In other news, I got a DMCA email from Xfinity today. Might or might not be able a Nintendo switch game. 🤪
Get a VPN!
I pirated BotW and TotK and others
Which made my brother buy a Switch and TotK and Mario Kart and a Nintendo Online subscription and aaaa…
Piracy increases sales, goddammit. Literally free advertising.
Honestly, I’m surprised this didn’t happen sooner. Emulating old hardware is one thing, but they have a current vested interest in their most recent console.
Still, Nintendo’s lawyers can rub spurge on their eyes, and I hope the Yuzu devs find a great lawyer (or better yet, are safely hidden behind some kind of digital or geopolitical veil).
safely hidden behind some kind of digital or geopolitical veil
When will people learn that the safest place to develop a Nintendo emulator is Pyongyang?
I guess that depends on your definition of “safe”
Yeah, it has always felt like we had something we couldn’t wish for or expect. And it’s a much better experience than using an actual switch.
Sadly the only surprising thing about this is how long it took for Nintendo to do something, I guess they worked on having as good of a chance as they could.
It would be a waste of time to litigate a case they think they’ll lose, after all. Unfortunately, once the devs included proprietary code in the application, they kind of sealed their fate.
Maybe they got a little too excited over TotK and thought they were under Nintendo’s radar. Maybe they felt like they owed the community an app that could play Nintendo’s highly-anticipated game practically on day one. I dunno. Either way, it was a miscalculated move, and now they’re reaping the consequences.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/watch?v=xZQXdiOdqf8
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
If you’ve ever seen a Steam Deck playing a Legend of Zelda game, chances are you were seeing the Yuzu emulator at work.
It also wants to take away its domain names, URLs, chatrooms, and social media presence; hand yuzu-emu.org over to Nintendo; and even seize and destroy its hard drives to help wipe out the emulator.
While there’s legal precedent that suggests it’s okay to reverse engineer a console and develop an emulator that uses none of the company’s source code, those cases are roughly a quarter of a century old or more — it gets trickier when we’re talking about multiple layers of modern encryption and the copyrighted BIOSes that Yuzu and other modern emulators require to run.
DMCA Section 1201(a)(2) bans products “primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access” to a copyrighted work.
“The important thing is that Nintendo is bringing the case as a DMCA circumvention claim,” says Richard Hoeg, a business attorney who hosts the Virtual Legality podcast.
Many small bands of developers have axed their projects after being approached by Nintendo, and it wouldn’t be surprising if Yuzu settled.
The original article contains 721 words, the summary contains 194 words. Saved 73%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Wow, fuck Nintendo. For well over a decade they didn’t give a shit about emulating old games. In fact, it was and is still the only way to play a lot of old games. Now nintendo is trying to use their shit flimsy online emulator as an excuse to claim IP right to 30 year old games they don’t give a shit about. Granted this is about the emulator itself, but doesn’t matter. Guess I won’t be buying the next switch console.
There’s a fairly big difference between “you’re making an emulator for a console we stopped selling anything for a decade ago” and “you are actively cutting into the sales of everything we are currently doing”
Frankly, Im not quite sure what anyone expected. Of course they were going to go after them Hardee than usual, especially when they made it pretty obvious they used proprietary code from TOTK. I’m as pro-piracy as they come, but ya still gotta use some of your brain.
Eh, I don’t really care. Now that every manufacturer and developer under the sun has decided I don’t own the games I buy. I couldn’t care less about their games getting pirated. I mean, I don’t own the game anyway according to their ToS, I just rent it.
But it’s more than that. I can’t even find old game isos easily anymore. Nintendo went out of their way to threaten legal action against sites that had been up for over a decade so they could do their shitty online emulator store.
They’re going after everyone now. I bought my switch in 2016, won’t be buying another one.
@NocturnalMorning @Alto Just avoid them as possible. On GoG.com you can buy PC games without any DRM. I even bought a game I already own, just to have a legit DRM free version like Skyrim and Fallout 4.
Watching the latest accursed farms video was very eye opening, even services like GOG with no DRM probably still have that legalese where you don’t own the files, but in reality you do since they can’t stop you from playing them, the legal sphere is even more of fantasyland than I thought, it actively denies reality.
I’m not saying they’re right for it, just stating what reality is. Anyone with half a brain knew this was coming the second they used proprietary code.
used code from totk? What? They implemented patches early using knowledge from it, but including even a single line from the game would be incredibly stupid and contradictory to having to dump your keys in the first place
The precedent that almost everyone cites (because it is some of the only) is Sony vs Bleem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleem!#Sony_lawsuit
Initial release was in 1999 and lawsuits were around the same time. PS2 launched in 2000. So while the bleem marketing was a complete mess, the emulator existing while a console was still “alive” does not matter in the slightest.
The main point of that ruling was that they weren’t using proprietary code. Yuzu almost certainly did after the TOTK leak, unless they magically just happened to improve that much directly afterwards.
I don’t like it, but there’s a pretty big chance that Yuzu loses this one.
Sega v. Accolade was about using proprietary code, Sega lost and the small snippet of code that was reverse engineered out of the Genesis was deemed fair use because there was no other way to get an unlicensed cartridge to run on the console
That’s not what using proprietary code means in this case.
Besides, it’s possible they “legitimately” bought a copy of the game from a store that accidentally broke the embargo date. You can’t legally blame customers for that.
They didnt use any code from TOTK (such would be piracy); they did however use it to improve the emulator via game specific patches before the release date (hinting some devs got the game less than legally, but not yuzu itself)
Gonna be real interesting how this plays out.
IANAL (and am not a lawyer) but the general takeaway of Sony vs Bleem was “emulation fine so long as you aren’t using proprietary code”. Hence why it is generally “find your own BIOS” and all that.
The nonsense about yuzu is facilitating piracy is going to be a mess. But I do wonder if Tears of the Kingdom is not going to be a problem. Because it was not at all hidden as to why Yuzu et al suddenly had a bunch of mysterious compatibility updates a day or two after the leaked roms went online.
Even the argument that the devs who worked on that had totally legit copies they got from Uncle Greg’s Game Store on 2nd street might get into a mess if nintendo argues those weren’t legitimately sold because they broke embargo date. And it is hard to argue those improvements were for people to play their own dumps.
So yeah. Gonna be real interesting (assuming this isn’t just an attempt to legal fee yuzu to death). Because if I were to put on my day job hat: Doing ANYTHING based on pre-release material is a huge no no since they only had access to it because people violated contracts with Nintendo’s distributors.
And… the more I look at this, the more I think the yuzu devs may have fucked it all up for the rest of us and it really depends on if nintendo’s lawyers drill in on that or continue for the broad reaching stuff.
IANAL
IANAL (and am not a lawyer)
I too do anal
Can we just take a second to say what utter bullshit it is that “facilitating piracy” is so allowed to be an argument?
How are we in this wacky world where rights holders get to say “what you built allows piracy, we demand total control over you”
I mean, like it or not, piracy is incredibly dark grey (if not outright black) in the eyes of the law. Its one of the reasons there is such a strong focus on “abandonware” and “oh, this is about digital preservation” in the various circles. It doesn’t fool anyone but it is at least a stronger protection than the old “Hey FBI. You aren’t allowed to look at my DC++ share” folder that people had back in the day.
You can argue that Nintendo facilitates piracy by making games that people want to pirate.
Because it was not at all hidden as to why Yuzu et al suddenly had a bunch of mysterious compatibility updates a day or two after the leaked roms went online
No way they were that stupid, Ryujinx always waits for the release date to publish those specific updates.
This is a great point and yuzu may get burned for it. Hopefully, it’s not lost on developers of future emulators.
The issue is that it is an incredibly dangerous precedent.
There are already a decent number of emulators where the devs have done a good enough job making plausible deniability but it is still VERY obvious they looked at the “leaks”. But if it is decided that “used a pre-release leak to develop code/support” is a no-no, then everyone knows to not do a 0-day update. But they start getting wary of doing day 1 updates because… it is still pretty obvious that they had that ready to go.
Which… could even be nintendo’s plan. The example I always like to use is Mass Effect PC. For those who were likely born well after that, MEPC was INCREDIBLY anticipated because we were all cool and didn’t need Mass Effect because Bioware were traitors who abandoned PC but… motha fugging Mass Effect. It was one of the early activation model Securom games DRM wise. And the warez groups did a bad crack that broke like two hours in (which meant they already “won” the release and fixing it was low priority). Which led to waves of pirates (self included) rushing Best Buy because we needed it NOW.
So if this makes for “okay, we can’t add support for this game until a week after launch”, that does wonders for sales figures. And, in a uniquely nintendo way, it avoids the ever more popular “So… this runs at like 10 FPS on the switch and 120 FPS on a potato laptop” problem.
I know it’s hard to hear because sometimes we are so passionate about these things, but it’s okay to have to wait for support on an unsupported platform. Having to wait a week is, in fact, incredibly fortunate. Consider how long it takes to get mac or Linux support on many PC games. A week? We’re laughing.
And if the sales figures are bumped in the first week? Let’s try to understand why it’s bad that developers, publishers, and those other middle-men get paid for their work. Not all games are wildly successful. Most aren’t. And evil Nintendo making more money… Well, if they don’t make money you don’t get any games. And consider that this is a platform which for the most part has avoided sinking into shady and unethical loot box practices. You can fault Nintendo for a lot, but from their perspective, free 0-day access to their games is an existential crisis.
I am all for support of devs. But it has increasingly become clear that playing a nintendo game on a nintendo platform is an objectively worse experience because even nintendo first parties have difficulty utilizing the switch. People love to pretend that “piracy is a service issue” but… it kind of is in this case. Was it Metroid Dread that had significant slowdowns on switch AND lots of qtes and parry windows?
But also? Regardless, I have very serious issues with using lawsuits and the legal system to muscle The Little Guy (even if they were idiots) to protect corporate interests.
“Nintendo sues” oh look it’s a day that ends in Y. The only person Nintendo isn’t dead set on suing is Nintendo.
Here’s you 937th remake of Super Mario Bros 2 that you can only rent, have a nice day.
And our online service is absolute trash but you’ll pay anyway to have a legal emulator until we also discontinue that for Super other garbage online service!
Their Emulator can’t even run SNES games at a stable framerate.
Don’t forget that they will hide behind arbitration to avoid paying up for knowing seeking shoddy consoles/controllers.
Oh don’t even get me started. Hall effect has been known since 1879, those JoyCons didn’t use it because it was cheaper to use shitty graphite. They literally went the cheap ass route because they didn’t even care.
And still charge premium money for the controllers
That’s not even necessarily the issue. XBox and PS controllers also don’t use Hall effect. I’ve never had an xbox controller drift. You’d have to seriously abuse them for them to break. Nintendo isn’t just cheaping out on the tech but also on the build quality itself. But what do you expect from a company that sells a console that was obsolete when it was released, hardware wise. For the third time.
Xbox controller drift
Really? That’s usually the quickest issue my controllers have with occasionally sticky thumb buttons. I’d gone through so many I just get Blue PowerA controllers now. They’re better than $200 ones for 1/8 the price, and have great warranties.
Stick drift and non optimal buttons are instant killers for any decent platformer.
I agree that they definitely also develop drift sooner or later, but I have yet to see a controller drift as fast as joycons do, with the exception of maybe the first batch of dualsenses that were atrocious for some reason
Both my two 360 controllers and my xone controller are drift free and I’ve had them for a while. And my 360 controllers have been abused by my little brother for a while. They have issues (like the rubber off the sticks getting rubbed away slowly), but drift isn’t one of them. Heck, even my old Wii Nunchucks are drift free and they’ve been abused a lot.
The issue is also rampant with PS5, unfortunately.
Don’t own a PS5 so I sadly/luckily don’t have experience with that
I don’t play any Switch games and have never used Yuzu, but I just started donating to their Patreon. Hopefully they can afford to go to court over this. Nintendo can pound sand.
Same, I just signed up. Here’s the URL for anyone else interested:
https://www.patreon.com/yuzuteam
Fuck Nintendo.
It doesn’t matter, it’s legal to create emulators and plugins for interoperability.
Yuzu cannot distribute switch games, nor distribute Nintendo software, but it can emulate the console.
Unfortunately, it’s more of a gray area than most people think.
17 USC §1201 (f)(1)
Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.
Ok, and that applies to…
17 USC §1201 (a)(1)(A)
No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
And a technological measure is:
17 USC §1201 (a)(3)
to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and
Perfect! Right?
17 USC §1201 (a)(2)
No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
© is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person’s knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
And unfortunately, Yuzu is capable of and needs console keys to decrypt games and system firmware files.
The reverse engineering for interoperability exception, (f)(1), only explicitly exempts (a)(1)(A) for research purposes. If Yuzu—as a software product—is found to have the primary purpose of circumventing Nintendo’s DRM, it will be in violation of (a)(2) and the developers are not protected.
This is something that will need to be tested in court, but the only way they would be entirely in the clear is if they stripped out all encryption/decryption code and forced users to use some other tool to fully decrypt the firmware, NAND filesystem, and game image filesystems during dumping. They’ll likely argue that the primary purpose is preservation, and Nintendo will use the fact that the Switch is still sold in retail as a counterargument to suggest that their development of the emulator was unnecessary and not in good faith. If they instead argue that it was created as a development or debugging tool, Nintendo could point to their low barrier of entry for developers to obtain a devkit (as evidenced by the crapton of shovelware and asset flips in the E-Shop).
If they don’t settle, it’s going to be an expensive mess to sort out.
Thanks for providing all that info, I was aware of some but not all of that. Is my understanding that just providing the emulator without keys correct? Besides the keys themselves and the switch OS, there’s nothing that bypasses copyright. It does seem like from the other comments here that the devs may not have kept a clean separation which will now bite them.
Almost. The technical stuff is going to be a bit butched, but I’ll drop the legal speak and be more human for a minute:
What makes this unique isn’t that Nintendo is going after them for providing the keys, but for actually using them. Yuzu asks the user to dump or acquire
prod.keyson their own, and then it uses that to read encrypted data. The fact that it does that, regardless of whether the keys were obtained legitimately or not, is where the argument that it’s a DRM circumvention tool lays. Yuzu itself is supposedly “circumventing” Nintendo’s DRM process by using the keys in a way that bypasses all of the protections that Nintendo put into place to prevent the games from being loaded on non-Switch hardware.The Yuzu devs’ willingness to have FAQs and a quick start guide explaining the requirements and steps to emulate commercial games on Yuzu is definitely going to bite them and undermine any defense they had for not knowingly marketing it as a circumvention tool. Another criterion is that Yuzu has to have some commercial significance if it were to lose its ability to circumvent DRM. And, as we know, it’s an emulator…
The best chances they have is to convince the judge that Yuzu isn’t primarily designed as a circumvention tool (which, once again, isn’t helped by their guide on how to run commercial games) or that it falls under the accessibility exemption added recently.
Thanks, that all makes a lot of sense.
To me just asking for the key alone seems fine (I’m not a lawyer, but other tools like open transport tycoon and other tools do that), but advertising how to get those keys as you said will probably over the line, and advertising it as posting Nintendo titles more so.
Time to boycott Nintendo Online and Nintendo in general for doing so many Ls as of late
Time? No one should have used Nintendo Online after they started charging for it. 365 days of the year thier games are full price, and they can’t afford a free ptp online service? But ohhh wait look they added 3 new old ass games for you this month! Aww they’re so cute (oh some of those games they themselves pirated? Silly scamps)
I agree it’s a complete scam tbh esp as you’re forced to pay for cloud backup as well. I was given the membership via friends, hence why I haven’t paid it so far, though have been guilty of buying games from them but what Nintendo is doing now is honestly inexcusable at this point, despite many other times they fucked up before and haven’t done shit to solve it. Instead, criminalising those for archiving their games.
Hey Nintendo, Eat dick.
Good luck to them. Regardless I’m sure it’ll be forked if development stops.
Can’t sell boats anymore, they clearly facilitate piracy at a colossal scale. /s
deleted by creator
fuck me, yuzu was one of the emulators I was excited about
git clone https://github.com/yuzu-emu/yuzu.gitIf the developers settle or lose the suit and have to take down the code, at least you’ll still be able to compile all the old releases.
