Oh there is good emulation of Switch on powerful Switch-like devices? I will definitely give it a try. Thanks Nintendo!
Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
531–540 of 709 posts
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#532Earlier quoted context omitted.
In that scenario, why would you have connected to Github from any IPs that link to your identity?
Because perfect security is impossible and you only have to leak your real IP once - especially with committing to github it would be so easy for a tool or plugin to leak that.
You make it sound harder than it has to be. Just put your VPN on autostart and be done with it.
Also, there are other git hosting providers out there.
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#533Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does loss of revenue matter at all? It feels like it should, but I had thought that it didn't matter in courts.
From my podcast law degree, in civil action like this yes. To get standing you must show you were harmed in some way and that the court can remedy that harm. That is just one of many parts of the standing test that a federal court will apply. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)
> To get standing you must show you were harmed in some way and that the court can remedy that harm. That is just one of many parts of the standing test that a federal court will apply.
Not in copyright cases. You have to show harm for actual damages, but copyright has statutory damages: you only need to demonstrate a violation of the law (the copyright statutes) for damages [1]:
> In all countries where the Berne Convention standards apply, copyright is automatic, and need not be obtained through official registration with any government office. Once an idea has been reduced to tangible form, for example by securing it in a fixed medium (such as a drawing, sheet music, photograph, a videotape, or a computer file), the copyright holder is entitled to enforce their exclusive rights.[35] However, while registration is not needed to exercise copyright, in jurisdictions where the laws provide for registration, it serves as prima facie evidence of a valid copyright and enables the copyright holder to seek statutory damages and attorney's fees.[48] (In the US, registering after an infringement only enables one to receive actual damages and lost profits.)
Statutory damages do not need to correspond to actual damages [2]:
> The charges allow copyright holders, who succeed with claims of infringement, to receive an amount of compensation per work (as opposed to compensation for losses, an account of profits or damages per infringing copy). Statutory damages can in some cases be significantly more than the actual damages suffered by the rightsholder or the profits of the infringer.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Registration
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_damages_for_copyrigh...
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#534Pirate everything Nintendo produces.
The funny thing is that I really would've liked to own a switch but my absolute hatred of Nintendo has kept me from doing it
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#535Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amusingly Valve themselves released an official trailer for the Steam Deck which showed Yuzu installed on the homescreen. It was quickly taken down and re-posted without any references to Yuzu, probably after a panicked email from legal. https://www.pcgamer.com/valve-edits-steam-deck-trailer-to-re...
I can play Switch games on Steam Deck!?
Yep and you can back up your saves, something you can't do on the Switch without a Nintendo subscription.
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#536Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, you might as well pirate it, that's just as bad in their view. Same with ripping DVDs/Blu-rays, it's illegal to rip them anyway, so might as well just download them. Especially now that they're suing emulator developers, it's almost unethical to buy Switch games anymore.
Here in France, as far as I know I have a right to private copy, which I pay for through a specific tax whenever I buy storage. I can rip my DVDs, Blu-rays, or even Nintendo Switch cartridges or hard drive, perfectly legally, even if it means cracking open the thing and circumvent stuff. It's awfully less convenient than downloading the stuff, but it is legal. Or at least it was 20 years ago, but I'm not aware of any…
Same in Poland. Fully legal to make any copies of any stuff you own, even if it involves bypassing their encryption or whatever. 100% legal.
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#537Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on the place. This sort of interoperability is explicitly allowed in the EU.
Per whose interpretation of the law? The DMA isn’t going to give nerds the utopia they think that they’re going to get.
Note: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.
In the EU, reverse engineering is allowed by law if the reason for doing so is interoperability by the one who owns a license to the product in question.
"The authorisation of the rightholder shall not be required where reproduction of the code and translation of its form within the meaning of points (a) and (b) of Article 4(1) are indispensable to obtain the information necessary to achieve the interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, provided that the following conditions are met:
(a) those acts are performed by the licensee or by another person having a right to use a copy of a program, or on their behalf by a person authorised to do so;
(b) the information necessary to achieve interoperability has not previously been readily available to the persons referred to in point (a); and
(c) those acts are confined to the parts of the original program which are necessary in order to achieve interoperability."
More information: https://www.vidstromlabs.com/blog/the-legal-boundaries-of-re...
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#538Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hammers are used for theft, as well. Even if Nintendo's business would benefit from emulators not existing[1], it doesn't mean we should ban emulators (or create laws which allow multinationals to sue open source emulator projects out of existence). [1] which is not necessarily true
I understand your argument, and perhaps a similar one will be made to the courts. For some people, if a tool has a single legitimate user, and otherwise haa illegitimate users, then the tool should be allowed. For others, if the tool is mostly used for illegitimate means, then the tool should be banned. Where the law lands in this case will be partly based on these values, and the benefits/harms to all parties. I don…
[deleted]
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#539> The legal document claims that over a million copies of last year's The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom were downloaded prior to the game's official retail release. As a result, the company is now seeking damages and is demanding that the Yuzu emulator is shut down. Quite the leap from existing as an emulator to inexplicably being held liable for some independent leak.
It's called contributory copyright infringement. The Supreme Court only ruled that the VCR was legal based on a very narrow use case: if a television broadcast aired once and only once, never to be seen again, and the user could not see it as scheduled, they were legally entitled to use a device to record the broadcast and watch it at a later time -- once, after which they would presumably have to destroy the recordi…
> It's called contributory copyright infringement. The Supreme Court only ruled that the VCR was legal based on a very narrow use case…
That 1984 Supreme Court decision was a 5–4 ruling. Can you imagine the deleterious effect on the home electronics industry if, in 1984, a single justice had voted the other way, and the VCR had been ruled an inherently infringing device?
Re: Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu
#540Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the keys are that readily available ... I don't think it is "effective" by any definition of the word.
'Effectively' has a different meaning than y'all are reading. It's not effectively as in 'an effective, well constructed lock', but instead as in 'for all intents and purposes'. The law doesn't say 'it's illegal to break a lock until it's been broken'.
A door without a lock or sign saying "keep out" is not "effective for all intents and purposes." Further, you can buy a switch and never agree to any EULA or other contracts.