Jarska333 said:
I wonder what "reasonable" means? Can they point to an E-bay auction of Atari 2600 and go "bwaha, jailtime!"...
probably not, but something like that would never get to court.
if in some parallel universe it did: a lot of 2600 games have been released on other platforms, from cell phones to ps2. plus, gametap probably has a lot of that stuff available. so it really depends on the game and whether the company that made it still exists. but mostly just because if they don't exist, they're not going to pay into the esa.
i guess what i'm saying is that, although there are tons of legal technicalities we could come up with, in most cases it's practical considerations ($$$) that determine a particular issue. then, on some historic day, somebody decides to go to court with it, where the same practical considerations hold.
the way i see it, copyright is sometimes concrete but more often abstract. if we could view it objectively we would see that there are abuses on both sides. but neither side's crimes justify the other side's, so everybody's wrong.
what does copyright law say about atari games? that authors and inventors should be secured, for a limited time, the exclusive right to their work. how limited? well, that depends...steamboat willie came out in what year? what year is it now? that long.