Nintendo is suing the creators of popular Switch emulator Yuzu

[Pemalite]

padib said:

Pemalite said:

Profiting from emulation is Legal.

Again, Nintendo uses Emulators for the NES/SNES Classic, Virtual Console and some Switch Ports, they made a profit from that.

The issue Yuzu had was that it's other activities were illegal.

Why the urge to point out this idea twice in this thread when we all know we're talking about profiting off emulating the work of others?

Profiting from a built emulator is fine. You just can't profit from ISO/ROM dumps or disseminate copyright material, it needs to be 100% your own work.

Contrary to popular belief, the chip architectures in these devices aren't "owned" by Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft, they are licensed from other manufacturers like IBM, ARM, AMD, nVidia etc'. - Those companies tend to want developers working and supporting their chips to grow their market.

In the case of Son, Nintendo and yes even Microsoft... They often leverage open-source software and often are required to "contribute" to the open source community to stay within the legal confines of using that software for commercial means...

zero129 said:

Reason for that is many people like myself talk about playing our legal owned games on PC as the is noting illegal about it. However if someone on this site or others like this start talking about playing pirete games on their hacked switches they will get banned. JUst saying maybe thats why you hear more about people playing games on an emu then you do them playing pirate games on hacked switches.

IT doesnt change the fact most if not all them one million copies where played on hacked switches since its the most easy console to hacked console since PSP and PS2.

It's not even just playing commercial games.

There is a massive community that builds games and software for these "environments" aka. Homebrew.

They are 100% legal... And often they are built in an emulated environment rather than on native hardware or a development kit.

Cerebralbore101 said:

You have a right to make backup copies of your games, but do you have a right to make backup copies of decryption keys?

Doesn't the law state that helping people bypass copyright protection is illegal?

Even when copyright law permits your use of a work, it may be illegal to circumvent an access-control technology to make that use. From the university of Michigan...

17 U.S.C. § 1201 prohibits the circumvention of any technological measure that “effectively controls access” to a work that is protected under U.S. copyright law. For instance, it is generally illegal under this provision to circumvent the Content Scramble System that restricts access to in-copyright works on some DVDs. This is known as the anti-circumvention provision of section 1201. Section 1201 also prohibits trafficking in tools that circumvent effective access controls or circumvent controls that protect “a right of the copyright holder under this title.” That is known as the anti-trafficking provision.

Did Bleem allow people to play digital copies of games? Perhaps Bleem won their legal battle because people were simply using it to play games they already owned? Or perhaps Bleem allowed people to download and pirate games off the Internet too. Anybody know the history of Bleem well enough to answer this?

As far as I'm concerned Yuzu and MigSwitch devs are leeches that skirt around the grey areas of the law with no regard to the damage they cause.

That's the issue.

The world isn't the United States.

Many countries have laws and legal precedents that differ from the USA, Australia and New Zealand tend to lean heavily on the European models due to their westminister underpinnings... But in regards to Piracy and Backups have decided that it's perfectly legal to create backups of digital content under the fair-use act.

Many other countries don't even recognize piracy at all, especially parts of Asia and Latin America... Some countries emulators are completely illegal.