Nintendo’s full case filing


https://twitter.com/stephentotilo/status/1762576284817768457/

"NEW: Nintendo is suing the creators of popular Switch emulator Yuzu, saying their tech illegally circumvents Nintendo’s software encryption and facilitates piracy. Seeks damages for alleged violations and a shutdown of the emulator.

Notes 1 million copies of Tears of the Kingdom downloaded prior to game’s release; says Yuzu’s Patreon support doubled during that time. Basically arguing that that is proof that Yuzu’s business model helps piracy flourish."

  • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    the funniest shit about the paperowrk is that nintendo indirectly says nintendo is doing illegal work because they claim a video game emulator is a piece of software that allows users to unlawfully play pirated video games that were published for a specific console on a general purpose device.

    they either have to say NSO/Nes/Snes classic are not emulation, or admit their definition of emulators is not the universally accepted definition of it, else Nintendo just Claimed Nintendo is serving up and charging for an unlawful service that is NSO.

        • schmidtster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s a funny one too me, because they are the original source when you dig your way down, so how are they doing anything wrong there?

          Yeah it’s someone else’s work… which isn’t there’s anyways… so isn’t it always nintendos then?

            • schmidtster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              It’s illegal if you don’t own the rom or decoded it with their keys. If you have the physical copy of the game, and a way to decrypt it, it’s not illegal to play the rom on an emulator.

              So it’s not illegal, it becomes illegal when you don’t have the physical copy, or decode it with their stuff.

        • Atemu@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s rather clear evidence that they dumped their own ROM and distributed that. Since they own the rights to that ROM, they’re not distributing it illegally though. They can dump and distribute their ROMs all they want; they own the rights to them.

          • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            I’m no legal expert but Nintendo’s argument seems to surround a video game emulator being a tool whose primary use is to facilitate illegal circumvention of DRM and piracy. Nintendo’s use of emulation for a legal means to resell their games on another platform, could suggest otherwise. The possible use of a ROM illegally distributed by a 3rd party as inputs in a legitimate Nintendo emulator (though Nintendo denies this) could help separate the issues between ROMs and emulation, because Nintendo’s emulator isn’t used for piracy.

            Nintendo could use a copy of the freely available Yuzu to emulate Switch games on their rumored Switch 2, if they were so inclined, and it would be a legitimate use case.

        • Mango@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I cannot even come up with a way to express how goddamn hilarious that is!!

    • TORFdot0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I really want a real explanation on how I’ve caused Nintendo financial harm by format shifting my legally owned games. Especially considering I pay for NSO. At some point there has to be precedent that a pirated download does not equal a lost sale and that the individuals are responsible for the infringement and not the tools.