• Wild_Mastic@lemmy.world
    117·
    8 months ago

    Let them eat each other alive. That would be a 2 for 1 offer for saying fuck off to two giant asshole companies

      • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
        24·
        8 months ago

        Nintendo goes after individual emulators, which are now even easier to track on an app store. Takes them out, potentially extracting user information for further Bowser sized rulings against the lot of them.

  • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
    596·
    7 months ago

    Typical Apple behaviour, shitting in everybody else’s bullshit pie while keeping their own bullshit pie completely pristine.

  • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
    381·
    8 months ago

    *Nintendo quietly shows Apple Yuzu’s corpse in their trunk while staring sternly and slowly and audibly tapping a bloody baseball bat against the ground behind their back… *

      • SquirrelEnglish
        32·
        7 months ago

        Yeah, I somehow doubt that Apple could be done in like Yuzu. They’re in a different ballpark, league, and game.

        • LazaroFilm@lemmy.worldEnglish
          10·
          7 months ago

          Apple has make a lawsuit last long enough to not make it worth it money. The worst a lawsuit against Apple did is stopping sales of Apple Watches for a week.

  • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
    342·
    8 months ago

    App developers are responsible for the content the emulators can include (which are called mini-apps)

    So let’s say I am Square Enix. I own the rights to Chrono Trigger. I can release an emulator with Chrono Trigger SNES ROM and can sell it as Chrono Trigger. I cannot have said emulator allowed to run Super Mario World, as that would get my program delisted from App Store.

    This is not limited to just emulators though. We can classify the games in roblox as mini apps; so let’s say if Roblox doesn’t remove a game that clearly infringes copyright; they too will get removed from App Store. (Which is one of the many reasons why they try to remove the games that contain these content)

    • thehatfox@lemmy.worldEnglish
      14·
      8 months ago

      The wording of the new App Store rules say developers are responsible for any software offered in an app, and there’s been a bit of debate going on as to what that means in practice.

      I haven’t heard if any emulators have or haven’t passed Apple’s review process yet.

    • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
      528·
      8 months ago

      Emulation for game preservation is fine, these ones getting taken down by Nintendo aren’t doing that. They are promoting piracy, providing the keys to play games, and making a profit.

      Theres ways to go about this legally, advocating piracy, profiting and providing the keys are what’s not legal.

            • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
              216·
              7 months ago

              Your confusing the product and the creators of it.

              They are one and the same. If you knew where to look, they provided means. This is one case that didn’t even make it to discovery before settling, that just tells you how fucked they were and how wrong they did everything.

              What’s wrong with Twitter? You could also just google this and find the information yourself, don’t know why I have to provide what should be common knowledge on this subject. They were not a legal emulator, full stop, sorry.

              • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
                161·
                7 months ago

                They are one and the same. If you knew where to look, they provided means.

                Tools are agnostic to their use. Tools do not have a preference how they are used. Hammers that are used are agnostic to if they are hammering a nail into a wall or caving in a skull. Yuzu would work exactly the same if you dumped your own carts. Same for emulators for Genesis and Atari 2600 and PlayStation.

                What’s wrong with Twitter? You could also just google this and find the information yourself, don’t know why I have to provide what should be common knowledge on this subject.

                If you make a claim, you need to provide the evidence. That’s how these things work. You say a claim, you give us the proof. And I can say on Twitter “Yuzu was 100000% legal and Nintendo actually is the real illegal operation”. Now that’s a valid source too, right?

                They were not a legal emulator, full stop, sorry.

                https://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq

                Sorry but that biggest technology legal experts and defenders of the little guys who get sued by the big companies you polish the boots with your tongue strongly prove you wrong.

                • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                  110·
                  7 months ago

                  Uhhh they didn’t reverse engineer the key they used, that’s the entire stickler here……

                  And the Twitter thread had the sources, so why are you saying the onus is on me? I provided it, even though it should be common knowledge.

                • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                  18·
                  7 months ago

                  Queues arguement doesn’t work since they didn’t reverse engineer their key….

                  I’m not defending Nintendo, I am providing information on the subject, it just unfortunately only looks bad for one side here. I even said legal emulation has its place…. So how am I “shill” and “defending” Nintendo? Because I proved you are fucking wrong? Lmfao. Why is THAT always the comeback in this scenarios?

          • Rustmilian@lemmy.worldEnglish
            61·
            7 months ago

            Objection hearsay! Some jackass on Twitter saying some crap without proof is not proof. We need screenshots of the actual incidents at the minimum.

        • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.worldEnglish
          47·
          7 months ago

          By going after the encryption and decryption part rather than the hardware and software emulation part. And having a massive amount of money to spend on lawyers.

        • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
          28·
          7 months ago

          Having much greater lawyer force than a couple of developers. Nintendo would win even if they are not right. Or even if not win, those developers would go completely bancrupt for the rest of their lifes because of lawyers costs.

          • LittleBorat2@lemmy.ml
            1·
            7 months ago

            Couldn’t they outsource that decryption part to someone who is more grey area and incognito than the emulator devs?

            Just make it possible to add this to the Emu and focus their development on the emu itself

            • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
              7·
              7 months ago

              Circumventing DRM is illegal under the DMCA, but the DMCA has an exception saying you’re allowed to ignore parts of the DMCA if it’s for purposes of interoperability between different computer systems. It’s that exception that makes emulators legal in the first place. However, there’s no case law setting a precedent as to whether the DRM circumvention prohibition or interoperability exception wins when both apply.

              That means that the decryption is in a grey area if it’s part of an emulator, but definitely illegal if it isn’t.

              We also don’t know if this is an argument Nintendo relied on to stop Yuzu. Their initial court documents claimed things like emulators being totally illegal and only invented for piracy, which weren’t true, and they settled out of court, so the public can’t see what the final nail in the coffin was. It could simply be that they’d make Yuzu’s position expensive to defend with spurious delays until they were bankrupt or shut down and gave them all their money, which doesn’t require Nintendo to be legally in the right.

              Not long before this, Dolphin’s Steam release was cancelled because Nintendo asked Valve to block it, so the Dolphin team double checked they were entirely above board with their lawyers. Despite Dolphin containing the decryption keys from a real Wii, and using them to decrypt Wii games, they were confident it wasn’t at risk. The keys are an example of a so-called illegal number, but they’re generally believed to not actually be illegal (hence the Wikipedia article about them featuring several examples). The decryption should be safe as the lawyers thought that if push came to shove, the interoperability exception would beat the DRM circumvention prohibition.

        • macniel@feddit.de
          221·
          7 months ago

          They didn’t. Nintendo and Yuzu came to an agreement and settled out of court.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            117·
            7 months ago

            They settled because they used an illegal key instead of making their own, which is the only legal way to do this for game preservation.

            • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.comEnglish
              252·
              7 months ago

              Incorrect. You had to rip that key for yourself. They never distributed it.

              They settled because there’s no winning for them. Even if they’re correct (and they really are) it will be years of litigation… and costs.

              They were forced to settle because they publicly talked about playing shit [pre-release] on discord too…

              Edit: Found a typo. My bad.

              • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                316·
                7 months ago

                The key they used to make the base engine was ripped from online, not made by them that’s the nails in the coffin right there. They also provided means to publicly available bios keys. They did distribute it, you just had to dig into discord or other means to find it, but it was there.

                They were forced to settle because they publicly talked about paying shit on discord too…

                So they were forced to settle because they did this thing illegally, yet you say they didn’t…? What…?

                • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.comEnglish
                  183·
                  7 months ago

                  The key they used to make the base engine was ripped from online

                  Proof please. Since it never went to court, nothing like this would have been “found” through the process of discovery. I suspect you’re just making shit up.

                  They also provided means to publicly available bios keys.

                  Nope, you had to rip your own to use the software.

                  They did distribute it, you just had to dig into discord or other means to find it, but it was there.

                  Users chatting on discord != yuzu doing it.

                  Nothing about Yuzu itself as a program was illegal. Period. How some of the developers talked in their Discord shows that they were using it for illegal things, which fucked them. Not the application itself.

                • msgraves@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  35·
                  7 months ago

                  They were forced to settle because they pirated TOTK ahead of its actual release to allow yuzu to support it, then sold that version that supported it on patreon -> “Made money off it” in nintendo’s eyes. I think it’s fucking stupid that they’re gone, but I’m not surprised, Nintendo happily goes after anything.