The argument against it is founded on copyright.
We fund copyright in order to enrich our culture, by incentivizing creative works.
Blocking creative works preservation strips away the cultural enrichment.
What’s left? People being compelled through taxes to fund profit police for copyright holders who aren’t holding up their end of the bargain.
It’s worth noting that publishers, and especially the “rightsholder groups” that they hire, are not artists. They are parasites. They are paid more than fairly for their role in getting creative works out there in the first place. I can’t think of any reason why they should have continued control after they’ve stopped publishing them.
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
If a company is going to argue that this would harm potential future re-releases of their games, they should be forced to rerelease those games in less than a years time. Otherwise it can be understood they have no interest in bringing those games back to market.
Allow libraries to do this for games that have no re-release, and have them remove the game from emulation options if it does get a re-release. Simple solution.
Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
The human world works in order that companies make money, not for you to have fun.
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It doesn’t have to work that way. It works that way because they have more money, not because it is good for humanity.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
The human world should work in order for us to have fun, not for companies to make money.
Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
That’s what I’ve been saying for awhile. If it’s not readily available after a certain amount of time, for a certain amount of time, emulation should be 100% legal. Sell it to me or fuck off.
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Emulation is 100% legal, at least in the USA. Do you mean downloading a copy of such a game from the internet? Because I would agree.