Psy-Q SDK Legal Status

[syntaxerror]

I am new to PSX Development. Everything I have read indicates that I am best off using Psy-Q over other tools like PSXSDK etc. because it is:

A) The original SDK from Sony
B) It has full 3D features
C) Has less bugs

I have no interest in selling my PSX games; I mostly want to fiddle around and develop for fun. I am a professional C developer and have a background developing homebrew games for Atari 2600 and the NES. However, I am respectful of making sure my endeavors are in fact legal. I can't seem to find the details on this anywhere on this site. I would suppose if there were a way to buy a used copy of Psy-Q that might be a loophole...

What I'd like to understand is the timeframes and patents of the IP if any. Or if anyone here knows if Sony had an original license agreement that has expired since 1996 or whenever it was last created. FWIW, I have seen some Psy-Q homebrew games for sale. I just want to make sure that I am doing my part before I go download the SDK and start developing. I appreciate any constructive feedback. Thanks.

[Administrator]

The copyrights have expired. It's classified as 'abandonware' now. Sony doesn't care about it because it doesn't make them any money. The SDK is very obsolete by their standards.

[gwald]

The copyrights have expired. It's classified as 'abandonware' now. Sony doesn't care about it because it doesn't make them any money. The SDK is very obsolete by their standards.

That's not legal advice.. is it? lol
Where is Sony's or SN System's notice of 'adandonware'?
Saying a company hasn't acted before is no protection... ie Nintendo and ROM sites

Its pretty simple.. If you want to avoid 100% any legal problems don't use proprietary software you have no right to use or to distribute the ps1 .exe .iso etc

[Administrator]

No it's not full legal advice.

As for licensing games and trying to sell them, that is a different story and will probably get you into trouble.

[NITROYUASH]

Can we make licensed PS1 games in 2018? o_O''

[Administrator]

Well you can if you pay a disc pressing company to replicate the wobble and you master your game on discs. That's what may get you into trouble.

[NITROYUASH]

Using Psy-Q SDK to create and sell the game without permission from SCE? It's legal?

[Sjors]

Well, I think actually Psy-Q has violated copyright law as well. I think ccpsx is based on gnucc. gnucc's license mentions that anyone asking for the source of ccpsx should get it for free, and that they have the right to redistribute it too. I don't know about the other tools included in the SDK.

[TriMesh]

Well, I think actually Psy-Q has violated copyright law as well. I think ccpsx is based on gnucc. gnucc's license mentions that anyone asking for the source of ccpsx should get it for free, and that they have the right to redistribute it too. I don't know about the other tools included in the SDK.

No, the GPL doesn't work like that, although it's a common misconception. The only people they have any obligation to under the GPL are the people they supplied binaries to - and apparently at one point the source was available to Sony licensees on request. I don't know if anyone ever took them up on it though, and I've never been able to find a copy.

Since you had to use one of the official toolchains to build games for release I would guess there was little interest in hacking the compiler anyway.

[Sjors]

Alright, I guess I was mistaken. Thanks for clarifying that.