Ultracade: the dirty scandal revealed?

Ultracombo64

New member
Joined
Jun 24, 2012
Messages
527
Reaction score
17
Location
goshen, Indiana
When i started collecting, i had a list. Obtaining an ultracade was high on that list. Seems like when i played on em back in the day, they ran smoother then than blue elf does now. So, i did so research, and the ultracade wiki entry blew my mind! Dudes in prison now? For doing more or less the same thing as the various multi-board guys do? Huh? Can someone please give me the dirt on the rise and fall of ultracade?

On a related note, please sell me a fully loaded ultracade. Please and thank you.
love, josh.
 
I never heard about this. Have no sympathy for him, anyone involved with making MAME arcade machines belongs in jail.

Yeah. Jail for all MAME machine builders, not just the thieves. Brilliant.

Let tax payers pick up the tab for punishing the people capitalizing on the seedy underworld of.......emulated vintage arcade games. Seems like time, money and effort well spent.

MAME is the greatest thing to ever happen to this hobby.
 
MAME is the greatest thing to ever happen to this hobby.
godzilla-facepalm.png
 
i almost kinda have to agree with koolmoecraig. theres about 10 bazillion games i wouldnt be able to play otherwise, and its helped keep things a lil less salty in the price department. mame was my only way to play my favorite games while i was moving around. i HAD to be able to play k.i. at anytime i please. i was JUST able to find a working numan athletics rom, which is great because my search for it has ended with more questions than answers.

i just really liked the look of the ultracades, and they all played really smooth, crook or no, dude made a sweet product =)
 
Well, I enjoy the Ultracades and all too. But the fact it is stolen intellectual property. Even though those games are no longer being produced, someone still owns the rights the rights to them and you can't just sell stuff that doesn't belong to you that you didn't properly license! It IS THEFT.
 
yeah, i just read some old posts about this.

wow. What a wet jigsaw puzzle.

Not sure what to think. 25% sympathy, 75% whoa....
 
Last edited:
Well, I enjoy the Ultracades and all too. But the fact it is stolen intellectual property. Even though those games are no longer being produced, someone still owns the rights the rights to them and you can't just sell stuff that doesn't belong to you that you didn't properly license! It IS THEFT.

You're mixing up MAME and Ultracade. Ultracade was licensed. David Foley got in trouble for continuing to do things he sold the rights to.

MAME has brought thousands back into the hobby by making it accessible. I know it brought me back to arcade gaming and I have a lot more dedicated stuff than MAME stuff now.
 
You're mixing up MAME and Ultracade. Ultracade was licensed. David Foley got in trouble for continuing to do things he sold the rights to.

MAME has brought thousands back into the hobby by making it accessible. I know it brought me back to arcade gaming and I have a lot more dedicated stuff than MAME stuff now.

Yes, what he said. This has nothing to do with MAME.

He sold the business, and all the rights, but secretly kept the ability to make the upgrade packs or whatever and was selling them on ebay with the help of others.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/can/news/2012/2012_01_09_foley.guiltyplea.press.html

http://www.vendingtimes.com/ME2/dir...91&tier=4&id=D1E0B5518FED4856BD298E475A1A9430
 
I dont know if anyone noticed, but in one of those articles it said he plead guilty to defrauding countrywide mortgage out of a couple million....kinda ironic when you consider whats going on today..
 
foley allegedly never got rights from namco to include pac man or galaga in his game packs. he also tried to register the mame trademark in his own name at one point. he even tried to charge royalties from artwork vendors, etc. foley contacted ebay and claimed that he was the registered trademark owner of mame and had legit auctions pulled. shutting down marquee sellers and artwork vendors to enforce a trademark on something he did not create? thats pretty low. motivation aside, he had no part in creating mame and no legal right to copyright it.

"G-Mode, Jaleco, SNK Playmore and Tecmo representatives have now publicly commented to Gamasutra, and are accusing Ultracade Technologies former owner David R. Foley of piracy. These parties are now claiming that Ultracade arcade game cabinets and game packs contained many titles that were never legitimately licensed for Ultracade.

All four companies released statements to Gamasutra indicating they had no records of ever licensing their game titles to Ultracade Technologies and its former owner David Russell Foley. These products include the original Ultracade coin-op arcade units and game packs." -gamesutra, excerpted

"According to Namco America president Kevin Hayes, "Ultracade is completely out of bounds in selling 'Pac-Man' or any other Namco titles for arcade use with their system. They have not licensed it from Namco or anyone else. Operators buying Namco titles from them should realize they are buying an unlicensed, illegal product and that Namco is taking appropriate action to protect its intellectual property from misuse / theft." -vending times, excerpted
 
You're mixing up MAME and Ultracade. Ultracade was licensed. David Foley got in trouble for continuing to do things he sold the rights to.

MAME has brought thousands back into the hobby by making it accessible. I know it brought me back to arcade gaming and I have a lot more dedicated stuff than MAME stuff now.

You are correct. Kindof. I was confusing the two as I wasn't aware of the whole Foley issue until after I read up on it. Not sure how I missed it. As Bradd posted though, it appears Foley never had the licensing rights from Namco or others, so it appears it may not have been that much different from MAME.

To mastersurrealist, PIRACY *IS* THEFT! You can come up with whatever quite cartoons you want to try and justify it, but it is still theft. Just wait until you have someone rip off and copy or clone your own products and then tell me it isn't theft.
 
I sympathize with what you're saying, but the criminal definition of theft is:

---
theft (θɛft)

— n
1. criminal law the dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession
---

The key is the second part of the statement: piracy doesn't fit the definition because piracy doesn't deprive the owner of possession.

I'm not saying that there's nothing wrong with piracy, but it really isn't the same thing as theft in the traditional sense.
 
I sympathize with what you're saying, but the criminal definition of theft is:

---
theft (θɛft)

— n
1. criminal law the dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession
---

The key is the second part of the statement: piracy doesn't fit the definition because piracy doesn't deprive the owner of possession.

I'm not saying that there's nothing wrong with piracy, but it really isn't the same thing as theft in the traditional sense.

1. Are you a lawyer?
2. Please cite your source for this definition. I disagree with the accuracy and/or the context in which you took this definition.
3. There are different types of theft, including theft of service which your definition does not account for.
4. So you are telling me the entire Patent/Trademark/Copyright system has no basis in law? That would make you the most brilliant lawyer ever. Just think of how many patent lawsuits you could win with your argument. Simply brilliant. with the BILLIONS of $$ you could make winning lawsuits with that permise you would have the most BADASS arcade collection ever! Of course they would probably all be stolen MAME games.
 
1
2. Please cite your source for this definition. I disagree with the accuracy and/or the context in which you took this definition.

Um... it is from the World English Dictionary ...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theft?s=t&ld=1086

But like you said... the very definition of theft has changed and evolved along with technology, etc. Ask the people who've been penalized both criminally and civilly for IP theft just how far that silly definition worked for them...
 
2. Please cite your source for this definition. I disagree with the accuracy and/or the context in which you took this definition.

The definition came from Dictionary.com. I am aware that theft can have more meanings than this, but deprivation of possession is an important component of theft as the word is commonly conceived, and that component doesn't apply in the case of piracy.

3. There are different types of theft, including theft of service which your definition does not account for.

You are absolutely right that there are different types of theft. But because they are different, all types are not morally equivalent.

There are different types of "abuse" as well, from verbal insults, to a mother hitting her child, to rape. It's all abuse but they are worlds apart in terms of harm, and therefore moral implication.
 
Back
Top Bottom