Can publishers release old consoles games on steam on the premise that they want to earn money but also preserve games?

[MrSteel300]

Like say there are a lot of old ps2 games for example which are forever locked on the console and have copyrighted content like actors and songs which don't belong to the publisher, could publisher ask the court "hey we just want to release def jam fight for ny cause it's important to preserve games for the betterment of human society but we also want to earn a profit as an incentive" , is this possible in say eu and usa? if not , then why not, shouldn't courts do what's better for us humans like you and me?

[Brian9824]

Why wouldn't it be possible? Publishers can release their games on any platform they want but it takes time and money to port them and they have to feel the sales will justify the cost to port them.

The courts have nothing to do with publishers releasing their products on another platform. The only way it wouldn't be possible would be if the publisher had a contract with a specific console in which they agreed to exclusivity to that console

[Crazy Tiger]

If they want to, yes, though it would require removing the copyrighted content that has expired. One has to keep in mind, though, that such things aren't always seen as a worthwhile investment by the IP-holders.

Also keep in mind that "preservation" is something people make up as being important. Obviously there is no court that will rule about it since it's not obliged to preserve things like games to begin with.

[Brian9824]

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

If they want to, yes. One has to keep in mind, though, that such things aren't always seen as a worthwhile investment by the IP-holders.

Also assuming that the developer/publisher didn't have an exclusivity deal with the platform it was first released on

[Start_Running]

They can. and many do.
SEGA, Capcom, Konami, Bandai/Namco

Can they do this with stuf they don't own the rights to?
NO.

[Kargor]

They can release their games for any "premise" that they want. In fact, unless there are contractual obstacles that they need to overcome with the developers, licenses etc., they don't need to give any reason at all.

[Wolfpig]

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

Also keep in mind that "preservation" is something people make up as being important.

I always thought they call it preservation to justify their (depending on country) non legal way of obtaining the stuff. (aside from the term abandonware)

[rawWwRrr]

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

Like say there are a lot of old ps2 games for example which are forever locked on the console and have copyrighted content like actors and songs which don't belong to the publisher, could publisher ask the court "hey we just want to release def jam fight for ny cause it's important to preserve games for the betterment of human society but we also want to earn a profit as an incentive" , is this possible in say eu and usa? if not , then why not, shouldn't courts do what's better for us humans like you and me?

As long as the licensed material is still under license, they shouldn't have to ask anyone for the right to release an old game on Steam.

But that's the catch: licenses.

Often licenses have an expiration date. We've seen a quite few games get pulled from the sale because the licenses to music, likeness, whatever, expired and the publisher felt it wasn't worth the effort or cost to extend the licenses.

Once a license expires, a publisher has to make a choice: either pull the game from sale or task the devs to remove/replace said material. Either solution incurs a cost that has to be justified against possible future sales.

A publisher can't just sell a game with unlicensed content. It puts them financially at risk as well as the distributor, this being Valve via Steam. And a judge isn't going to tell artists that they have to give away their intellectual property "for the good of the gamer!!!" Artists got to eat too.

So there's often a long costly process to release an old game for sale. Perhaps if there's enough general interest, they'll do it. Otherwise, fire up those old consoles.

[MrSteel300]

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

Like say there are a lot of old ps2 games for example which are forever locked on the console and have copyrighted content like actors and songs which don't belong to the publisher, could publisher ask the court "hey we just want to release def jam fight for ny cause it's important to preserve games for the betterment of human society but we also want to earn a profit as an incentive" , is this possible in say eu and usa? if not , then why not, shouldn't courts do what's better for us humans like you and me?

As long as the licensed material is still under license, they shouldn't have to ask anyone for the right to release an old game on Steam.

But that's the catch: licenses.

Often licenses have an expiration date. We've seen a quite few games get pulled from the sale because the licenses to music, likeness, whatever, expired and the publisher felt it wasn't worth the effort or cost to extend the licenses.

Once a license expires, a publisher has to make a choice: either pull the game from sale or task the devs to remove/replace said material. Either solution incurs a cost that has to be justified against possible future sales.

A publisher can't just sell a game with unlicensed content. It puts them financially at risk as well as the distributor, this being Valve via Steam. And a judge isn't going to tell artists that they have to give away their intellectual property "for the good of the gamer!!!" Artists got to eat too.

So there's often a long costly process to release an old game for sale. Perhaps if there's enough general interest, they'll do it. Otherwise, fire up those old consoles.

yes but what i'm talking about is soon to be forgotten media not something like amazing spiderman or whatever which is still recent and still has a chance to make sequels, surely the passage of time requires few rules to be skewed in favor of humanity. publisher also need money to stay active and a profit is what ensures that. maybe let the people vote?

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

yes but what i'm talking about is soon to be forgotten media not something like amazing spiderman or whatever which is still recent and still has a chance to make sequels, surely the passage of time requires few rules to be skewed in favor of humanity. publisher also need money to stay active and a profit is what ensures that. maybe let the people vote?

That would not only be up to the publisher (Activision, now Microsoft) but also Sony/Disney.

[Brian9824]

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

yes but what i'm talking about is soon to be forgotten media not something like amazing spiderman or whatever which is still recent and still has a chance to make sequels, surely the passage of time requires few rules to be skewed in favor of humanity. publisher also need money to stay active and a profit is what ensures that. maybe let the people vote?

Again the only rule is if they are allowed to sell it, with ones like the Spiderman game they don't own the license and the law beats people wanting to play older games.

Just because time has gone by doesn't mean the law is ignored and companies have their rights taken away.

[MrSteel300]

Originally posted by brian9824:

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

yes but what i'm talking about is soon to be forgotten media not something like amazing spiderman or whatever which is still recent and still has a chance to make sequels, surely the passage of time requires few rules to be skewed in favor of humanity. publisher also need money to stay active and a profit is what ensures that. maybe let the people vote?

Again the only rule is if they are allowed to sell it, with ones like the Spiderman game they don't own the license and the law beats people wanting to play older games.

Just because time has gone by doesn't mean the law is ignored and companies have their rights taken away.

damn man this is just needs of the few over the needs of the infinite many, humanity needs to think about preserving media, not squabbling over money

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

Originally posted by brian9824:

Again the only rule is if they are allowed to sell it, with ones like the Spiderman game they don't own the license and the law beats people wanting to play older games.

Just because time has gone by doesn't mean the law is ignored and companies have their rights taken away.

damn man this is just needs of the few over the needs of the infinite many, humanity needs to think about preserving media, not squabbling over money

It's not only about money, it's also about IP ownership.

[MrSteel300]

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

damn man this is just needs of the few over the needs of the infinite many, humanity needs to think about preserving media, not squabbling over money

It's not only about money, it's also about IP ownership.

:winterbunny2023:

too bad those ips like i-ninja are forgotten and dead, no one is gaining anything and courts need to see that for the betterment of humans

[Brian9824]

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

Originally posted by brian9824:

Again the only rule is if they are allowed to sell it, with ones like the Spiderman game they don't own the license and the law beats people wanting to play older games.

Just because time has gone by doesn't mean the law is ignored and companies have their rights taken away.

damn man this is just needs of the few over the needs of the infinite many, humanity needs to think about preserving media, not squabbling over money

You have to respect the law, companies have a right to control their products, and you don't have a right to a video game just because you didn't buy a game that isn't available. Besides the issue isn't that the media isn't preserved. Anyone who bought it owns it and can make a copy, the issue is YOU don't have it available

[Brian9824]

Originally posted by MrSteel300:

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

It's not only about money, it's also about IP ownership.

:winterbunny2023:

too bad those ips like i-ninja are forgotten and dead, no one is gaining anything and courts need to see that for the betterment of humans

In the case of Spiderman the IP isn't dead or forgotten, the studio that made the game is no longer authorized to sell it by the IP holder.

Don't worry though the media is preserved and anyone who bought it has permanent access to it - https://steamcommunity.com/app/212580