Nintendo’s full case filing


https://twitter.com/stephentotilo/status/1762576284817768457/

"NEW: Nintendo is suing the creators of popular Switch emulator Yuzu, saying their tech illegally circumvents Nintendo’s software encryption and facilitates piracy. Seeks damages for alleged violations and a shutdown of the emulator.

Notes 1 million copies of Tears of the Kingdom downloaded prior to game’s release; says Yuzu’s Patreon support doubled during that time. Basically arguing that that is proof that Yuzu’s business model helps piracy flourish."

  • @hperrin
    link
    English
    414 months ago

    Booo! Nintendo sucks! This was decided 30 years ago. Emulation is not illegal.

    • s0ckpuppet
      link
      fedilink
      184 months ago

      Yeah and none of the switch emulator stuff I’ve seen comes bundled with the firmware. You have to track that down separately or dump your own from your Switch.

      This sure looks like like a slapp suit to me.

    • @echo64
      link
      English
      -154 months ago

      It’s good we are all clear, nintendo isn’t arguing that. They are arguing a case about copyright infringement and being in violation of the dmca

      • @hperrin
        link
        English
        19
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It is not illegal to make copies of games you own and play them on an emulator. That is what was decided by the courts. Nintendo is trying to make that illegal.

        They’re using the DMCA to say that because Yuzu lets someone circumvent their encryption (which is illegal, but shouldn’t be), that’s the same as Yuzu circumventing their encryption.

        That’s basically like saying VLC should be illegal because it has the capability of copying a DVD.

        • Atemu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          04 months ago

          They’re using the DMCA to say that because Yuzu lets someone circumvent their encryption (which is illegal, but shouldn’t be), that’s the same as Yuzu circumventing their encryption.

          Yes, yes they are. That’s how the DMCA works. It’s mental.

          • @hperrin
            link
            English
            2
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            That’s not how the DMCA works, or tons of other software would be illegal. It’s illegal to circumvent copy protection under the DMCA (something I wholeheartedly disagree with), but it’s not illegal to make something that can be used to circumvent copy protection.

            In fact, there are exemptions to that provision and one of them states that circumventing copy protection in order to play a video game using assistive technologies is legal.

            • Atemu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              It’s illegal to circumvent copy protection under the DMCA (something I wholeheartedly disagree with), but it’s not illegal to make something that can be used to circumvent copy protection.

              It is explicitly illegal to produce any thing whose purpose it is to circumvent DRM:

              (1) 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 protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;

              I’m telling you, that law is mental.

              In fact, there are exemptions to that provision and one of them states that circumventing copy protection in order to play a video game using assistive technologies is legal.

              Could you point that specific exception in the law? I can’t find it.

              Link for convenience: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-105publ304/pdf/PLAW-105publ304.pdf

              • @hperrin
                link
                English
                1
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                The exceptions are handled by the Library of Congress and go through a renewal process every three years. Here’s the one from 2021:

                https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-10-28/pdf/2021-23311.pdf

                The accessibility use exception is on the last page, middle of the page, paragraph labeled 21.

                It’s illegal to make something that’s sole purpose is to circumvent copyright. Yuzu does not have that sole purpose, and doesn’t include the code necessary (prod.keys) to even accomplish it.

                • Atemu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  The actual text for reference:

                  Video games in the form of computer programs, embodied in lawfully acquired physical or downloaded formats, and operated on a general-purpose computer, where circumvention is undertaken solely for the purpose of allowing an individual with a physical disability to use software or hardware input methods other than a standard keyboard or mouse.

                  That explicitly only applies to physically disabled people. Yuzu is not specifically targetted at providing a different input method (at all) and certainly not solely for the physically disabled.

                  That exception is not relevant to this case.

                  • @hperrin
                    link
                    English
                    14 months ago

                    I didn’t say it was. I used it as an example of when circumventing copy protection is allowed under the DMCA.

        • @echo64
          link
          English
          -14 months ago

          They’re using the DMCA to say that because Yuzu lets someone circumvent their encryption (which is illegal, but shouldn’t be),

          Yes. That’s what I’m saying. That’s what I said.

          • @hperrin
            link
            English
            24 months ago

            Yuzu is not infringing on their copyright, some of the users are. Sue the users.

            • @echo64
              link
              English
              -14 months ago

              unfortunately, that isn’t how the DMCA works

              • @hperrin
                link
                English
                24 months ago

                Can you point me to the provision you’re talking about?

                • @echo64
                  link
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  (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. (3) As used in this subsection— (A) 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 (B) a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

                  • @hperrin
                    link
                    English
                    2
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    Yes, so distributing the code necessary to perform the decryption is illegal. That’s why you have to hack an actual switch to get the code necessary to perform the decryption (prod.keys). All Yuzu is doing is running that code through an AES library to get the game and emulating a Switch to play it. You can’t make AES libraries illegal just because they can be used to decrypt copy protection.

                    It’s the same with DVD decryption. VLC is not illegal because it doesn’t include the codes used to decrypt DVDs. Once you have those codes, VLC can copy a DVD for you.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -34 months ago

          I love YUZU and it’s wonderful…

          …but if they didn’t have a Patreon they’d have a better stance

          • @yamanii
            link
            English
            -2
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            You are being downvoted but reminder to everyone that the public Yuzu is way behind on updates and compatibility, they sell access to their most recent version via their patreon. Something that Ryujinx does not do, it purely is a donation and nothing more.

            • Atemu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              34 months ago

              You can download and view the latest Yuzu source code for free and do practically whatever you want with it (GPLv3), including building and running it.

              What paying via Patreon provides you is access to early access builds of the software. You’re paying for the convenience of them compiling the latest version of the software for you.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              You can get all the latest Yuzu EA builds for free on their GitHub

              But the fact that they’re kinda “selling” access… wait, why exactly DO they “sell” access even? They might not have as much legal trouble if they didn’t do that.