Ethin is correct on this one. License agreements are more enforceable  than you might think in this case. True, some people use cut and pasted templates (seriously, fix the *insert product name here* placeholders, y'all. But you still might be mostly off the hook in that regard. Just because sounds are available in their raw form does not automatically mean that a developer has granted distribution rights. It can be interpreted as such if you don't place a disclaimer on it, though. As for whether or not a sound is well-mixed, you're probably ok legally if you do the bare minimum, i.e. just enough to the point where the whole of an original sound is absolutely unrecoverable. Breaking off a slice of an individual well-mixed sound doesn't necessarily count as an open and shut case of asset lifting from a vendors perspective because, a, it's clearly not the whole original sound, and b, if you enforce your i p rights you can usually go after the lifter in question before the vendor does. And even when the vendor does, they aren't going to go after you specifically if there's a relatively good faith belief that you did all you could. Vendors who aren't anal about it will probably not even press the issue further if they don't see you distributing your assets out in the open, for example.
This is precisely why splitting hairs on this isn't necessarily the whole of this process, because there is naturally way too much open to interpretation. The main concern here is devs blatantly lifting an asset group (CP, VH, etc). Of course it's easier for us if the original asset owner confirms the assets were indeed stolen, though having it be a requirement for a good-faith investigation isn't always enforceable. Someone brought up a very good point about more than half of this community not being willing to alert Nintendo of their assets being used. Let's approach that from the opposite angle, say for example that a significant portion of the community did approach Nintendo about it, but absolutely no one got a response because we're small-fries for them compared to other interests on their plate. That doesn't necessarily mean we drop the case against the game.
TheTechguy is hugely underestimating the difficulty of relocating this whole site. Without the webmasters, we can't access the mySQL databases for the forum and the database, or our domain name for that matter. And there is no way in hell we are giving up a 20 year legacy in the name of relocating. Not gonna happen.
That goes for protecting the site as well. If, by some twist of fate we were to get a dmca notice, they would not simply drop the case if the webmasters weren't around. They'll go in guns blazing, and will go up the chain of command, approaching the web hosting provider. They will not rest until the site's down, if they don't get to collect the goods.
While this probably has little more than a snowball's chance in hell of actually happening, we do need to take this into account as long as the chance is greater than 0. No, the Wayback machine will not help matters much in this case because it's missed more than enough of the database contents.

The wayback machine doesn't do too well with dynamic content, nature of the beast when dealing with databases. This site'es really overdue for an overhaul anyway, with or without the small chance of takedown. But do we really have to wait till the next spam attack to get the attention of the webmasters?

@Ironcross32: Can't yet, not without taking our things with us. And I'd imagine we would want to keep the audiogames.net domain as well, which means we'd need access to the dns records. So we would need to get a hold of the web hosts to either do this for us, or pass down control of the site to us. What I want to know, is that if they're that uninterested in keeping the site afloat unless a disaster forces them to, why they aren't itching to let it go?

@Jayde
I like the idea of being able to discuss games even if linking too/providing info on how to get downloads is banned.
It keeps the spirit of the site alive by letting people, ya know, talk about the audio games they play, while still making people aware of what's up so they can choose to not play it or talk to the dev about fixing it.

@ironcross32
Speak for your self man, not the whole community.  Sure there are some staff I wouldn't want on a new site either, but I wouldn't exclude all of them simply by association...  Starting a new site off on that kind of footing always looks bad.
As long as they followed the mod rules and didn't make big changes without consulting the creator/creators of the site, I've got no real problem with most of them.
Besides, finding half way decent mods is a nightmare in this community, so good luck forming a better team that will actually stick around without any of these guys...  Usually the best people have other shit to do, which is part of why they are the best.

i agree with 108, who do you define with me, personally speaking, I have no problems with the staff in general

My biggest concern is how this effects the database.

this database is a historical resource, and so to sensor it to me really seems like tearing down an old building.
There's a lot of games that by definition of the new rule would have to be removed.
I mean. isn't the whole point of audiogames.net to be a one-stop place fo rpeople to find games?
You also can't realistically expect everyone to update their games to comply. for example. Jim Kitchen is sort of kind of no longer with us. He's not exactly going to update his over 3 dozen games to comply.
There's also games that by making them change their sounds would defeat the entire point of the game in the first place making them completely pointless to exist. My rendering of Duck Hunt is an example of this.
It was made because someone said. "Hey. Do you think you could do a version of Duck Hunt?" So I said. why not? I make no money from it. I'm not at all attempting to impinge on Nintendo's rights, but the idea was to create a concept that we didn't have access to originally. As stated early in the thread, fan projects are done a lot. A lot of companies tend to turn a blidn eye ( no pun intended) unless the concept is of a current project which they plan on making money off of (see Mario 64 pc remake), or a game that is being charged for where the author is making a clear profit from someone else's intellectual property.

One thing I am in full favor of and especially is a developer is cracking down on cases where it's clear assets have been stolen and where someone comes to the moderators and points this out. I'm in favor of what was done with the original new Horizon pack as if CR crafted sounds were lifted with no attribution plus being against the wishes of the creator of the sounds, then this is clearly not okay. the question which I haven't seen answered is. where do we draw the line in order to keep the integrity of the forum and database, but also be fair to those who's work is being used? Again I ask. When is too much just too much?

Again. I and many others are completely opposed to this change, but as others have stated, the team is clearly going to do what it wants. That makes me very sad in a way.

In like 98% of his posts.

People like Sterlock and Ironcross saying a new site should be started are so funny. I'll believe it will work when it actually works. Like I've said, it has never worked before, and it likely never will because this is pretty much the central source in this community for discussion of games. Also, Sterlock and Ironcross are two people that do not strike me as good people to be moderating either, so if either of them decided to start one I think it would die fast. Or it would just split the community, because very few people will care to check two forums and so people would just stick to one. I know I would.

I'm addressing this to the moderation team:
You're doing this the hard way, and I understand why. It's that personal connection. It's that sense of being able to care for something because you love it so much. You are attempting to take on roles you have never experienced or trained for. Most notably, a lawyer. As much as it looks and feels like it is helping, and it is helping to some extent, it isn't "real help". What does that mean, real help?
It means putting the situation in someone's hands who is trained to deal with this, and taking it out of your own inexperienced hands. You want the best, and the best you can do is trust people who know what they are doing.
Contact lawyers or a true copyright agency, tell them the truth and only the truth, and let them handle this situation. It's the only right way to do this. Also, y'all could use a break from all the stress on the forum, and this is that time. Y'all will still remain moderators of this site, y'all will still have the same jobs you did before. You just have to let other people who know what they are doing, handle what you can't. The forum's life is in your hands, and your shaky and only half reliable help, is much more risky and time consuming and stressful than getting the proper help that the forum needs to get stable again.
I hope this message hits deep because
.
.
.
I don't want to finish that sentence. Or think about it.
Just contact a real lawyer and let them take care of the copyright situation.
Edit, fixed 2 spelling errors

No, that's not what it is. I mean, there's no doubt about it that he is good at debating. He's good at forming a premise, and backing it up with bullet points. But this goes beyond this, into the realm of morality. Does he have charisma? I don't really see it. Charisma is that force of someone's personality that makes others gravitate toward them. He doesn't have that. He'd rather prove how much better he is than you, and how much more intelligent. And you know what, if he were a user, who cares. But he's a staff member now, and that makes the difference.

He's trying to force his moral views on all of us. Remember when Bashue was pretty heavy with the religious stuff, and some folks really didn't like that? He was among them, and so was I. But now, he's doing the same thing, but substitute religion for morality and it still fits.

We'll see I guess. I bet he's gonna try to get someone else to come slap me down.

@118 I mean, that costs money. It's one thing to do unpaid work for a site because you want to and feel you can help; it's quiet another to fork out your own cash. Also, this site isn't under U.S. law, or Canadian law, it's under EU / Nederlands law, so they'd have to find a Dutch lawyer.

Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. But Jayde is only one member of the team. And the others do not strike me as impressionable, or ones to easily be pushed around.

unlike Bashu, Jade has been willing to move a bit off the high horse to a more moderate position. First he wanted to ban people, then he said he wanted to ban discussion of the games, now he's only banning links to the games, which is a position I can compromise with. If he stays at this position then I'm satisfied for now.