291–300 of 709 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don't agree to a bunch of treaties around IP protection, you will find yourself frozen out of many free trade agreements and mostly unable to import or export anything except at crushing cost.
Better just use China then
It's unfortunate, but remember that corps don't play fair, and they will turn "grey area" against you by having more money than you. They can find the right jurisdiction to get what they want.
That said, Nintendo is going to have to point to a specific DRM bypass. If they can't, yuzu should win.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There were tons and TONS of ride sharing apps that got shut down as Uber was becoming popular due to regulatory violations: Sidecar, Juno, Poparide, Heetch, Taxify, and there are probably hundreds that got shut down in local markets. Plenty of companies get shut down for regulatory violations, or employee mistreatment. Pointing at some extreme outliers is nothing more than a form of selection bias.
Why didn't Uber though? Is it just enough money to buy the right lobbyists and lawyers?
Basically, Uber had powerful allies and was willing to do illegal things. That's the difference between Uber and the other apps that got shut down for breaking the law
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nintendo could do the exact same thing if they made their platforms open like Steam does. That the switch is limited to only Switch games is entirely a choice they made because their whole existence they've been all about proprietary and locked down.
I mean, to be fair, the NES lockout chip is what salvaged the video game industry after hoards of shitty games caused it to collapse. Obviously a lot has changed since then. Now they do it to protect their own IP and investments.
Speculating here but it feels like part of Nintendo's beef is the popularity of PC form factors that look like a Nintendo Switch. Most notably the Steam Deck but there are loads of them. In 2022 Nintendo starting taking down Youtube videos showing Steam Decks running Switch games: https://www.resetera.com/threads/nintendo-started-blocking-v... And last year went after Dolphin (GCN/Wii emulator) as soon as they announ…
It would be amazing if Valve stepped up with legal funds/protection there. They do get money from people buying SteamDecks for emulation and well... free publicity if they take on Nintendo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you played their game on an emulator, and you "would otherwise have really considered" paying for their products (but you didn't). How are they losing out by alienating you?
Nintendo lost out on future game and console sales from that person.
It's funny to me how every time the topic of piracy comes up, the world suddenly becomes so full of people who totally like giving companies money out of the sheer goodness of their hearts. And then by next week when it's time for another post about how open source maintainers get burnt out from a lack of material support, we all suddenly remember how human nature actually works.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Piracy/comments/b6rpzx/here_are_som...
> As a result, Nintendo ... is demanding that the Yuzu emulator is shut down. When corporations like Uber violate multiple laws, do they get shut down? When Amazon treats its employees poorly, does it get shut down? When Google forbids manufacturers to pre-install competitor apps, does it get shut down? Well, it seems that as long as copyright is not infringed, everything is ok. Also it seems to me that Nintendo migh…
> Also it seems to me that Nintendo might themselves violate antitrust laws by using their monopoly power on market of Nintendo-compatible games, and not allowing enough competition there. Nintendo is being a bully here, but what on earth does a monopoly on the market of your own platform even mean?
- Nintendo Switch OS only runs on Nintendo Switch hardware -> Nintendo monopoly on Switch OS hardware
- Nintendo Switch hardware and OS only run officially licensed Nintendo game -> Nintendo monopoly on games for Nintendo Switch and OS games
- Nintendo Switch games only run on Nintendo Switch -> Nintendo monopoly on hardware that runs Switch games
(Apple and iPhone are in the same situation)
Compare to the situation with Windows:
- x86 hardware can run any OS, including Linux and Windows -> mostly no Microsoft monopoly, although Windows and Microsoft keys are often pre-installed
- Windows can run on any x86 hardware (and ARM I think?) -> no Microsoft monopoly, although they don't release source to port to other CPU architectures
- Windows can run any software from anyone at no charge -> mostly no Microsoft monopoly, although they can favor their own software
- Windows software can run on any OS, such as Windows or Linux with Wine -> mostly no Microsoft monopoly, although one can argue that having an OS API without an open-source implementation induces lock-in and creates a partial monopoly
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Easy. The defendant and plaintiffs each hire and pay for lawyers they can or are willing to afford. But all of that money goes into a prize pot, which gets distributed based on who wins the case. This would ensure either Nintendo doesn't try to financially grind out a poor small company because the loss would not be worth it to them.
That doesn't solve grinding out the small company, though it does reverse the damage if they don't get ground out. The problem is not the end payout, it's the base cost can't be afforded along the way. One side can keep appealing and escalating, the other can't pay for the cases themselves. They may not get far enough to win the pool. You would have to have the lawyers work pro bono or some common legal fund pay for…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And enough usage in the general public to have "politician X will ban uber" be a negative campaign position. Same reason AirBnB works despite many laws to the contrary. If you get popular enough that the public will vote against people who threaten to enforce the law, out of a desire to keep using the product, you win. It's a race to get too big to be shut down.
There's something hilarious about your framing of "get too big to be shut down". You actually said "if you get popular enough that the public will vote against people who threaten to enforce the law". So someone builds a product that the public likes, something they demand that politicians allow, and somehow this is "too big to be shut down". Do you forget that modern democracies pretend that their authority derives…
There are many reasons why popularity alone of the voting public does not translate into policy. The dangers of tyranny of the majority is well known, will of the people is a necessary but not sufficient reason.
There are also some pre-requisites for a functioning democracy like a well-informed electorate which is questionable today at best.