Re: Now what?
Posted by aitchk1 on .
Would be nice but companies pay money to governments, courts, politicians.
archive.org claims DMCA protection, but everyone files takedown requests with them anyway and win.
Yuzu was making money. USA courts aren't nice to people who do that.
archive.org claims DMCA protection, but everyone files takedown requests with them anyway and win.
Yuzu was making money. USA courts aren't nice to people who do that.
People were blabbing about emulation because it was reasonably assumed that emulation was protected under the law due to strong precedent. Nintendo probably would have lost the lawsuit had they gone to court, although it's reasonable to say the Yuzu/Citra team had good reasons not to take it to court, and losing only two emulators instead of risking new precedent that could threaten emulation in general is probably a good trade in the grand scheme of things.
What we really need is legislation that explicitly protects emulation and archival. Consumers need to have the right to not just run programs on any hardware we so choose, but also decode it, duplicate it, and transfer it to other mediums for personal use. Just because Nintendo or whoever made the game doesn't mean they should be able to control how we play the game or what medium we store the game on. If these rights were codified in law, then lawsuits like this one could be easily dismissed.
What we really need is legislation that explicitly protects emulation and archival. Consumers need to have the right to not just run programs on any hardware we so choose, but also decode it, duplicate it, and transfer it to other mediums for personal use. Just because Nintendo or whoever made the game doesn't mean they should be able to control how we play the game or what medium we store the game on. If these rights were codified in law, then lawsuits like this one could be easily dismissed.