stealing from him.
Arkansan said:
I used to agree with the position that modern copyright law is unjust, but I don’t think it’s fully defensible. The state has a right to tax transactions, so there’s no reason in principle why it can’t delegate that authority. Even if it is admitted that the laws are purely penal in character, and that it is therefore not sinful for an individual to violate them, those who inflict positive economic damage on a copyright holder (by making the work publicly available illegally) would still be acting seriously wrongly.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure it is just to be able to own ideas, which is the foundation of copyright law. The injustice of the law is also in the fact the state only enforces penalties against the common man and not against the corporations who violate the law by making false copyright claims.
 
If you go through the work of developing a product, you also ought to retain the right to refrain from distributing it.

The work under discussion here is not an “idea.” It is a body of software that provides entertainment just as surely as a doll or a truck does.

No one is saying the OP is not free to produce a game just like the one under discussion for his own use. The question is whether he may obtain a copy of a work that its producer copyrighted so that the producer could be compensated.

There are free games that can be had on the internet. Their owners are giving them away for free, as is their right. It ought to be assumed that owners not doing that who did bother to keep their copyright current do not intend to do that.

Again, copying that is within copyright law is OK. For instance, if you own a CD, it is OK to make an MP3 copy or a backup copy for your own use.
 
Last edited:
Which game are you talking about? Please tell us which game is no longer sold as i can’t really understand why you wouldn’t be able to get a game on ebay.
 
The mainstream Nintendo games, such as the Super Mario Bros for the nes and Pokemon games for the gameboy.
 
exnihilo said:
Stealing is depriving someone of his use of his property. You can’t deprive the use of something digital
Click to expand...
The conclusion does not follow the premise. Property need not be physical. Musical arrangements, fictional characters and stories, made-up words, etc. could all be considered as ‘property’.

Whether this applies to digital piracy is another question, but digital or even merely ideal goods can still be ‘property’
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top