The IP arguments are poor. IP (intellectual property) is a new idea. Copyright on the other hand is an old idea. The constitution allows for "limited" exlusive use to be assigned to the creator of an artistic work. If you read the constitution, it becomes abundently clear that the writers did not create copyright as an ownership issue. They created it to give a limited monopoly as a reward for bringing greater culture to the public domain.
Over time greedy companies have done their best to get the timeframe of these copyright monopolies extended. The most recent being when Disney sucsessfully lobbied congress to extend it past the old 70 year mark. They did this because they were going to loose their monopoly use of Mickey Mouse. So truly they were the "Pirates", stealing "IP" from the people.
Of course we all know that the term "Pirate" is an attempt to redefine language in such a way that the very reasonable argument of "Should copyright exists", sounds like "Should people be allowed to be pirates".
Do not take any of this as a statement that copyright should not exist. I believe it should. I just believe that it should be reasonable.
As for the "free lunch" argument that is consistantly used by people who believe that copyright monopolies should be enforced by law forever, you should keep in mind that what one should get for free is a definite grey area. For example we all would be quite upset if we had to start paying for the oxygen that we breath, even though the oxygen comes from plants that are owned by other people. The only differences between "IP Pirates" and and "Oxygen Pirates" are that a law was written (and could be revoked) by people, and that with "IP Pirates" there is no shrinkage.
So, as for the question of should the 1.3 roms be released for free...Yes, they should. They are a over a decade old. Their value is no longer based on the quality of the code, but on the nestalga value that the users create.
It is a sad day when pieces of the worlds culture is lost, and with the current trend in copyright, we will loose large parts of our culture. The worst part of this is that we won't loose our cultural heritage because we cannot preserve it, and we will not loose our cultural heritage because people will not preserve it. We will loose our cultural heritage because of greed. The greed that has convinced the populous that copyright should last long beyond the real commercial value that lead to the creation of the work. That it should last forever because it MIGHT someday be worth SOMETHING.
And this I challenge to any of the holyer than thou "artists" who rant about "Piracy". Create a single non-derivitive work. Make just one thing that is not built upon the creative works of those before you. I have never seen a truely 'original' piece of work, and I doubt that one exists.
