- cross-posted to:
- games@lemmit.online
You must log in or register to comment.
Here we go again, hope Nintendo loses. But yuzu with that pateron access thing were kinda cringe.
They also painted a gigantic red target on their back with that.
The legal arguments against piracy are related to loss of potential income, but that’s hard to prove.
Except when you accept donations and they can point to it directly. When the donations spiked around the time of the Tears of the Kingdom leak, Nintendo’s lawyers probably got very excited.
I’m not saying the devs for emulators can’t or should never accept donations, but you have got to be smarter about this.
Emulation is not piracy.
There is an abundance of precedent that emulation is not copyright infringement and is not in any way illegal. You can absolutely make money on an emulator and there is absolutely nothing they can do.
Even if it’s perfectly pristine and legal, it still paints a giant target on their backs. Even if someone is in the right, they need to spend way more on lawyers to prove it.
It’s already proven. Repeatedly.
Nintendo and every lawyer involved should see obscene fines for the blatant harassment.
https://github.com/yuzu-emu/yuzu
Might be wise to download a copy of the source code in case something happens.
Sony v Bleem! And Nintendo v Galoob already set legal precedent in this case, no? They sue over alleged “circumventing copy protection,” but doesn’t Yuzu operate the same as Ryujinx? Why would Nintendo only go for Yuzu and not both?
Yuzu opened a patreon, therefore making profit on the project. When you start making profit is when Nintendo sends the homing missiles.
Bleed and galoob were both explicitly comercial products.
Well shit. We all know how that’s gonna play out.
I generally support emulation, but I admit Switch emulation is hard to support when it happens while the machine is commercialized and the authors are trying to get money for it.
