Thursday, July 20th 2023

Dolphin Emulator Dev Comments on Steam Removal Controversy

Well that blew up, huh? If you follow emulation or just gaming on the whole, you've probably heard about the controversy around the Dolphin Steam release and the Wii Common Key. There's been a lot of conclusions made, and while we've wanted to defend ourselves, we thought it would be prudent to contact lawyers first to make sure that our understanding of the situation was legally sound. That took some time, which was frustrating to ourselves and to our users, but now we are educated and ready to give an informed response.

We'd like to thank Kellen Voyer of Voyer Law for providing us with legal council for this matter. And to be clear, all of the analysis below is specifically regarding US law. Without further delay, let's begin.
What actually happened?
First things first - Nintendo did not send Valve or Dolphin a Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) section 512(c) notice (commonly known as a DMCA Takedown Notice) against our Steam page. Nintendo has not taken any legal action against Dolphin Emulator or Valve.

What actually happened was that Valve's legal department contacted Nintendo to inquire about the announced release of Dolphin Emulator on Steam. In reply to this, a lawyer representing Nintendo of America requested Valve prevent Dolphin from releasing on the Steam store, citing the DMCA as justification. Valve then forwarded us the statement from Nintendo's lawyers, and told us that we had to come to an agreement with Nintendo in order to release on Steam. Considering the strong legal wording at the start of the document and the citation of DMCA law, we took the letter very seriously. We wanted to take some time and formulate a response, however after being flooded with questions, we wrote a fairly frantic statement on the situation as we understood it at the time, which turned out to only fuel the fires of speculation.

So, after a long stay of silence, we have a difficult announcement to make. We are abandoning our efforts to release Dolphin on Steam. Valve ultimately runs the store and can set any condition they wish for software to appear on it. But given Nintendo's long-held stance on emulation, we find Valve's requirement for us to get approval from Nintendo for a Steam release to be impossible. Unfortunately, that's that. But there are some more serious matters to discuss, some that are much bigger than Dolphin's Steam Release.

What about the key?
Over the past few weeks, a lot has been said about Dolphin including the Wii Common Key. As you may know, Wii games are encrypted, and the Wii uses the "common key" that is burned into the console to decrypt Wii discs. Wii software does not have any access to the key whatsoever, however, some smart engineers and a pair of tweezers was all it took to extract the key. If you haven't heard this story before, we highly recommend checking out the 25c3 presentation on the actual Tweezer Exploit that gave Team Twiizers its original name. It's an incredibly entertaining video that's worth your time. If you aren't familiar with Team Twiizers, perhaps you know them under their modern name: fail0verflow.

The extraction of the Wii Common Key did not elicit any kind of legal response from anyone. It was freely shared everywhere, and eventually made its way into Dolphin's codebase more than 15 years ago (committed by a Team Twiizers member no less).

These keys have been publicly available for years and no one has really cared. US law regarding this has not changed, yet a lot of armchair lawyers have come out talking about how foolish we were to ship the Wii Common Key. Fueling this is Nintendo's letter to Valve, which cites the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA (17 U.S.C. § 1201), particularly because Dolphin has to decrypt Wii games.

Nintendo's Letter to Valve stated: "Wii and Nintendo GameCube game files, or ROMs, are encrypted using proprietary cryptographic keys. The Dolphin emulator operates by incorporating these cryptographic keys without Nintendo's authorization and decrypting the ROMs at or immediately before runtime. Thus, use of the Dolphin emulator unlawfully "circumvent(s) a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under" the Copyright Act. 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1). Distribution of the emulator, whether by the Dolphin developers or other third-party platforms, constitutes unlawful "traffic[king] in a[] technology... that... is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure...." 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(2)(A)."

This sounds extremely bad at a glance (and we certainly had a moment of panic after first reading it), but now that we have done our homework and talked to a lawyer, we are no longer concerned.

We have a very strong argument that Dolphin is not primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection. Dolphin is designed to recreate the GameCube and Wii hardware as software, and to provide the means for a user to interact with this emulated environment. Only an incredibly tiny portion of our code is actually related to circumvention. Additionally, GameCube games aren't actually encrypted at all, and Dolphin can also play homebrew and is used in the development of game mods. There are even homebrew and mods that specifically target Dolphin as its own platform, given that it has the ability to emulate more memory and processing power than is possible on the original consoles. That's why there are "Dolphin modes" in many modern homebrew games!

Considering that only a small fraction of what we do involves circumvention, we think that the claim that we are "primarily for circumvention" is a reach. We do not believe this angle would be successful in a US courtroom, if it were ever to come to that. The reason the lawyers representing Nintendo would make such a leap is because they wished to create a narrative where the DMCA's exemptions do not apply to us, as these exemptions are powerful and widely in our favor. Of particular note for Dolphin is the reverse engineering exemption in 17 U.S.C. § 1201 which states that: "...a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title."

Dolphin is an independently created computer program that is circumventing Wii disc encryption for interoperability with Wii software. According to this exemption, this does not constitute infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 1201. This exemption even allows distribution of information collected through circumvention, like encryption keys, if it is for software interoperability: "The information acquired through the acts permitted under paragraph (1), and the means permitted under paragraph (2), may be made available to others if the person referred to in paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be, provides such information or means solely for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title or violate applicable law other than this section."

17 U.S.C. § 1201 is a significant legal protection for emulation in the US, and it is why Nintendo has yet to legally challenge any emulator with the DMCA anti-circumvention clauses despite the law going into effect 25 years ago. Unless a court rules that our understanding of the law is incorrect, we have every reason to believe that our decryption of Wii game discs is covered by this exemption.

After this situation blew up, we received many requests, and even some demands, to remove all Wii keys from our codebase. We're disappointed that so many people on YouTube and social media didn't even consider that maybe the team had done their research and risk analysis before including the keys, and just assumed that now that it was "pointed out to us" we would remove them. However, we do not think that including the Wii Common Key actually matters - the law could easily be interpreted to say that circumventing a Wii disc's encryption by any means is a violation. As such, it is our interpetation that removing the Wii keys would not change whether the exemption in 17 U.S.C. § 1201(f) applies to us or not.

In fact, we think that offloading decryption tasks onto a potential 3rd party application would make the situation worse for everyone. As such, we believe leaving the keys as they are is the best course of action.

And to all the armchair lawyers out there, the letter to Valve did not make any claims that we were violating a US copyright by including the Wii Common Key, as a short string of entirely random letters and numbers generated by a machine is not copyrightable under current US copyright law. If that ever changes, the world will be far too busy to think about emulation.

What happens now?
We do not believe that Dolphin is in any legal danger. We can look to the end of the message Valve forwarded to us to show this. After all of the scary language, Nintendo made no demands and made only a single request to Valve. Nintendo's letter to Valve stated: "We specifically request that Dolphin's "coming soon" notice be removed and that you ensure the emulator does not release on the Steam store moving forward."

In the end, Valve is the one running the Steam store front, and they have the right to allow or disallow anything they want on said store front for any reason. As for Nintendo, this incident just continues their existing stance towards emulation. We don't think that this incident should change anyone's view of either company.

As a silver lining, some of the features being developed for the Steam release will still work in Dolphin's normal builds, and are still being developed. One of the features we are most excited for is a full "Big Picture" GUI that can be used directly with a controller. That is still going to happen regardless of a Steam release, alongside several smaller features that were meant to be quality of life improvements for Steam builds.

The last thing we'd like to do before signing off is thank the developers who put a lot of effort into the Steam release. OatmealDome in particular was the architect of Dolphin's Steam Integration, working with Dolphin's infrastructure and Steam to take it from theory all the way to a fully-functional version of Dolphin. We'd also like to thank delroth for the immense amount of CI work the past few months, which gave OatmealDome a solid foundation to build from. Finally, MayImilae put in a large amount of media work toward the Steam release despite also working on a major upcoming feature.
Source: Dolphin Emu Dot Org
Add your own comment

63 Comments on Dolphin Emulator Dev Comments on Steam Removal Controversy

#26
Gooigi's Ex
AssimilatorOffended by what? You really need to project less.
LMAO I’m projecting but says the man with multiple comments about the subject at hand. Pot meet kettle moment.
Posted on Reply
#27
mechtech
While I do understand Nintendo position and rights........................

Where is does sucks if one has a big stack of game cube discs but the console is broken, and emu is not allowed, then they are up the creek and out all that money and left with a coaster collection
Posted on Reply
#28
R-T-B
dragontamer5788I think we all know that law is selectively applied with regards to online: memes, like "surprised Pikachu" obviously violate trademark and copyright laws but everyone turns a blind eye to it.
Not really, "Fair Use" is actually very defined and cut and dry. What he did falls under fair use.
dragontamer5788see ROCm, an obvious copy of NVidia's copyrighted CUDA. But as long as AMD didn't use any NVidia code, its perfectly legal to copy the behavior of other people's code
Technically this only exists because NVIDIA lets it, they could sue if the Oracle lawsuits over API usage are anything to base it on.
dragontamer5788Google vs Oracle is the biggest case and still fresh on my mind. Is Google allowed to build its own Java-emulator (aka: Android / Dalvik) to run Java code, even though Java is copyrighted by Oracle / Sun? Well, duh. Copyright doesn't protect against copying behavior, as long as Google rebuilt the Dalvik virtual machine from scratch (meaning it will have its own inconsistencies and quirks against the official, original Java virtual machine), then they're in the clear. Because copyrights can't and shouldn't protect against behaviors.
That's literally the opposite of what the final ruling determined, IIRC. The final ruling was tl;dr "APIs are copyrightable"
Posted on Reply
#29
Camm
Not sure why people are brigading for Nintendo here.

The reality is Ninty would absolutely have sued many of these projects into the ground if it thought it could. The fact it hasn't says alot.

On the flipside, Dolphin refusing to engage it also makes sense, the US legal system is expensive, and you only engage if you have the funds to do so. Dolphin does not.
Posted on Reply
#30
evernessince
AssimilatorCopyright of the key itself isn't the issue here; it's that the key allows Nintendo's copyright protection of its games to be circumvented.
The emulator is using the key the same way any Wii console would. Hence why it's called an emulator.

If someone can point to a part of the code that circumvents protections put in place by Nintendo, please do. Otherwise I fail to see how emulating the Wii as faithfully as possible constitutes a breach of Nintendo's rights. Would people prefer if they had provided a cracked key instead?
CammNot sure why people are brigading for Nintendo here.

The reality is Ninty would absolutely have sued many of these projects into the ground if it thought it could. The fact it hasn't says alot.

On the flipside, Dolphin refusing to engage it also makes sense, the US legal system is expensive, and you only engage if you have the funds to do so. Dolphin does not.
It's definitely not worth fighting it. Simply look at the Smash Pro community if you want to see how much Nintendo is willing to screw over it's own fans. I can only imagine what they would do just to spite someone they actually dislike.
Posted on Reply
#31
LabRat 891
Ooooh! Spicy!

Seems like every few months I get yet another reason to consider Nintendo a non-entity. Thankfully, they don't cross-license technology and games very often. -keeps things easier to avoid.
Posted on Reply
#32
Denver
The whole system of laws in most cases is one big - unnecessary - pile of interpretive rubbish. How can a law be fair if it depends on the interpretation or opinion of the one who is judging.

Dolphin has been here for more than a decade, just because the emulator of the "defunct consoles" appeared on Steam, Nintendo's dirty hand decided to act.
Posted on Reply
#33
evernessince
DenverThe whole system of laws in most cases is one big - unnecessary - pile of interpretive rubbish. How can a law be fair if it depends on the interpretation or opinion of the one who is judging.

Dolphin has been here for more than a decade, just because the emulator of the "defunct consoles" appeared on Steam, Nintendo's dirty hand decided to act.
It depends on how the law is written, some laws are more ambiguous while others are not. A certain level of ambiguity is need as not every law can be laser focused on a specific thing. Certain laws need to be flexible to address a subject that is wide or ever changing.

Unless it is a new law, judges should defer to stare decisis. It is this deferment to stare decisis that enables a large level of stability in the legal system, as deferment to precedent ensures an consistent and even application of the law.

Technically you aren't wrong that Nintendo should have taken action if it believed it's rights were being infringed. That they didn't would weaken any case they brought before a court.
Posted on Reply
#34
lexluthermiester
T0@stWell that blew up, huh?
Right? Like, really, who could have EVER seen THAT one coming?
/s Almost everyone did...
T0@stAs for Nintendo, this incident just continues their existing(completely moronic and meritless) stance towards emulation.
That statement needed a bit of help. :toast:
Posted on Reply
#35
dragontamer5788
R-T-BThat's literally the opposite of what the final ruling determined, IIRC. The final ruling was tl;dr "APIs are copyrightable"
I didn't realize how many appeals this case went through. I guess its good to double-check upon the final status before running my mouth off, lol.
Posted on Reply
#36
lexluthermiester
R-T-BThe final ruling was tl;dr "APIs are copyrightable"
API's are code. Cryptographic key strings are not.
dragontamer5788I didn't realize how many appeals this case went through. I guess its good to double-check upon the final status before running my mouth off, lol.
Trust me, you can easily be forgiven for missing things in such a complicated case.
Posted on Reply
#37
Unregistered
This is overblown, Dolphin is available freely for Windows, Mac, Xbox, you can easily download it without having to have an extra software on your PC and enjoy.
#38
Bomby569
They f'd up, it happens.
Nintendo went to protect what's theirs, seems normal.

Honestly it all seems normal at my end. And do mind, i ocassionaly pirated stuff so i'm not on Nintendo's side.
Posted on Reply
#39
Dr. Dro
Xex360This is overblown, Dolphin is available freely for Windows, Mac, Xbox, you can easily download it without having to have an extra software on your PC and enjoy.
The idea of emulator distribution on Steam is to bring the application to more users and I would argue primarily to facilitate its usage on the Steam Deck. It's a really popular device, at least in markets where Valve bothered making it available. The other devices like the GPDs and the ROG Ally run Windows, so that makes things easier. Speaking of which, ASUS has such impeccable timing, just as I decided to upgrade my PC they release the Ally here... hehe its a crime for me to complain after the treat I just gave myself :eek::D
Bomby569They f'd up, it happens.
Nintendo went to protect what's theirs, seems normal.

Honestly it all seems normal at my end. And do mind, i ocassionaly pirated stuff so i'm not on Nintendo's side.
IMHO the biggest problem with copyright law today is that it does not discern between casual piracy (i.e. kid that downloads an mp3) and infringement with the intent of capitalize on a third party's intellectual property - with the preservation of "obsolete" mediums (often amazing restoration projects that culminate in a supreme, archival-quality release of a partially or completely lost work) and continued access to media that is no longer available in any manner due to market or technological concerns caught in the crossfire, I sincerely believe that a reform in both patent, trademark and copyright law is long overdue.

Patent trolling is a plague upon mankind. Can you imagine how powerful and innovative CPUs would be today if there wasn't a duopoly due to x86 patents, or how many lives could be saved if more than one company could make any given medicine after say, 5 years? Oh it's gotta fund R&D? Not like that problem wouldn't take care of itself through the sheer force of market. Boo-hoo.
Posted on Reply
#40
Bomby569
Dr. DroIMHO the biggest problem with copyright law today is that it does not discern between casual piracy (i.e. kid that downloads an mp3) and infringement with the intent of capitalize on a third party's intellectual property - with the preservation of "obsolete" mediums (often amazing restoration projects that culminate in a supreme, archival-quality release of a partially or completely lost work) and continued access to media that is no longer available in any manner due to market or technological concerns caught in the crossfire, I sincerely believe that a reform in both patent, trademark and copyright law is long overdue.

Patent trolling is a plague upon mankind. Can you imagine how powerful and innovative CPUs would be today if there wasn't a duopoly due to x86 patents, or how many lives could be saved if more than one company could make any given medicine after say, 5 years? Oh it's gotta fund R&D? Not like that problem wouldn't take care of itself through the sheer force of market. Boo-hoo.
Things should go to public domain faster, especially if you are doing nothing with it.

The alice games are a good example, EA doesn't care and doesn't want to let the original developers revive it. Nintendo has a back catalogue of games that no one can even buy anymore. This is stupid. Games are literally dying.

I found on reddit this tv show that flopped so bad they just removed it from the platform for good, so now no one can watch it but pirates.

It's even worst, copyright law makes companies have to go after someone even if they don't care to, because if they don't they can lose the IP. It's absurd,

Things are broken
Posted on Reply
#41
lemonadesoda
Bomby569It's even worst, copyright law makes companies have to go after someone even if they don't care to, because if they don't they can lose the IP. It's absurd,
Came here to say the same thing. Unfortunately, Nintendo has to actively defend in order to protect all their IP. Because if they didn't, it puts at risk all their IP of similar age/heritage, and you can understand they want to protect other items. All items in the IP portfolio have to be actively defended lest you lose entitlement to the whole portfolio under the legal precedent "they didn't defend X so therefore IP of Y lapses". It's doopid, but that's copyright laws for you.

Dolphin could get round this by having a piece of IP protector software built into their code. e.g. check for Wii CD, not allow ISOs. (And let someone ELSE do the noCD crack)
Posted on Reply
#42
Assimilator
Gooigi's ExLMAO I’m projecting but says the man with multiple comments about the subject at hand. Pot meet kettle moment.
Apparently having multiple comments on a topic means I'm offended by it, WHO KNEW? I'm sure your Nobel Prize nomination is gonna be in the post soon.
CammNot sure why people are brigading for Nintendo here.
Nobody is brigading for Nintendo. We're simply pointing and laughing at the Dolphin devs for lacking the mental capability to realise that megacorporations will act to protect their IP when they feel it is sufficiently threatened. You can kick the hornet's nest a few times and not get stung, but if you stick your entire stupid head inside it don't expect to walk away unscathed... and apparently the Dolphin devs did. F**k around and find out, as they say.
CammThe reality is Ninty would absolutely have sued many of these projects into the ground if it thought it could. The fact it hasn't says alot.
Please reread my previous post regarding cost/benefit analysis.
evernessinceIf someone can point to a part of the code that circumvents protections put in place by Nintendo, please do.
How about, IDK, the part of the code that uses that key to make copy-protected GameCube/Wii games playable? Without which Dolphin is nothing?
Posted on Reply
#43
Dristun
The problem is we can't know if they (ninty) really have a standing in this case, because nobody went to court. Sure, Dolphin guys were naive to say the least to think that Nintendo will sleep but also they just don't have the cash to defend, like many others in past history of modding, fan-games and so on. What we need to find out is a crazy billionaire to fund #TeamEmulation and see what they get, haha. Maybe they'll rekt the entire emulation scene or maybe ninty finally get their comeuppance.
Posted on Reply
#44
Kyan
I really recommend everybody to watch this video, it's really well writen and goes back in history to understand why nintendo is like this with it's property. I think it's a part of the understanding behind the dolphin on steam controversy. Nintendo are more willing to protect their public image/character/game than protecting their hardware once they are hacked.
Posted on Reply
#45
lemonadesoda
@Kyan , got a slightly more focused version of that video? It really drags and takes 10 mins to say what could be said in 3. I gave up because it was just too slow.
Posted on Reply
#46
Kyan
lemonadesoda@Kyan , got a slightly more focused version of that video? It really drags and takes 10 mins to say what could be said in 3. I gave up because it was just too slow.
I don't know if anybody have covered the subject in another form. I've watch it some month ago so i don't really remember when does it get slow. I've watch it without any problem.

I've just notice that he made a video about the dolphin-steam-nintendo case
Posted on Reply
#47
skizzo
AssimilatorHow about, IDK, the part of the code that uses that key to make copy-protected GameCube/Wii games playable? Without which Dolphin is nothing?
it only decrypts Wii games. if the key was removed GameCube games would be not impacted and continue to work as is.
Posted on Reply
#48
evernessince
AssimilatorHow about, IDK, the part of the code that uses that key to make copy-protected GameCube/Wii games playable? Without which Dolphin is nothing?
The key makes games playable because copy protection is still in place. If the emulator was circumventing copy protection, what need is there for the key? None. Saying using the key is circumventing copy protection is backwards, using the key means copy protection is in fact still in place.

The real Wii also uses that key to unlock the encryption to play games. Again the emulator is emulating the original console.
Posted on Reply
#49
Unregistered
Bomby569Things should go to public domain faster, especially if you are doing nothing with it.

The alice games are a good example, EA doesn't care and doesn't want to let the original developers revive it. Nintendo has a back catalogue of games that no one can even buy anymore. This is stupid. Games are literally dying.

I found on reddit this tv show that flopped so bad they just removed it from the platform for good, so now no one can watch it but pirates.

It's even worst, copyright law makes companies have to go after someone even if they don't care to, because if they don't they can lose the IP. It's absurd,

Things are broken
The whole IP system (especially that of Anglo-Saxon countries) just hinder innovation, those who pretend to create "new" things just copied others nothing particularly new.

Science on the other hand, we have truly new discoveries, yet the information is available (though the stupid system of paywalls remains a huge problem, fortunately there are some people working to make knowledge available freely) to everyone to use.
Posted on Edit | Reply
#50
Zareek
There needs to be an exception in the DMCA that specifically stipulates that content in considered abandoned if it is not currently sold or a sequel made from it after a reasonable amount of time. I'd like it to be ten years, but twenty would be fine as well. Nintendo and others are sitting on piles of great games which they refuse to sell and refuse to make consoles to play said games on anymore. Meanwhile, tons of people are sitting on collections of these games with no LEGAL way to play them. I totally get protecting franchises like Mario Brothers, Pokémon and Zelda. But you need to sell the games and a device to play them on, or get out of the damn way!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 16th, 2024 02:38 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts