News Notoriously litigious Nintendo sues maker of Yuzu Switch emulator, alleges it facilitates ‘piracy at a colossal scale’

[Admin]

In a typical Nintendo move against console emulation, Nintendo is suing the makers of the Yuzu Switch emulator — seeking damages and shutdown.

Notoriously litigious Nintendo sues maker of Yuzu Switch emulator, alleges it facilitates ‘piracy at a colossal scale’ : Read more

 

[blacknemesist]

The reason Nintendo took so long to take action is because they themselves have no idea what IPs they actually own since unless it says Mario it probably ain't theirs

 

[TerryLaze]

In a typical Nintendo move against console emulation, Nintendo is suing the makers of the Yuzu Switch emulator — seeking damages and shutdown.

Notoriously litigious Nintendo sues maker of Yuzu Switch emulator, alleges it facilitates ‘piracy at a colossal scale’ : Read more

Just to clarify, nintendo does not move against emulators here, Yuzu is decrypting the games in real time which is basically real time cracking of the game.
At least that's what nintendo tries to push through here.

Yuzu unlawfully circumvents the technological measures on Nintendo Switch games and allows for the play of encrypted Nintendo Switch games on devices other than a Nintendo Switch. Yuzu does this by executing code necessary to defeat Nintendo’s many technological measures associated with its games, including code that decrypts the Nintendo Switch video game files immediately before and during runtime using an illegally-obtained
copy of prod.keys

 

[YouFilthyHippo]

Nintendo is not going to win. Making copies of digital files that you already rightfully own is legal. Example: I go buy a music CD, pay for it with clean, legitimate money at a retail store, take home the CD clone the CD to blank CD, and store the original in a drawer, and just listen to the copy to keep the original in perfect condition. Making copies of prod.keys or dumping games is not illegal. You are just copying something you already own anyway. It's distributing them out that is illegal, something Yuzu devs have never done.

Nintendo is suing the wrong people. Yuzu does not rip the prod.keys and does not include it, nor firmware, nor games in Yuzu. Its the end user that does. Yuzu in and of itself, released AS IS..... is completely 100% legal from the first line of code to the very last. Nintendo has done this before. It failed each and every time. This one will be no different.

They are going after Yuzu because suing 30,000,000 end users and 30,000 ROM sites isn't viable. One problem: Yuzu hasn't done anything wrong. At some point, you have to think: Yuzu devs have done their homework. They have their own lawyers who in advance will make sure that Yuzu doesn't do anything wrong. If Yuzu was legally in the wrong, a lawyer for Yuzu dev would have told them by now.

Yuzu devs have been prepared for this for all of time. They have always known this can happen. They are prepared. They will know what to do. They will be fine

 

[TerryLaze]

Making copies of prod.keys or dumping games is not illegal. You are just copying something you already own anyway. It's distributing them out that is illegal, something Yuzu devs have never done.

While you are allowed to make a backup of your game, firmware/os files do not belong to you, you do not own them or have any right to copy them or to use them out of context.

 

[YouFilthyHippo]

While you are allowed to make a backup of your game, firmware/os files do not belong to you, you do not own them or have any right to copy them or to use them out of context.

When you purchase the Nintendo Switch, you purchase the whole thing, not just 10%, not half, not 90%, not 99.9999999%. You purchase the whole thing. The firmware/os files are part of the Nintendo switch, and it is sold as one unit, and one in the same. Therefore, it does belong to you. Yes, you do have the right to copy them for your own personal use.

However, that is irrelevant anyway. Yuzu devs did neither one of those things. It is Yuzu that is being sued. Yuzu does not include OS/Firmware. So it's a moot point

 

[JTWrenn]

All this bs about rights of users after buying the software is really the harsh part of this whole thing. Nintendo is claiming a whole lot of rights to restrict usage for actual owners along with the piracy issue. I can't backup my software and play it on a steamdeck? I know a lot of people who did just that for their fanboy love of Zelda.

In the end if buying isn't owning, is piracy really theft?

This is getting ridiculous.

 

[mhmarefat]

While you are allowed to make a backup of your game, firmware/os files do not belong to you, you do not own them or have any right to copy them or to use them out of context.

wait, who are you to tell me what I can or can't do with something I own? by what logic I do not "own" what I have purchased? Is taking a hammer and use it to rip my Nintendo to pieces out of context?

 

[TheyCallMeContra]

Nintendo is not going to win. Making copies of digital files that you already rightfully own is legal. Example: I go buy a music CD, pay for it with clean, legitimate money at a retail store, take home the CD clone the CD to blank CD, and store the original in a drawer, and just listen to the copy to keep the original in perfect condition. Making copies of prod.keys or dumping games is not illegal. You are just copying something you already own anyway. It's distributing them out that is illegal, something Yuzu devs have never done.

Nintendo is suing the wrong people. Yuzu does not rip the prod.keys and does not include it, nor firmware, nor games in Yuzu. Its the end user that does. Yuzu in and of itself, released AS IS..... is completely 100% legal from the first line of code to the very last. Nintendo has done this before. It failed each and every time. This one will be no different.

They are going after Yuzu because suing 30,000,000 end users and 30,000 ROM sites isn't viable. One problem: Yuzu hasn't done anything wrong. At some point, you have to think: Yuzu devs have done their homework. They have their own lawyers who in advance will make sure that Yuzu doesn't do anything wrong. If Yuzu was legally in the wrong, a lawyer for Yuzu dev would have told them by now.

Yuzu devs have been prepared for this for all of time. They have always known this can happen. They are prepared. They will know what to do. They will be fine

I certainly hope Yuzu is as well-prepared as you seem to think they are.

 

[USAFRet]

wait, who are you to tell me what I can or can't do with something I own? by what logic I do not "own" what I have purchased? Is taking a hammer and use it to rip my Nintendo to pieces out of context?

"owning" and "license to use" are two completely different things.

Presumably you actually read the "license agreement" of the software?

 

[Notton]

"owning" and "license to use" are two completely different things.

Presumably you actually read the "license agreement" of the software?

Quite a few of those license agreements are non-enforceable, depending on jurisdiction.
AKA, Contractual Validity.
For example, if there is a strict law for privacy rights in X jurisdiction, just because the contract says they can sell your private data, doesn't mean they can.

 

[USAFRet]

Quite a few of those license agreements are non-enforceable, depending on jurisdiction.
AKA, Contractual Validity.
For example, if there is a strict law for privacy rights in X jurisdiction, just because the contract says they can sell your private data, doesn't mean they can.

Very true.

But also, you having a license to use <whatever> does not mean you get to do anything and everything.
For instance...reverse engineering.

And still, "license to use" is quite different than "owning".

Ex: 'buying' a game from Steam. Do you "own it"?
You can do anything and everything you want with it?
Yes or no?

 

[YouFilthyHippo]

Very true.

But also, you having a license to use <whatever> does not mean you get to do anything and everything.
For instance...reverse engineering.

And still, "license to use" is quite different than "owning".

Ex: 'buying' a game from Steam. Do you "own it"?
You can do anything and everything you want with it?
Yes or no?

You own it

You own the software that you purchase, and any claims otherwise are urban myth or corporate propaganda

Updated August 2020 Some of the bottom part of this post is a paste of a message I sent to Steam support following the seemingly-bullying actions of a Steam forum moderator who has been falsely telling people that Steam rents / leases games through their service and doesn't sell them, and who was...

linustechtips.com

 

[USAFRet]

You own it

And reading through that, what is your (or the various Courts) definition of "own"?

 

[Deleted member 2969713]

Let me preface this by saying that, even if it's technically illegal, I have no moral qualms whatsoever with a user legally purchasing an eShop game and extracting it to be used on a PC emulator. I have done so with my Wii U games. I am very against piracy and illegal redistribution, though, and presumably 99% of Yuzu users fall into the unsavory latter camp.

When you purchase the Nintendo Switch, you purchase the whole thing, not just 10%, not half, not 90%, not 99.9999999%. You purchase the whole thing. The firmware/os files are part of the Nintendo switch, and it is sold as one unit, and one in the same. Therefore, it does belong to you. Yes, you do have the right to copy them for your own personal use.

However, that is irrelevant anyway. Yuzu devs did neither one of those things. It is Yuzu that is being sued. Yuzu does not include OS/Firmware. So it's a moot point

No you don't. You buy the hardware, and can do anything (legal) with it, but you cannot use the internal software for whatever you want. By buying a Switch you don't suddenly have the rights to decompile or reverse engineer the OS and make your own Switch and sell it, for instance. The software is still protected. When you buy a Mario game, it doesn't give you the right to make and sell your own Mario games or to sell copies of the Mario game you bought.

wait, who are you to tell me what I can or can't do with something I own? by what logic I do not "own" what I have purchased? Is taking a hammer and use it to rip my Nintendo to pieces out of context?

You are free to smash the hardware to bits if you please. But buying hardware does not grant you unlimited rights to the software contained within.

You own it

No you don't. You own a license to use the software, subject to the terms. If you owned the software, then when you bought Microsoft Office you would be allowed to go online and sell copies of it yourself. But that's obviously illegal. So is buying home editions of software, intended for personal, non-commercial use, and using them in a business environment.

Edit: having skimmed through that post at that link, it appears to be refuting the common (erroneous) sentiment that digital software and games are only "rented," not "sold." I agree with the point of the post. But you cannot use "own" without qualifiers. You own a license to the software, and the right to use it as intended. The maker of the software still owns the software itself.

---

On a related note, people make a huge fuss over digital media being "licensed," not sold, but you still "own" digital media in the exact same way you "own" physical media. Both grant you a license to use the media as intended, and nothing more. When you buy a Blu-ray, it doesn't grant you the right to upload the movie to a video hosting site, for instance, which true ownership would grant. The reason the words "sold" and "ownership" are avoided in legal documents and terms is because they have problematic implications regarding the end user's rights to do whatever they please with the content within.

 

[YouFilthyHippo]

No you don't. You buy the hardware, and can do anything (legal) with it, but you cannot use the internal software for whatever you want. By buying a Switch you don't suddenly have the rights to decompile or reverse engineer the OS and make your own Switch and sell it, for instance. The software is still protected. When you buy a Mario game, it doesn't give you the right to make and sell your own Mario games or to sell copies of the Mario game you bought.

False. Again, when I bought the unit, I bought everything contained within the unit. It is my free right to do as a please with the hardware and software. If I don't, I don't truly own it. Likewise, with a vehicle, when I buy a vehicle, it is my free right to modify it and change it how I like. If I want to break down the engine and rebuild it, or make it do different things, that's allowed. Either I own it or I don't. If I own the switch, it is entirely my free right to do what I want with it, from playing games, to reverse engineering, to smashing it with a hammer. Do I own it or not? Don't tell me what I'm allowed to do with my property. If it's not my property, I don't own it. Pick 1.

No I don't have the right to make and sell copies of Mario, but I have the right to sell My copy. Again, do I own it or not?

Edit: having skimmed through that post at that link, it appears to be refuting the common (erroneous) sentiment that digital software and games are only "rented," not "sold." I agree with the point of the post. But you cannot use "own" without qualifiers. You own a license to the software, and the right to use it as intended. The maker of the software still owns the software itself.

Owning the license to play the game is the ownership of the game. When you say that we don't own the software, what that means is the intellectual property and the code still belongs to the developer and that the purchase of the game is not the sale of the IP and the code. It doesn't mean I don't own that copy. When I go buy a car, am I purchasing the car, or am I purchasing a license to drive the car? (Not to be confused with an issued drivers license). I own the license to drive that car, but I don't own the intellectual property, the design, the branding, the name, the schematics, the concepts, the IP, that sort of stuff. That still belongs to the car company. But I still own this particular physical copy of car. That's not to say that I don't own the vehicle.

This is all irrelevant anyway, because Yuzu does not provide the prod.keys, the firmware, or games. As I said before, Nintendo is suing the wrong people. Yuzu in and of itself, released AS IS..... is completely 100% legal from the first line of code to the very last. Nintendo has done this before. It failed each and every time. They are going after Yuzu because suing 30,000,000 end users and 30,000 ROM sites isn't viable. One problem: Yuzu hasn't done anything wrong. Nintendo has lost each and every time they tried this crap, and they will lose again

 

[USAFRet]

No I don't have the right to make and sell copies of Mario, but

And there is a specific limit on what you can do.

 

[YouFilthyHippo]

And there is a specific limit on what you can do.

Therr are limits on what I can do, that doesn't mean I don't own it

 

[USAFRet]

Therr are limits on what I can do, that doesn't mean I don't own it

You say potato, I say potahto

 

[Deleted member 2969713]

False. Again, when I bought the unit, I bought everything contained within the unit. It is my free right to do as a please with the hardware and software.

But it isn't. If you buy a Blu-ray disc, this does not give you the right to send copies of it to all your friends and family or to upload it to a file sharing site. This is in spite of you owning the disc. Ownership of the disc does not grant unfettered ownership of its contents. And the same applies to a video game system.

This being the case, whether or not you "truly" own it is an argument of semantics.

Don't tell me what I'm allowed to do with my property.

That is exactly what laws do. Even when you buy a car, it does not grant you the right to do anything whatsoever with it. You are not free to drive it through a storefront, for instance.

This is all irrelevant anyway, because Yuzu does not provide the prod.keys, the firmware, or games. As I said before, Nintendo is suing the wrong people. Yuzu in and of itself, released AS IS..... is completely 100% legal from the first line of code to the very last. Nintendo has done this before. It failed each and every time. They are going after Yuzu because suing 30,000,000 end users and 30,000 ROM sites isn't viable. One problem: Yuzu hasn't done anything wrong. Nintendo has lost each and every time they tried this crap, and they will lose again

I think that making copies of games you rightfully bought (a license for) and using them on a system not intended by Nintendo should not be considered illegal. But Nintendo is going after Yuzu because the vast majority of the time it is used to facilitate piracy. I don't think Nintendo is in the wrong for wanting to crack down on piracy, but I agree they may have no legal grounds here.

 

[TheOtherOne]

It's all words play and legal/illegal gibberish to be honest.

What about all those pre-owned/used consoles that owners sell online? Those certainly are legal otherwise they wouldn't be able to sell those off eBay etc...

But then how can the new owner, who bought the used console from a third person, be "in contract" with Nintendo and accepted their terms & conditions and license by default?

These companies ALWAYS want to keep the cake and eat it whole too. And since they are filthy rich, they can simply sue anyone who they think isn't falling in line and keep dragging the case until that poor little person / small company simply can't afford to continue and lose the case despite doing nothing wrong.

Great "Justice" system! 👌

 

[USAFRet]

It's all words play and legal/illegal gibberish to be honest.

What about all those pre-owned/used consoles that owners sell online? Those certainly are legal otherwise they wouldn't be able to sell those off eBay etc...

But then how can the new owner, who bought the used console from a third person, be "in contract" with Nintendo and accepted their terms & conditions and license by default?

These companies ALWAYS want to keep the cake and eat it whole too. And since they are filthy rich, they can simply sue anyone who they think isn't falling in line and keep dragging the case until that poor little person / small company simply can't afford to continue and lose the case despite doing nothing wrong.

Great "Justice" system! 👌

The contract comes in to play when you begin to use the software.

 

[YouFilthyHippo]

But it isn't. If you buy a Blu-ray disc, this does not give you the right to send copies of it to all your friends and family or to upload it to a file sharing site. This is in spite of you owning the disc. Ownership of the disc does not grant unfettered ownership of its contents. And the same applies to a video game system.

This being the case, whether or not you "truly" own it is an argument of semantics.


That is exactly what laws do. Even when you buy a car, it does not grant you the right to do anything whatsoever with it. You are not free to drive it through a storefront, for instance.


I think that making copies of games you rightfully bought (a license for) and using them on a system not intended by Nintendo should not be considered illegal. But Nintendo is going after Yuzu because the vast majority of the time it is used to facilitate piracy. I don't think Nintendo is in the wrong for wanting to crack down on piracy, but I agree they may have no legal grounds here.

Ownership is the right to do whatever you want with what you own within the confines of what is legal. Driving a car through a store front would be breaking the law. Dumping games off the switch, as well as firmware etc is not illegal and I explained why in my original comment at the start of this thread. Emulation should not be illegal. It is extremely important for the gaming industry for many reasons.

 

[USAFRet]

Ownership is the right to do whatever you want with what you own within the confines of what is legal. Driving a car through a store front would be breaking the law. Dumping games off the switch, as well as firmware etc is not illegal and I explained why in my original comment at the start of this thread. Emulation should not be illegal. It is extremely important for the gaming industry for many reasons.

Making unlimited copies and selling them?
Legal or no?

 

[Deleted member 2969713]

Ownership is the right to do whatever you want with what you own within the confines of what is legal. Driving a car through a store front would be breaking the law. Dumping games off the switch, as well as firmware etc is not illegal and I explained why in my original comment at the start of this thread. Emulation should not be illegal. It is extremely important for the gaming industry for many reasons.

Then we are in agreement.

However, apparently the makers of Yuzu bring in a lot of money from the project, which isn't a good look and is likely part of what drew Nintendo's ire in the first place. Even with the emulator itself being legal, accepting large amounts of donations or charging for it is questionable, since the majority of users will be pirates.