this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
707 points (98.2% liked)

Games

32695 readers
1008 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
707
Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu (news.bloomberglaw.com)
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
199 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

(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 (C) 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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

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] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No, it's broader than that. Providing a mechanism is enough. Yes, this is functionally making maths illegal, and yes, this is a complaint we've had with the dmca for 20 years.

Providing the keys is against dmca, as is Providing the tooling that specifically breaks the rights management. This is just the shitty way Americans made the copyright system.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I disagree that the DMCA makes AES libraries illegal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Okay, well, that's your opinion based on nothing, so it doesn't mean much.

At the very least, read the prior art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_City_Studios%2C_Inc._v._Corley?wprov=sfla1

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don’t know if the two cases are equivalent, DeCSS included all code necessary to decrypt a copy protected DVD.

Yuzu does not include the necessary code to decrypt a Switch game. Users have to either “hack” their own Switch, or pirate the codes. What the users are doing is the illegal part here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You're conflating the idea of code and keys. The keys are explicitly illegal as they directly fall under nintendo copyright.

The code is also falling under breach of dmca, as its entire use and focus is to break drm. This is the sticking point here.

Again, to labor the point, it's nothing about the keys, we don't need to talk about the keys.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I’m using code in the sense of the word pass codes. Like, encryption codes. The codes you input to an encryption algorithm, along with the cyphertext, to get the plaintext.

But yes, Nintendo and you are saying that distributing Yuzu is illegal because it can only be used to violate the DMCA.

I disagree.

It can also be used in compliance with the DMCA, and nothing it includes are the intellectual property of Nintendo. There are exceptions to the rule about circumventing copy protection, and as long as you use Yuzu with an intent (such as security research) that falls in one of these exceptions, you can use Yuzu legally.

As long as Yuzu is never distributed by its authors with the encryption codes, it shouldn’t be illegal, even according to the DMCA. Otherwise, there would be no way to circumvent copy protection for legal purposes with regard to Switch games.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

You can disagree if you like, nintendos lawyers, prior art, and everyone who understands the dmca isn't going to agree with your stance at all.

Your stance is a moral one. The dmca is not moral. It exists to limit your freedoms in favor of companies' profits. Enjoy your blinkered outlook.

Also, never use the word code like that, it's incorrect and everyone will misunderstand you. It's wrong. Use encryption key.