Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu

Post by withinboredom » Tue, Feb 27, 2024, 9:51 PM UTC

monocasa wrote: post #19

fzeroracer wrote: post #6

Looking over the legal document, realistically, their arguments are so damaging from a software perspective that they should lose. IANAL, but from skimming the legal document: The two major notions are that Yuzu violates Nintendo's copyright [1] by allowing people to play unauthorized copies [2]. In order to do so it allows for bypassing Nintendo's encryption (by taking in the keys, it does not embed the keys in the…

I'm not sure they're necessarily claiming the keys are copywritten (which honestly would be a terrible strategy), but instead that yuzu's ability to injest keys and encrypted copywritten works (decrypting them on the fly as needed like a switch would) constitutes a circumvention device banned by 17 US § 1201. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

Post by withinboredom » Tue, Feb 27, 2024, 9:53 PM UTC

boolemancer wrote: post #47

fzeroracer wrote: post #6

Looking over the legal document, realistically, their arguments are so damaging from a software perspective that they should lose. IANAL, but from skimming the legal document: The two major notions are that Yuzu violates Nintendo's copyright [1] by allowing people to play unauthorized copies [2]. In order to do so it allows for bypassing Nintendo's encryption (by taking in the keys, it does not embed the keys in the…

> [4] "On information and belief, Yuzu users have (1) dumped Nintendo games they have lawfully purchased and copied the game ROMs into Yuzu; and (2) obtained Nintendo games online from pirate websites and copied those game ROMs into Yuzu. Each such reproduction constitutes a violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501(a) for which Plaintiff is entitled to damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504 and injunctive relief under § 502" How on earth…

Post by gamepsys » Tue, Feb 27, 2024, 9:54 PM UTC

Feorn wrote: post #36

diggan wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

bleem! (PlayStation emulator) was sued by Sony and was forced to close down because of legal fees, so I guess that counts as a success for Sony. I seem to recall a bunch of ROM sites disappearing as well, but not sure if that's because they got sued or for other reasons. Some must have been sued and consequently shut down, so maybe not a bad idea (for the companies) to at least try?

I think ROM sites were an artifact of the internet speeds we had access to early on. Where it wasn't practical to just download an entire library for an older console. Downloading an N64 ROM over dialup still took a little longer than an mp3, whole collections of them were out of the question. Even early broadband in many areas was limited to speeds where a single ROM was more practical to download. Complete ROM coll…

Post by lrvick » Tue, Feb 27, 2024, 9:55 PM UTC

Post by resizeitplz » Tue, Feb 27, 2024, 9:56 PM UTC

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #30

bentley wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not necessarily. It's fairly easy to prove that if the emulator did not exist, the leak would be fairly inconsequential… Well, no. Pirated Switch games can be played on a hacked Switch or a flashcart with no emulation necessary. Common sense suggests emulation would be significantly more common, but can Nintendo prove that in court, or prove that the leak wouldn’t have happened without Yuzu’s existence?

Nintendo can't prove the leak wouldn't have happened without Yuzu. But they don't have to. They can simply show that Yuzu made it infinitely worse. Also, suing Yuzu does not preclude suing emulator makers or flashcart makers - they can all be sued as they all have culpability.