There's a difference between commercially distributed mass-market entertainment and pictures on a website.

Not really.

this might be offtopic, but does anyone know if NWN2 (Gamersgate) is already patched after i've installed all addons?

Yes really, one instantly becomes a part of culture and the other one does not (unless recognized by mass-media outlets).

I have gigs of abandonware.

I'm a monster!

Stop Thief! :o

How can you live with yourself?!

STOP CRIMINAL SCUM! >:(

No ... but ... how could you've possibly fou... um ...I mean, you misunderstand ... that ... that wasn't really ... er ... 'abandonware' ... I ... er ... would never touch something filthy like 'abandonware' with a ten-foot-pole ... and ... er ...

BEHIND YOU! A THREE-HEADED SCAPEGOAT!

*dashes off*

A better analogy may be that deviant art owns his brothers pictures and shuts down and no one is able to ever see them again unless they have saved them and distribute them to others to enjoy. Really has nothing to do with the original artist / game developer - its all about who owns the rights to the content and what they are doing with it.

More or less, and the US constitution is very clear about the purpose of copyrights. What we really need is an addendum to take back those rights when companies fail to respect that they only get the rights for a limited time.

At this point, much of the art is lost before it is granted to the public domain. That's somewhat understandable when it's created by amateurs or when there's only one copy, but when it comes to things like movies, software and other mass media products, there's basically no excuse any more for that to happen.

What's worse is that only a fraction a round 1/7 to 1/8 of the known works were extended prior to the term being lengthened which suggests that a vocal minority has effectively deprived the public domain of most of the works, whether or not the creator really intended for that to happen.

Ultimately, we need a legal designation for orphanware and a mechanism for enforcing it. There's absolutely no reason why multibillion dollar corporations can't take better care of the culture they create.

I disagree, if a piece of art becomes recognized by mass-media outlets it is free to influence culture, not to be free to all members of that culture.
If Deviant art does not take the responsibility of redistributing that piece of art, that is responsibility that the original artist had chosen to give up when he originally handed over ownership. It's now Deviant Art's choice to redistribute that work, not anyone else's. (if Deviant Art ceases to exist, proper negotiation of their owned works would have to take place in the courts).

Speaking about abandonware, it's important to notice that the difference between abandonwarez sites and warez sites is that abandonwarez sites remove games when copyright holder request that.

In this case it's possible to say that even if abandonwarez sites don't have permission to offer games, copyright holders don't mind they are being offered.

This is clearly the difference, because if noone is 'hurt' (and if you don't mind, you are not) then there's no 'crime'.

I don't really care if they remove a game when requested or not, I still value them. In the case of hotu, many rights holders requested a game to be removed and thereby removing one of the last places were you could download that game.

If the company has a legal, good working alternative to offer, I will consider buying it there. But if a game remains "unreachable" they can be the most vile warez sites on the net and I'm still glad they are there.