While it’s true that they’ve been trying to stop emulators for a long time, they haven’t been able to do too much about them because of Sony v Bleem.
Modern emulators exist in a legal gray area, though, and might be violating the DMCA. The more of these assholes that pop up and get sued, the higher the likelihood that one of them refuses to settle, gets steamrolled by Nintendo, and gives them and every other console manufacturer the legal precedent that emulators are piracy/DRM-circumvention tools.
Even if you disagree with my belief that Nintendo would be less aggressive this year if people hadn’t been spotlighting emulation-based piracy and provoking them, you should be concerned about that.
Sony v Connectix is the actual case that set the precedent for emulation, not Bleem. The Bleem case decided whether or not the use of screenshots of copyrighted games to advertise their emulator was legal. I believe it just deferred to the Connectix case for the legality of the emulator.
While it’s true that they’ve been trying to stop emulators for a long time, they haven’t been able to do too much about them because of Sony v Bleem.
Modern emulators exist in a legal gray area, though, and might be violating the DMCA. The more of these assholes that pop up and get sued, the higher the likelihood that one of them refuses to settle, gets steamrolled by Nintendo, and gives them and every other console manufacturer the legal precedent that emulators are piracy/DRM-circumvention tools.
Even if you disagree with my belief that Nintendo would be less aggressive this year if people hadn’t been spotlighting emulation-based piracy and provoking them, you should be concerned about that.
Sony v Connectix is the actual case that set the precedent for emulation, not Bleem. The Bleem case decided whether or not the use of screenshots of copyrighted games to advertise their emulator was legal. I believe it just deferred to the Connectix case for the legality of the emulator.