I saw an image online of a NES cartridge of Sweet Home, which conflicted with my knowledge. Sweet Home was only released on the Famicom. After some research, I found this website: http://www.timewalkgames.com/

ROM hacks in custom made cartridges, I'd say.
i.e. A rip-off.

Not necessarily a ripoff if you know what you're getting into. NES repros have been a pretty big thing in recent years, and there's no need for the folks involved to be misleading - some collectors find it genuinely cool to have a "real" cartridge of an unreleased game.

[edit] After looking more closely at their offerings, I should qualify this by pointing out that offering translations and other hacks, for which the groups responsible almost certainly are not receiving compensation, is a little low. Sweet Home wouldn't be of any interest to customers if it were still in that crazy moon language.

This is actually a cool idea. I have a hard time playing games on emulators because they lack that element of authenticity that makes playing retro games so appealing. Definitely can't afford those prices, however.

While cute, I don't think these things are legal, are they? In which case, one is paying a relatively large amount of money for a bootleg. In which case, I say, boycott bootlegs!

Maybe, maybe not. If in fact the cartridges work without any problems, I'd say it beats emulation. I talked to a friend about that site and he said he'd prefer to play those cartridges rather than roms on a computer.

In my opinion, in order for something to be a bootleg, it must be an exact (or nearly identical) copy of a product.
As an example, the North American release of Sweet Home does not exist. Since it does not exist, it is not possible for a bootleg to exist. A duplicate of the Famicom cartridge of Sweet Home would qualify as a bootleg. But new artwork has been created, and I imagine the game has been fan-translated. So it is not a duplicate, but something different. Its intention is not to masquerade as the original product (bootleg), but to offer something previously unavailable. Therefore, a new term needs to be invented to describe what those things are.

Well your 'opinion' is wrong. Using the term for something unlicensed that doesn't otherwise exist in the fashion is pretty common.

I agree. While it's true you can make up your own definition, you might want to stick to what others agree with in this case. Example: you could define any molecule of 2 parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen as the Higgs boson. Then you could go around telling people "I found the Higgs boson!" but I'm pretty sure people would not take you seriously

It's nicer to play these games on an actual console, I suppose, but they're ridiculously expensive.

Besides, it means people are making money on other people's IPs, so you can bet your ass this is illegal.

I'm not concerned with what is common. Not in the least. A bootleg is a copy of a real object that hurts the sales of that real object. Since Sweet Home on the NES does not exist, it is not possible for a bootleg of it to exist. There is no how no way that anything can hurt the sales of Sweet Home on the NES because it does not exist. The whole point of bootlegs is to copy existing objects in the hopes that buyers can't tell the difference.

I don't understand why you can't understand that it is possible for a thing to not exist.

The point is you're trying to change a definition of a word.

These guys are rewarding collectors. When they get sued for selling these games all these cartridges will become much more valuable. I may have to buy Sweet Home and Clock Tower before these guys get sued. But I probably will be end up playing them in Japanese after I master...the kana!

What you keep describing is actually counterfeiting. TerraEpon is using the correct definition of bootlegging which simply refers to the illegal/unlicensed distribution of product; or someone else's product.

So while they are not counterfeiting preexisting goods they are in fact dealing in bootleg items because they do not have permission from the owners or license holders to sell such a thing (i.e. the ROM itself).

Yes, I know that. I'm just ferociously stubborn when I decide something, even if it contradicts with the norm.

What trips me up is that a recording from a concert is called a "bootleg" and a copy of a licensed item is also called a "bootleg". I think the term bootleg is too broad. It can't be used for things that both exist and do not exist.

Here's what I think: Counterfeit is an appropriate word to describe a copy of an existing physical object. So is bootleg. But if an item does not exist, bootleg and counterfeit are not appropriate words. I can't think of an example throughout history that elucidates what I'm trying to say. However, I can think abstractly. Let's say that *if* Sweet Home did exist on the NES, then the products at that website would be counterfeit or even bootlegs. But I can contradict that by demonstrating that Sweet Home does not exist on the NES. This is why I feel a new term is appropriate.

I guess let's say that Van Gogh didn't make a certain painting. But someone else (not Van Gogh) painted the painting and tried to say it was painted by Van Gogh. That would not be a bootleg or a counterfeit, since there is no actual painting! The whole point is that there is no way to make a comparison! Van Gogh never made this particular painting, so there is no way to check if it is legit or not.

The same with Sweet Home. There is no way to make a comparison. You can't take the NES version of Sweet Home and compare it to the offerings on that site because it does not exist!

The point of comparison is not the absence of an NES game, but the CODE. It's not the physical game cartridge or packaging. It's those 1s and 0s. That has always existed. The 1s and 0s were slightly altered. Oh how different those text pixels look. Technically that would make it an original work and not a bootleg. However, humans do not operate on that level and have to determine through opinion whether there is enough of a degree of change to make it an original work or not. We've all determined here that the code is similar enough that it is a copy of the code in Capcom's Sweet Home. And selling such a copy  unauthorized by the company makes your product bootleg.

None of [semantics] will matter to Nintendo when they see these guys are selling bootleg Super Mario Bros. 2 games.

edit 1 - An example for you: I bought a cd that was a very well-done bootleg of a product only released on cassette. Just because there was no actual cd available prior to this does not change the fact that the code (the sound files) was unofficially sold on cd which earns it the status of "bootleg" in society.

Actually, there is.
There are plenty of art experts that would be able to tell a real Van Gogh painting from a fake one, even if its existence was heretofore unknown.

It's not uncommon for people to claim they've found a "new" painting from a famous painter.

That would fall under a derivative work and probably be subject to all the typical licensing/legal rigamarole. For example software licenses such as the GPL are used to combat this.

@Jodo Far enough.

Translation: I have a hard time admitting I'm wrong

Hey, no problem. Many of us do, sometimes these things take time, however in this case you are wrong. People have shown you why. I still would not support these guys because I feel they are "stealing". Vert claims these will eventually be worth lots of money... well, maybe it will go up in value. I don't know, but technically since these are bootlegs, they are not legal to sell on eBay or amazon, or any other such place. Still, main reason not to purchase these is simply to support the real artists and producers (and as your mom told you, stealing is wrong)!