this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
259 points (96.4% liked)

Technology

58135 readers
4674 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] androidisking@lemmy.world 128 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Nintendo is one of the worst companies that always want to set an "example" about the DMCA. They don't realize they are fighting a battle they cannot win. Emulators are perfectly legal as long as the emulators don't contain any code that was in ownership from them.

That being said, I'm betting some of those forks were following the DMCA but Nintendo still shut them down. This is where copyright needs to be reevaluated.

I'm honestly not surprised they haven't gone after dolphin emulator since those devs contain the encryption keys to play the iso files.

[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So, I agree with your general points, but I think part of the reason Nintendo is so harsh towards Yuzu is because, as far as I'm aware, Yuzu does actually contain proprietary code from Nintendo.

My understanding is that the Yuzu team used a Switch development kit instead of reverse engineering the Switch as they had claimed, so the entire code is essentially tainted because it's unclear which parts came from the development kit and which parts came from true reverse engineering

[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 37 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Source?

Not disbelieving, but I've never heard this before.

[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I tried looking for it, but all my searches are flooded with articles about this current takedown wave. I did find a forum post talking about it, though, so I know I'm not crazy.

I might try searching again later, in which case I'll edit this comment.

Also, I know this isn't really relevant to the question, but the Yuzu team was doing some really shady stuff, even ignoring the development kit usage. For instance, they were collecting telemetry data from all of their users and were using illegally obtained roms to optimize Yuzu, to the point where the Yuzu team was able to get games to work before the game's official release

[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 20 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

They did do shady stuff but I hate that the "TOTK worked on the Switch perfectly on release day" is thrown around as an argument. It's an emulator, emulating the switch hardware, if it does it's job well of course it'll do that.

I know that they used leaked builds but that just annoys me.

And obligatory, fuck Nintendo.

[–] HKayn@dormi.zone 4 points 4 months ago

I've seen hearsay that there have been Yuzu patches specifically to aid compatibility with TOTK before it was officially out, which would have greatly supported the "mainly/primarily used for piracy" argument in court.

[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I would agree with you, but there was apparently evidence that specific patches were made that allowed TOTK to work. And then if you take a look at the link, there were screenshots of the Nintendo documents to suggest that TOTK apparently was not the Yuzu team's first rodeo when it came to patching for pre-release games

[–] sebinspace@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

I kind of want to just see the evidence. No offense, but the heresay is obnoxious.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 months ago

It doesn't matter if there's patches to make it work specifically, if they don't contain Nintendo's code. At most they could accuse whoever contributed the patch with piracy / breach of NDA or similar for having downloaded the ROM prior to release (couldn't have purchased it) but that doesn't impact the emulator itself

[–] phx@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 months ago

IIRC they also had some stuff going around about how Tears of the Kingdom ran better on the emulator than the actual Switch.

Pretty sure that was the point at which Nintendo decided to unleash the dogs on them

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world -3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/3/24147936/nintendo-dmca-takedown-yuzu-emulator-copies

It's true. They used Nintendo's own cryptographic keys to make the yuzu switch emulation work.

[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's not "proprietary code", those are keys. And they actually didn't include keys, Yuzu did require you to supply a key, however a lot of them were then derived from the key supplied.

And there is no other way to do emulation and a whole host of other things if you can't use their keys. Make no mistake, Nintendo wishes it could make using the keys at all illegal.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago

Here's the thing. The creators of Yuzu folded which is a win as far as Nintendo is concerned and a loss for everyone else who uses the yuzu emulators. Your semantics about the situation aren't helping. All I did was supply a link to a news story that was already available on Lemmy on literally the technology community. This has already been hashed out.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

That's not code and Texas Instruments already lost on that one

[–] rbar@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

The distribution of DRM encryption keys is very storied.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AACS_encryption_key_controversy

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 months ago

They didn't win, they did an out-of-court settlement.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Something something legal precedence. This hasn't gone through court yet, has it?

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

And if Nintendo has its way (which they did this go round) they won't have to. They got what they wanted and they're not having to spend ridiculous amounts of money (that there's basically no way to re-coup) on litigation. They sued a guy who can never pay them back what the court says he owes them. I doubt they want to go through that again. Easier to just for arbitrate the proceedings.

[–] Icalasari@fedia.io 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Part of the problem is they apply Japanese copyright law to an international level. Wouod be cool if they hit the wrong target, got sued for trying to apply their laws to the world stage, and got matched each time they appealed until their war chest got drained dry

[–] lowleveldata@programming.dev 13 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What Japanese copyright law? They sued Yuzu in a US court.

[–] Icalasari@fedia.io 4 points 4 months ago

In terms of their mentality, I mean

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

The DMCA is a US law, so I don't see how you can say they're using Japanese law.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

In Japan, there is no concept of "Fair Use", it's why they don't have a modding scene and why Japanese devs actively fight against people trying to mod their games. Nintendo uses DMCA on things that are clearly fair use (Parodies like SML, Nintendo themed mods on Garry's Mod), and people cave solely because they can't afford to go to court.

It's also literally a criminal offense in Japan to modify Pokemon data because tournaments in that scene are taken that seriously.

Or to be blunt, Nintendo abuses DMCA (an American Legal system) by applying it to things that would only be illegal in Japan, but are perfectly legal in America as it's outside of Japan, and since the courts only care about who has more money, no one's pointed this out as they'd have to do so in court in front of Nintendo's army of lawyers.

[–] Icalasari@fedia.io 4 points 4 months ago

In terms of their mentality, I mean