Um...I wouldn't be getting legal advice on copyright from Nintendo. For starters, let me say that as of the enactment of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, it is indeed illegal to make a copy of a videogame PERIOD. As for the copies themselves, that's a legal grey zone for the following reason:
Basic copyright law stipulates a "personal use" exception to the "no copying" rule. Big Media (Dawkins wept, that's a sorry word to have to type) have been desperate to argue that this only applies if they were selling it in the absence of a licensing agreement, which they claim they are most certainly not. Their claimed stipulations are that the money you give them in exchange for the product (videogame) only covers the purchase outright of the media itself. Therefore, the only thing you technically own is a blank disc, cartridge, or card, and an intangible LICENSE. There are three problems with this:
1. There is no attempt whatsoever to convey this to the consumer in a clear and forthright manner. Consequently...
2. The consumer's yea or nay is never established.
3. And besides all that, this entire legal theory conveniently assumes that an EULA is legally binding. In reality, NO SUCH TEST OF LEGALITY HAS BEEN MADE. In other words, no court has ever ruled on the validity of an EULA, and never will, if Big Media has its way.
Now do you see the grey zone?
It is, of course, still patently illegal to make a copy of a work not in the public domain and distribute it.
(IANAL).
Edited by Eurysilas, 12 March 2010 - 06:03 PM.
