The Super Game Boy has received a significant upgrade with the introduction of the Super Game Boy Plus, an unofficial enhancement developed by @BucketMouseBite. This new version addresses several limitations of the original Super Game Boy, which allowed Game Boy games to be played on the SNES but had a faster clock speed than the original Game Boy, affecting gameplay and compatibility with link cables.

  • Omega
    link
    English
    93 months ago

    Is it illegal to rip a game that you own onto a device that you own? My understanding is that’s 100% legal, not gray area at all. The only issue would be if you distributed it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Your understanding is incorrect if copying involves circumventing encryption or other means of protecting the data. That said, it’s not an issue for the Game Boy or Super NES.

      • Omega
        link
        English
        33 months ago

        17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems

        Well that’s interesting. It does say the law won’t override fair use. But I assume it blocks it regardless.

      • Fonzie!
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13 months ago

        These games were not stored with encryption, don’t you worry

    • Bobby Turkalino
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 months ago

      That’s what I’m getting at, Nintendo only needs the argument “this could be used to rip a game onto the cartridge, then distribute it” and US courts will bend over and grant them the DMCA strike

      • @v1605
        link
        English
        53 months ago

        This argument would outlaw a USB flash drive, “Your Honor, this device can store the contents of this 30 old game, it needs to be outlawed to protect all intellectual property”

      • Omega
        link
        English
        23 months ago

        So you’re saying, because it would rip straight to another cartridge, it could be argued it’s streamlining distribution?

        I would hope that a court would see through that argument. There’s a pretty good track record of allowing personal use of personal property. But I wouldn’t be surprised either if they convinced a court that this was explicitly for distribution purposes.