21–30 of 99 posts
I guess that proposing symbol names could be an apt use case for AI. Some papers are referenced here: https://github.com/nforest/awesome-decompilation#ai-based-de...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a real legal defense. Code is just as subject to copyright as game assets (why wouldn't it be? it's just another kind of game asset), and the whole extracting assets thing making decompilations free from copyright infringement that gets bandied about is complete armchair lawyering. It's only by Nintendo's good graces these are still allowed to be hosted on GitHub.
> Code is just as subject to copyright as game assets The decompiled code is not the code that Nintendo wrote. This isn't the equivalent of steeling original code but more like generating a brand new code that would compile to the same executable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Distributing the reverse engineered source code is probably infringement however. Probably not if it actually reverse engineered (with a firewall) but that's not what they are doing (i.e. decompilation isn't' reverse engineering)
Decompilation is an essential (although not mandatory for some cases) part of reverse-engineering. As for decompilation projects that have only reconstructed source code and no game media assets, it's probably fair use.
It's not likely to be fair use to distribute, fwiw.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a real legal defense. Code is just as subject to copyright as game assets (why wouldn't it be? it's just another kind of game asset), and the whole extracting assets thing making decompilations free from copyright infringement that gets bandied about is complete armchair lawyering. It's only by Nintendo's good graces these are still allowed to be hosted on GitHub.
> Code is just as subject to copyright as game assets The decompiled code is not the code that Nintendo wrote. This isn't the equivalent of steeling original code but more like generating a brand new code that would compile to the same executable.
That doesn't make it not copyright infringement. As long as it's based on the same executable, that's a derivative work. In the same way if I were to recreate Star Wars A New Hope with new actors and new sets. If I were to play a cover of Micheal Jackson's Thriller with new instruments and new voices.
That's why clean-room design is a thing. To recreate the same function not based off the copyrighted executable, but rather its interactions with the user, other programs, and files. Interactions that aren't copyrightable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a real legal defense. Code is just as subject to copyright as game assets (why wouldn't it be? it's just another kind of game asset), and the whole extracting assets thing making decompilations free from copyright infringement that gets bandied about is complete armchair lawyering. It's only by Nintendo's good graces these are still allowed to be hosted on GitHub.
> Code is just as subject to copyright as game assets The decompiled code is not the code that Nintendo wrote. This isn't the equivalent of steeling original code but more like generating a brand new code that would compile to the same executable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a real legal defense. Code is just as subject to copyright as game assets (why wouldn't it be? it's just another kind of game asset), and the whole extracting assets thing making decompilations free from copyright infringement that gets bandied about is complete armchair lawyering. It's only by Nintendo's good graces these are still allowed to be hosted on GitHub.
It's nearly trivial to get a file copy of the game disc if you own a Wii and the game. No copyright infringement needed to get the assets. Even still, the reverse engineering part to put the executable code into C++ is definitely copyright infringement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Code is just as subject to copyright as game assets The decompiled code is not the code that Nintendo wrote. This isn't the equivalent of steeling original code but more like generating a brand new code that would compile to the same executable.
The decompiled code is a 1:1 translation, so it’s a derivative work. You can’t distribute a translated book without an agreement with the copyright owner, even if the translator contributed original creative work on top. The analogy is literally 1:1.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It made me appreciate the goth girls in nature too… https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=midna
[flagged]
https://search.sethforprivacy.com/search?q=midna&tbs=&lr=lan...