Quoting: pleasereadthemanual

Quoting: F.UltraAnd the emulator would be completely useless without that guide and that key extraction tool, and any site hosting the tool and/or such a guide would violate the DMCA.

That is Nintendo's argument, but the emulator could still be used for Homebrew Switch games. For example, some indie game developers make games for the Gameboy, distributing the emulator and all (e.g. npckc distributing Marron's Day via Sameboy sometime in the next few months).

Yuzu would not be entirely useless without the keys, but Nintendo's argument is that this is not a significant use case and should be discounted. So you're completely correct in your analysis.

If that's indeed the case that it doesn't actually have the ability to circumvent Nintendo's protection on its own, then maybe a low-profile fork without any key extraction instructions would be OK or at least fly under Nintendo's radar.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

After using Wayland for a couple of years, I could never go back to X.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: emphyThat was nintendo's claim, but they didn't even issue a dmca take-down notice to github, giving a strong indication that even their legal team had doubts as to some of their claims about the legality of the emulation itself.

From what I understand, yuzu's main legal problems were that their devs didn't strictly adhere to a "we can't tell you how/where to get the games"-policy.

Regardless, emudeck does not have the deep pockets required for an effective legal defence against a billion-dollar company in full extortion mode, so I suspect they'll pass up on the opportunity to paint a bullseye on their backs by supporting emulation of a device whose ecosystem is still being commercially exploited.

From what I understand, DMCA takedown notices are for digital content. If they had a claim that their code was used, they could issue a takedown notice. Their actual argument against Yuzu is from a different part of the DMCA (Section 1201), which prevents the circumvention of TPMs (technological protection measures). This is the same argument they used against Dolphin Emulator when they convinced Valve to block it from the Steam store.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: doragasuDMCA does not apply worldwide.

True, but there's only 7 countries that don't recognize it. They'd have to restrict distribution to only those countries. And that doesn't preclude those countries from having their own copyright laws that might come into play.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: doragasu

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: EhvisThe interesting thing will be what they do next. The code to both has been preserved and deleting all mirrors is something even Nintendo money can accomplish. So it's only a matter of time until builds will pop up somewhere (possibly under a different name). Will Emudeck pull those in?

I think the EmuDeck developers would be pretty stupid if they did pull in some fork, they would be opening themselves up to lawsuits for facilitating what has already been basically declared illegal.

I suspect a **clean** Yuzu fork (other dev team outside USA, no Patreon or any other revenue source, strong anti piracy statement, no support for leaked ROMs, etc.) could maybe stay safe. But of course who is brave enough to take on this task? Don't count me in :tongue:

None of the things you mentioned are what needs to be "cleaned." It's the technology that allows the software to circumvent Nintendo's copy protection. I assume it's encryption of some sort. If you're an old librarian like me, you remember that Linux has struggled with this issues for decades. It used to literally be impossible to play DVDs on Linux because of the copy protection. It was illegal for libdvdcss (the software library that allowed you to de-scramble DVDs) to be packaged with distros, so you had to download and install it separately.

This is all because of the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), which specifically mentions circumventing copy protection as a form of copyright infringement. It doesn't matter if it's done in the USA or other countries because most countries have signed on to copyright treaties that extend those laws beyond their borders.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Ehvis

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: EhvisThe interesting thing will be what they do next. The code to both has been preserved and deleting all mirrors is something even Nintendo money can accomplish. So it's only a matter of time until builds will pop up somewhere (possibly under a different name). Will Emudeck pull those in?

I think the EmuDeck developers would be pretty stupid if they did pull in some fork, they would be opening themselves up to lawsuits for facilitating what has already been basically declared illegal.

The case was settled. Nothing was declared illegal.

They didn't have to declare anything illegal. Under the DMCA, it was already illegal.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Cheaters will still find a way. As with any type of blanket restrictions, it only ends up being the honest, paying customers who get punished. The actual cheaters, pirates, etc. will always still find a way to do what they do.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: melkemindBut at the end of the day, you can't look at corporations as people with good or evil motives because they have neither. The only motive is profit.

For the purpose of judging motivations, you should look at corporations as the people who own and lead them. They're the ones with agency. A corporation is just an abstract concept.

The fact that these people are more or less expected to seek profit without concern for ethics (at least as far as they can get away with) is irrelevant. If an action would be unethical for a person, it's unethical for a corporation.

True, but my conversation wasn't about current actions, it was about motivations for possible future actions. It was speculation about what Microsoft will do. You could argue that you can predict future actions based on past actions, but the people running the company aren't the same people who ran it back when they were clearly attacking Linux. My argument isn't that they're good now. It's just that we don't know what they're going to do. Microsoft did a fine job of spreading FUD back in the day. I don't see any reason why we need to do the same now. They are not our teachers.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ElectricPrismThe saying comes to mind

"When people show you who they really are, believe them the first time."

I mean, I'm with you 100% on that. The thing is, no matter how much the US government wants to say otherwise, corporations aren't people. Microsoft is not a person. It's a public corporation that functions with one motive: profit. Now you can argue against the very concept of capitalism. I myself am very much opposed to it, as was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and pretty much anyone else who cared about human rights. But at the end of the day, you can't look at corporations as people with good or evil motives because they have neither. The only motive is profit.

Sometimes that works in our favor. Sometimes it doesn't. Right now, Microsoft's profit motive is not antagonistic to free and open source software. That could certain change in the future. I was just speaking of the present situation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ElectricPrism

Quoting: pleasereadthemanualThe major way Wine differs from Yuzu is that Wine does not circumvent technological protection measures.

I 100% agree with you it __SHOULD__ but the world we live in "money talks, bullshit walks".

Assuming this is this American legal system we are talking about, I'm not particularly confident that a jury of "average peers" or citizens have the technical intellectual framework necessary to understand the difference between Wine & Emulation.

The name wine even is a bit of a acknowledgement of this conflation -- W.ine I.s N.ot a E.mulator.

I would love to be optimistic, but considering the levels* of idiocracy and incompetence in the modern age, I can't help but consider this to be a very real and serious possibility.

I can't see the slope any other way than slippery if they succeed.

(Final thoughts, most people don't know the difference between a JPEG and a GIF, we can't even get past annunciation.)

At least for the moment, Microsoft's Xbox division is interested in selling games and game services (GamePass). They have no interest in restricting games to the Windows ecosystem. That's why their games are on Steam. If they wanted to be petty, they could just only sell their games in the Windows Store. They aren't even restricting their first-party console games to Xbox.

If Proton means more people will play their games, I think they're all for it. In fact, I don't think Microsoft even wants to be in the OS business anymore. It's not their big money maker. Restricting games just doesn't benefit them financially.

So, yes, it's a possibility as much as anything is a possibility. But is it "very real and serious?" I doubt it. Not for now, at least.

View this comment - View article - View full comments