Weak argument.  There are all kinds of things on the internet...  that aren't legal.  

At best it is a gray area, leaning towards illegal.  But nobody here is going to change their position.  

Just like the Switch and the SteamDeck, which makes this entire conversation pointless.

As opposed to your position "it is legal cos I say so?"  

And your post is verified false.  I posted Steam and Nintendo user agreements, both clearly stated the buyer is purchasing a license, not the game.  

Lol, screenshot court cases proves you can emulate games on other hardware...  wow, you are something else.  Both of your court cases are about copyright.  Has nothing to do with source code.

Hardware, performance and value wise Steam Deck rolls all over the Nintendo Switch (for base model). The NS hasn't got many price cuts and is rather old in terms of tech. Games prices too are in favor of the Deck as there are so many games on Steam and playable on the Deck. On average you can find games much cheaper. With an abundance of third party games a fraction of the price on NS and other consoles. However its not for everyone, the thing can be temperamental when it comes to software and certainly isn't a plug and play experience you get with something like the Switch.

It is a PC however, so there's so much more you can do with the device. And it being a open platform you can play and around and tinker all you like with it. Different devices though for different audiences.

For their respective audiences I don't think either overlap though. Like the people who are interested in the Steam Deck, are likely to be already Steam PC users who have some knowledge on PC gaming. And on the other side Nintendo gamers and the average joe who plays games know what to expect from a Nintendo console.

I do think it should be time Nintendo should release a new handheld with updated specs. With new games and engines on the horizon, Nintendo should be in there faster to get ports from third parties day one. Rather than wait and try catch up again with current gen consoles and PC.

Why has this thread gone entirely away from Talking about the Switch/Deck, to piracy, emulation and legality?.

Like this always ends up happening whenever emulation is brought up, and it's such a tireless debate to watch unfold, because it plays out exactly the same.

Because it's a more interesting subject than the one proposed in this thread

And correlates with the main subject because exclusivity seems to be one of the reasons console owners use to justify console purchases

If they acknowledge exclusivity, in the plain sense of the world, does not even exist in the first place, their gaming world will probably fall apart I guess...

Anyway, I can see 3 main rational reasons why players can pick consoles because of exclusive software:

- They don't really understand (and aren't interested to learn) how all this works in detail and just want to play games as soon and as simple as possible 

- The ones who understand how all this works, but want to be excused for the job of copying and converting software, downloading emulators, and bothering with specs. Either for low time, low patience or simple habit of using consoles (humans are animals of habit after all, is painful to change habits that's why many people still buying and listening to CDs even if when they are mainly extinct)

- The ones who understand how it works, but prefer to play on consoles because of other reasons like entry price, hardware components availability, ergonomics and simple preference for dedicated hardware as sometimes the PCs lacks some features console have to play some games better like Wii, 3DS or even the Switch (I'm here by the way)

What is not very rational is to pretend you absolutely need to buy a... let's say a very old second-hand Dreamcast to play your own Dreamcast collection of games because otherwise, you're breaking the law, when no such law even exists. Maybe if manufacturers were less obtuse in regards for emulation we wouldn't be plagued with a market of remasters and ports

- Piracy/Legality of duplication does vary from region to region/territory to territory.
Some jurisdictions have stipulations that individuals can duplicate media for personal use as long as they have bought a license of some form.

But this is also off topic, I would suggest people steer back to the original discussion. Cheers.

The user agreements cannot overwrite the law.

In the US you can go by the DCMA (the question is tagged european union, but the answer provides with the DCMA, which is entirely not european):

> Copyright law permits you to make one copy of your computer software for the purpose of archiving the software in case it is damaged or lost. In order to make a copy, you must own a valid copy of the software and must destroy or transfer your backup copy if you ever decide to sell, transfer or give away your original valid copy.

With other words, you can make a copy if you own the original.

The second part refers to Nintendo Switch Online, a subscription service in which you don't get a copy of the game, but a timed access as long as you subscribe. So different situation.

https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/82949/is-it-legal-to-extract-digital-game-copies-from-a-game-console-to-emulate-backup

In europe you have actual court ruling:

> By its judgment delivered today, the Court explains that the principle of exhaustion of the distribution right applies not only where the copyright holder markets copies of his software on a material medium (CD-ROM or DVD) but also where he distributes them by means of downloads from his website.

> Where the copyright holder makes available to his customer a copy – tangible or intangible – and at the same time concludes, in return form payment of a fee, a licence agreement granting the customer the right to use that copy for an unlimited period, that rightholder sells the copy to the customer and thus exhausts his exclusive distribution right. Such a transaction involves a transfer of the right of ownership of the copy. Therefore, even if the licence agreement prohibits a further transfer, the rightholder can no longer oppose the resale of that copy.

https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-07/cp120094en.pdf

Whatever Steam or Nintendo write in their user agreements, the parts that stands in contradiction to the law are simply invalid.

Sorry, I composed my answer first, before going on in the thread to reach this post. I'll abstain from further posts on this topic in this thread.