Nintendo Sues Team Behind Yuzu Emulator

[sam_86314]

Fucking Nintendo, man...

Nintendo Sues Creators Behind Yuzu Switch Emulator | Nintendo Insider

It has emerged that Nintendo of America is taking Tropic Haze LLC to court - the company that owns, develops and operates Yuzu, which it claims allows users

www.nintendo-insider.com

Nintendo of America Inc. v. Tropic Haze LLC

Copyright case filed on February 26, 2024 in the Rhode Island District Court

dockets.justia.com

I hope this ends up as a landmark case in favor of emulation a la Sony v. Bleem.

I also hope this calls attention to how FUBAR'd copyright law is.

 

[natr0n]

time to get an updated copy

 

[GreiverBlade]

given Nintendo propension to sue ...

i wonder how long until they sue Pocketpair for Palworld... i hope they do not ... Palworld is awesome (and i am a "Pokemon hardcore hater" )

time to get an updated copy

indeed.

as for Bleem, tested it (iirc i have the OG CD-ROM for one version of it, somewhere )... and quickly got drawn to more open sources one later i own a PS2 so i can legally dump the ROM and use it with PCSX2, right?
my PCSX (on PC ofc) and ePSXe on my phone still use my OG PsOne ROM (i only play the games i have the physical media )

 

[LabRat 891]

allows users to “unlawfully” play pirated Nintendo Switch games

From 2 entirely different PoVs, this makes 0 sense.

A. Nintendo's DRM is supposed to make games un-pirate-able, right??
Those that modify and distribute the code (outside of license), are a more-legitimate (but fleeting) targets.

B. If a tool, device, or software 'allowing' or 'facilitating' an unlawful activity is unlawful,
then both Nintendo (and everyone else) has some much bigger problems...
(paedo activity in Company-hosted game chats and servers, comes to mind)

 

[sam_86314]

given Nintendo propension to sue ...

i wonder how long until they sue Pocketpair for Palworld... i hope they do not ... Palworld is awesome (and i am a "Pokemon hardcore hater" )

I'm sure they'd already have sued Pocketpair if they had anything on them. The game has been in development for several years.

Imagine how legendary it would be if such a case were ruled in favor of Pocketpair. What a precedent that would set...

time to get an updated copy

The first thing I did after hearing about this was update Yuzu.

 

[GreiverBlade]

The first thing I did after hearing about this was update Yuzu.

also, what about the peoples who bought switch games but don't own switch ...

well ... my Asus ROG Ally ... with Yuzu, i play some Switch games ... i bought them i downloaded the ROM of them, is it piracy?

 

[chrcoluk]

Thanks Nintendo for bringing my attention to its existence, downloaded.

 

[SL2]

Those that modify and distribute the code (outside of license), are a more-legitimate (but fleeting) targets.

Are they really a more legitimate target than emulators? Just curious.

 

[LabRat 891]

Are they really a more legitimate target than emulators? Just curious.

I do not personally support it but,
from my limited observations of law, and what is/was once 'fair' in business: Yes.

Emulators that strictly reverse engineer and/or re-approach/wrapper functions, and contain no Closed Source Code, are strictly off the menu. (As Yuzu should have been)

Personally,
-the good 'ole VHS 'backup copy' rule applies, into the modern age.
Meaning, you should be able to keep and use copies of any IP you've invested into, period.
Personally-kept copies, and Personal modifications (and the enrichment you gain/share from the work) are 'yours'.

But, if you Re-Distribute as-is reproductions for profit
or
Modify and Re-distribute for profit

You are in some way causing losses, damages, or other 'harm' to the original IP holder/distributor.
Same way an artist or photographer *is supposed to* have protections from another directly using and re-selling their work(s)

TL;DR
If it isn't "For Profit" then I personally feel that "Fair Use" should be applied liberally.

 

[Klemc]

Are they really a more legitimate target than emulators? Just curious.

No, only the DRM makers/sellers that have been cracked !

 

[SL2]

I do not personally support it but,
from my limited observations of law, and what is/was once 'fair' in business: Yes.

Emulators that strictly reverse engineer and/or re-approach/wrapper functions, and contain no Closed Source Code, are strictly off the menu. (As Yuzu should have been)

Personally,
-the good 'ole VHS 'backup copy' rule applies, into the modern age.
Meaning, you should be able to keep and use copies of any IP you've invested into, period.
Personally-kept copies, and Personal modifications (and the enrichment you gain/share from the work) are 'yours'.

I see what you mean, but does that really mean that you should be able to run your games outside Nintendo's hardware?

Having a personal backup copy to run on a Switch is pretty far from having a personal backup copy that runs on anything with an emulator.

I fail to see how the latter should be a consumer right, even tho I'd really like that.

 

[ty_ger]

B. If a tool, device, or software 'allowing' or 'facilitating' an unlawful activity is unlawful,
then both Nintendo (and everyone else) has some much bigger problems...
(paedo activity in Company-hosted game chats and servers, comes to mind)

Good luck with that!

Have a listen:

Radiolab - The Internet Dilemma

Matthew Herrick was sitting on his stoop in Harlem when something weird happened. Then, it happened again. And again. It happened so many times that it became an absolute nightmare—a nightmare that haunted his life daily and flipped it completely upside down. What stood between Matthew and help...

podcasts.google.com

Radiolab: The Internet Dilemma


Nintendo has no fear of being charged with that sort of thing, even if it is a logical extension of that stance.

Section 230 is a section of Title 47 of the United States Code that was enacted as part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which is Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and generally provides immunity for online computer services with respect to third-party content generated by its users. At its core, Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by third-party users:

 

[OneMoar]

I hope nintendo looses there asses I am so tired of that company existing and surfing the coat-tails of talent past while doing nothing to drive the industry foward

 

[SL2]

I hope nintendo looses there asses I am so tired of that company existing and surfing the coat-tails of talent past while doing nothing to drive the industry foward

I dunno if it's any better to sell gimped PC's for gaming only (MS/Sony) just because they have a higher pixel rate.

Switch is a massive success AFAIK, and Nintendo didn't get there by copying others (alone ), they did drive the industry forward, just not in transistor count.

You don't like asparagus? Well then don't eat it.

 

[Double-Click]

Emulation legalities aside, Nintendo sure are dicks about their software (and foolishly so).

All they have to do is license the ROMs and the money would pour in like friggin crazy.
Pride is the only thing stopping them from profiting here.

It's not rocket science, their marketing teams know the feedback is literally this:

 

[AusWolf]

also, what about the peoples who bought switch games but don't own switch ...

This. Nintendo have no idea what they're doing.

Personally, I consider spending hundreds on a handheld console that I'd only play for maybe half an hour per year (basically only when I'm on vacation with nothing to do at the moment) an absolute waste, but if there's an exclusive game that strikes my fancy, I wouldn't mind getting it for my PC with an emulator.

 

[LabRat 891]

I see what you mean, but does that really mean that you should be able to run your games outside Nintendo's hardware?

Yes. Hardware breaks down.
Some merely prefer the interface, upscaling, etc. a PC offers. See Also:

Personally, I consider spending hundreds on a handheld console that I'd only play for maybe half an hour per year (basically only when I'm on vacation with nothing to do at the moment) an absolute waste, but if there's an exclusive game that strikes my fancy, I wouldn't mind getting it for my PC with an emulator.

As long as someone is not doing damages to the IP-holder/manufacturer/licensed distributor, etc. the end-user should not be obstructed from utilizing things (Tangible, and Intangible, alike) however they see fit (within law)
[Tangible Automotive example: GM<->Ford<->Mopar<->Import 'kit bashing', and aftermarket modifications]
[Intangible Software Example(s): community ports of software, user-made mods, etc.]

From what I've observed over the years, and in my opinion(worthless):
these open-source emulators are 'within (US) law'.


Another, less individualistic (and less-'Murrican *insert Bald Eagle Screech*) PoV:
Video Games, like TV, Movies, Music, and other Multi-media Publications *are* cultural history. If the living members of that culture choose to preserve it, I believe they (fundamentally) have a right to do so.

Having a personal backup copy to run on a Switch is pretty far from having a personal backup copy that runs on anything with an emulator.

I fail to see how the latter should be a consumer right, even tho I'd really like that.

Should people that bought physical Movies, Albums, etc. not be allowed to rip those to digital, and store (and enjoy) them on (and off of) their own(ed) equipment?
"Changing of mediums" seems like an already-accepted 'thing' under (older) copyright law.

Good luck with that!

Have a listen:

Radiolab - The Internet Dilemma

Matthew Herrick was sitting on his stoop in Harlem when something weird happened. Then, it happened again. And again. It happened so many times that it became an absolute nightmare—a nightmare that haunted his life daily and flipped it completely upside down. What stood between Matthew and help...

podcasts.google.com

Radiolab: The Internet Dilemma


Nintendo has no fear of being charged with that sort of thing, even if it is a logical extension of that stance.

Meh.
'More/less brought up such an extreme and inflammatory point, to reinforce the absurdity of the lawsuit.
It's absolutely absurd that Blaming the tool, not the tool abusing the tool has bled into The Gaming 'sphere'. As if suing Hyundai for the actions of criminals, wasn't enough...

 

[R-T-B]

Good luck with that!

Have a listen:

Radiolab - The Internet Dilemma

Matthew Herrick was sitting on his stoop in Harlem when something weird happened. Then, it happened again. And again. It happened so many times that it became an absolute nightmare—a nightmare that haunted his life daily and flipped it completely upside down. What stood between Matthew and help...

podcasts.google.com

Radiolab: The Internet Dilemma


Nintendo has no fear of being charged with that sort of thing, even if it is a logical extension of that stance.

and thank goodness because the internet as we know it would not, and could not exist without this exception.

 

[AusWolf]

Yes. Hardware breaks down.
Some merely prefer the interface, upscaling, etc. a PC offers. See Also:


As long as someone is not doing damages to the IP-holder/manufacturer/licensed distributor, etc. the end-user should not be obstructed from utilizing things (Tangible, and Intangible, alike) however they see fit (within law)
[Tangible Automotive example: GM<->Ford<->Mopar<->Import 'kit bashing', and aftermarket modifications]
[Intangible Software Example(s): community ports of software, user-made mods, etc.]

From what I've observed over the years, and in my opinion(worthless):
these open-source emulators are 'within (US) law'.


Another, less individualistic (and less-'Murrican *insert Bald Eagle Screech*) PoV:
Video Games, like TV, Movies, Music, and other Multi-media Publications *are* cultural history. If the living members of that culture choose to preserve it, I believe they (fundamentally) have a right to do so.


Should people that bought physical Movies, Albums, etc. not be allowed to rip those to digital, and store (and enjoy) them on (and off of) their own(ed) equipment?
"Changing of mediums" seems like an already-accepted 'thing' under (older) copyright law.


Meh.
'More/less brought up such an extreme and inflammatory point, to reinforce the absurdity of the lawsuit.
It's absolutely absurd that Blaming the tool, not the tool abusing the tool has bled into The Gaming 'sphere'. As if suing Hyundai for the actions of criminals, wasn't enough...

Exactly. If I buy physical media, I own that media. Even if I buy something online (for example, on Steam), I own the rights to use it as I see fit. I copy it, I modify it, I do whatever I want with it for my own use. As long as I don't distribute it, there's no harm done to the IP owner. Similarly, is there anyone to tell you that you aren't allowed to modify a car that you bought on cash? I don't think so.

 

[remixedcat]

there's a skeezy af audio plugin company called unison audio that is making millions off gengar's likeness to sell thier plugin called mangler

several ppl have told nintendo this and nintendo ignores them.

while yuzu devs and streamers that nintendo goes after make nothing off thier stuff and nintendo goes after them

 

[LabRat 891]

Exactly. If I buy physical media, I own that media. Even if I buy something online (for example, on Steam), I own the rights to use it as I see fit. I copy it, I modify it, I do whatever I want with it for my own use. As long as I don't distribute it, there's no harm done to the IP owner. Similarly, is there anyone to tell you that you aren't allowed to modify a car that you bought on cash? I don't think so.

That was most-all clearly legal AFAIK prior to the post-DMCA era.
Which, is the hook for the case. So... we'll see where it goes.

Clearly, our personal values have become distant from law as-enforced. I'm not sure what actions we as a community of customers can do to fix that.

"voting, with our wallets" is overwhelmed by engineered media and social trends, etc.
ex.

there's a skeezy af audio plugin company called unison audio that is making millions off gengar's likeness to sell thier plugin called mangler

several ppl have told nintendo this and nintendo ignores them.

while yuzu devs and streamers that nintendo goes after make nothing off thier stuff and nintendo goes after them

So... short of effectively nullifying DMCA (in RTR?) ???

Edit:
I do not know the UK and EU equivalents.

 

[AusWolf]

That was most-all clearly legal AFAIK prior to the post-DMCA era.
Which, is the hook for the case. So... we'll see where it goes.

Clearly, our personal values have become distant from law as-enforced. I'm not sure what actions we as a community of customers can do to fix that.

"voting, with our wallets" is overwhelmed by engineered media and social trends, etc.
ex.

Personally I'd say we need common sense. Instead of unquestioning obedience, we need to stay informed and always do whatever feels right and moral, even if it comes with repercussions at times. Laws can be wrong, but that doesn't mean that we, citizens should be as well.

In this instance, I wish the creators of the emulator all the best. They did the right thing making it.

 

[Keullo-e]

Emulation legalities aside, Nintendo sure are dicks about their software (and foolishly so).

All they have to do is license the ROMs and the money would pour in like friggin crazy.
Pride is the only thing stopping them from profiting here.

It's not rocket science, their marketing teams know the feedback is literally this:

Ningreedo should do the same as many other game companies and have their own legal emulators on other devices with the possibility to purhase their games, but noooope.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Ningreedo should do the same as many other game companies and have their own legal emulators on other devices with the possibility to purhase their games, but noooope.

Let me ask all of you a question that is...relevant. What would it take to write code once in the 80's, and sell again multiple times for roughly full price, and actually have people buy it without highlighting the fact that you did nothing? Well, that'd be artificial limitation on the availability of said code versions and what is required to run them. In this case, it's Nintendo writing games, then making them available in limited quantity on hardware that they control. It's the same model as the Rolling Stones...where you create demand through artificial limitations on available purchase options.

Now, why is Yuzu "a bad thing." Well, it makes one part of that strategy fail. Imagine in ten years when the average hardware has improved to the point where the processing power of a Switch now fits onto a Raspberry PI...and you've now got code that will still run on it today. Nintendo makes no profit, so they see this as damaging their model of business. They thus sue everyone, on at best dubious claims that at least are arguable to a judge...and try to kill a good thing. "It's piracy" is not a fair statement, but Nintendo can't really say "our business model doesn't tolerate this, so please make it illegal."

I appreciate that Nintendo is flexing it's might, because a bunch of Nipponese business considerations want to make money without effort. That said, games are basically part of cultural heritage at this point. Emulation should be embraced to drive these companies not to do what they did with Pokemon...which is nearly 1000 of the monsters deep and basically the same rock-paper-scissors gameplay with varying numbers since 1999. As much as I hate to say this, Palworld will hopefully be the start of a new version of Pokemon which competes with it. Yuzu should offer Nintendo the ability to re-release their old software library...instead of a reason to bemoan all the new handhelds which compete with the Switch. Imagine being able to sell three times as many copies of a game because every single handheld is now your platform...and your software licensing is where you print money.

 

[kurosagi01]

I just want Sony to release a good emulation support for the PS3 that runs on the PS5 or whatever system they release.