In a *nix environment, it doesn’t matter what format the disk has: A program called dd will read a raw image off of the disk and dump it into a file. (… or into your soundcard, or video card, or anything else. It isn’t picky.)
What does that give you? A literal copy of everything on that disk. Byte-for-byte exact, everything preserved. Even the unused disk sectors, even sectors containing `deleted’ information. (dd doesn’t even try to interpret filesystems.) It’s represented as a single very large file (as large as the disk’s capacity, which is a bit over 1 Mb for 3.5" floppies), but it’s all there.
What use is it? Depends on the emulator. If the emulator likes disk images, you’re in business. If the emulator doesn’t, you could probably make educated guesses about where in the disk image file dd gave you the program begins and the formatting information ends. A hex editor and a working knowledge of the disk’s filesystem, plus a determination to not be stymied by the bizarre errors that go hand-in-hand with doing things no developer at the time anticipated, is all you need to extract the program from the image.
Of course, if the emulator requires bizarre alterations to a straightforward disk image or executable binary, you’re up shit creek unless you know about it. Determination eventually prevails, but you start to wonder if another game of Jumpman is worth it.
sigh Sorry, I thought the C64 was a console based system, I forgot it was disk based. Anyways, if it were cartridge base, all of my original points are vaild. It is illegal to create a backup of a cartridge game.
Derleth, of course another game of Jumpman is worth it. I’m having a hard time comprehending how anyone could doubt such a self-evident truism.
skateboarder87, do you have a cite for your assertion that “It is illegal to create a backup of a cartridge game”?
It certainly looks like the sort of action which the courts have determined to fall under the category of “fair use.” Since there isn’t a lot of money at stake, it’s unlikely that a specific case regarding cross-platform “back-ups” of legally acquired software is going to hit the courts any time soon, but the caselaw favours this interpretation. cite
Well, tomorrow afternoon, a corporation with the resources could take the trouble to acquire the distribution rights to old software, and start marketing c64 nostalgia CD’s. Similar things have already happened. (Not proven to be a big money-maker, though, unsurprisingly.) If someone took the trouble to do this, they might decide to pursue charges against those they perceive as infringing on their copyright, which is why it’s important to understand the difference between fair use and blatant theft. Since there is no real market for C64 software, in the absence of new developments it’s unlikely that anyone’s going to be slapped for trading C64 games. Who the heck owns them now, anyway? CBM was sold to some German company, which has since gone under. Most of the third-party publishers, with a few notable exceptions, have long-since dried up and blown away. Even the mighty Epyx. Broderbund is still alive and kicking, though, so Opal is being very sensible about wanting to make sure that she’s not stepping on anyone’s toes when she’s playing Choplifter. I’d think twice about irritating Infogrames, Microprose, Capcom, Activision, or Electronic Arts, too. Those cats got lawyers. I can’t think of any other distributors of C64 games that still exist, though.
At any rate, there’s no argument that running copyrighted software, no matter how unmarketable, of which you do not own a legal copy, is a transgression of the law, regardless of how likely or unlikely you are of being taken to task for it. The question is, is it actually legal to use emulation software to run software you’ve come by legally on another platform. I would expect that if we stray too far from that, chances are good that this thread will get locked down faster than you can say “Digital Millennium Copyright Act.”
If you legally own and agreed to a software license which doesn’t explicitly dictate the hardware on which to run it (if restricting retail software in such ways is even possible where you live), what difference does it make if you run it from a PC’s harddisk instead of from a floppy and through its track buffer, or from a cartridge, into the C64’s memory, or on a C128, maybe keeping it in an expansion RAM-disk, running on a faster 6510-compatible processor, or whatnot?
That this makes it easier to run it on two machines simultaneously or illegally spread the software through the internet doesn’t make it any more illegal to use your own license, contrary to what those people say who would love to charge for your software by the minute if you let them.
I think the best program to transfer your disks from a 1541 to a PC is Star Commander (linked by Larry Mudd). It comes with good instructions, appends read error data, supports many different cable variants, and most of all it has a turbo mode. It’s been a long time since I rescued my disks, what was it … 1 1/2 minutes per side with the serial cable?
The C64’s IEC bus uses pull-up resistors to hardware-OR the signals. I didn’t like to directly connect that to my parallel port, so I hacked together the C64’s original circuit with a buffer IC on a breadboard. BTW, the 2<>15 connection was used by the original X1541 program to autodetect its cable.
Nope, won’t work. The 1541 floppy uses zones with different track lengths and rotation speeds, and GCR encoding instead of MFM. A standard PC disk controller can’t read it already on the hardware level.
At least all the emulators I know can directly handle .d64 images. WORTH IT? Blasphemer.
"Can I Download a Nintendo ROM from the Internet if I Already Own the Authentic Game?
There is a good deal of misinformation on the Internet regarding the backup/archival copy exception. It is not a “second copy” rule and is often mistakenly cited for the proposition that if you have one lawful copy of a copyrighted work, you are entitled to have a second copy of the copyrighted work even if that second copy is an infringing copy. The backup/archival copy exception is a very narrow limitation relating to a copy being made by the rightful owner of an authentic game to ensure he or she has one in the event of damage or destruction of the authentic. Therefore, whether you have an authentic game or not, or whether you have possession of a Nintendo ROM for a limited amount of time, i.e. 24 hours, it is illegal to download and play a Nintendo ROM from the Internet."
skaterboarder87, supposing I have a Nintendo cartridge I wish to backup within the bounds of the law. I don’t have the equipment to do so, therefore would I not be entitled to entrust an agent on my behalf? Obviously in keeping with the law, this agent can’t keep a copy but then it’s up to this person to do the correct thing and follow the law. Thus, extending this, as long you you, the downloader, are keeping within the spirit of the law – downloading copies of what you legally own or license – it shouldn’t matter the physical source of the backup. Licenses provide for the use of software – a bit-for-bit copy of yours and an internet copy are identical. Or not?
A more interesting question, though, is how does one do the honest thing and legally aquire old software? Suppose I download all of EA’s Winter-Summer-Etc. Games for my C64 emulator. Okay, I want to pay for them, but no means is provided to do so. In the legal sense, am I simply expected to not use the software, or are there any provisions in the law (such as in trademark law) the provides for free use of non-defended, copyrighted materials?
Balthisar, I am certain that there is no legal defense in copyright law for “abandonware”. Copyright is not just about money - it’s also about control. And part of that control is determining exactly how and why you give out licenses to your software/game machine/etc. As a copyright holder, you are under no obligation or burden to provide your work to anyone, regardless of the money or consideration offered.
But you see, there is a human factors thing that enters into it as well.
In addition to that - even if you are allowed to possess a ROM, I believe one reason you may not download a ROM or receive a ROM is that the giver of the ROM may have acquired it illegally, and thus you are receiving an illegal copy. But I have not ascertained if that is actually the case.
People have also said that it is “unlikely that they would ever come after an individual for downloading a ROM”, or words to that effect. But does that mean you should still do it?
(personally, I feel that it should be legal to “jump media” like that, and I also feel that video game and software copyrights should have their terms reduced to 7 years, renewable for another 3. But that’s a matter for GD).
Hmmm…that’s an interesting thought. I’m not enough of a techie to know: could they tell? I mean, if I copy a rom to my computer (somehow) and then download a copy, could one tell (ignoring obvious stuff like the date or whatever) which one’s which? Shouldn’t the file size and stuff be identical?
I wonder if a distinction could be made between “receiving an illegal copy” and receiving a legitmate copy from an illegal source?
