Speculating here but it feels like part of Nintendo's beef is the popularity of PC form factors that look like a Nintendo Switch. Most notably the Steam Deck but there are loads of them.
It would be amazing if Valve stepped up with legal funds/protection there. They do get money from people buying SteamDecks for emulation and well... free publicity if they take on Nintendo.
I mean Valve literally had a trailer with a nintendo emulator as an app installed... Valve doesn't need to do RND for its games because they can just use whatever is on steam that is playable on the deck plus a ton of games from nintendo consoles via emulators as a selling point.
I knew that Patreon would bite them some day. Any time money comes into a "offensive" open source project, whoever feels they are getting hurt can make a claim a lot easier. Somewhat surprised they haven't yet sued Ryujinx (the other Switch emulator project) for also having a Patreon.
Nothing Nintendo can do can shut the emulation genie... because China.
A lot of Chinese sff pc/handheld producers (GPD/Minisforum/Ayaneo/Beelink etc)[1] are now creating device with the explicit understanding that these devices will be used for emulation, and are creating devices as such.
even if Yuzu is banned...Chinese will take over, and nothing any american/japanese game manufacturers can do to stop it.
I don't believe so (the Sony v. Bleem cases mainly ended up in favor of Bleem), but also I don't think anyone has tried since the DMCA. It looks like Nintendo is taking a 'trafficking in circumvention device' legal strategy as opposed to a strictly anti-emulator legal strategy.
This won't matter. The goal will be to run them out of money. It's an open source project and they most likely don't have the capital to fund any sort of lengthy lawsuit.
bleem! (PlayStation emulator) was sued by Sony and was forced to close down because of legal fees, so I guess that counts as a success for Sony.
I seem to recall a bunch of ROM sites disappearing as well, but not sure if that's because they got sued or for other reasons. Some must have been sued and consequently shut down, so maybe not a bad idea (for the companies) to at least try?
> Are there any cases of emulators being sued successfully?
Sony lost all their cases in the past. They claimed they infringed copyright when copying PS1 BIOS for reverse engineering purposes, court ruled that was fair use as it was necessary to gain access to the unprotected elements of the console. The other case was some bullshit about advertising, they had the audacity to claim screenshots violated their copyrights. They lost in court but won in the market by bankrupting their competitors.
Who knows what's gonna happen in 2024 though? Felony contempt of business model seems quite well entrenched at this point. Company puts "IP" into their product and suddenly they get to control what you do with it and it's illegal for you to resist in any way.
Common sense says emulators are alternative compatible implementations of the original hardware which increases consumer choice. People should have every right to make an emulator, doesn't matter if it's an old console or one that's just been released. Emulators are competitors to Nintendo. If they don't like it then they should drop their "exclusives" nonsense and start releasing games on PC where they belong with better graphics and performance and all the bells and whistles that emulators provide.
Who knows what these courts are gonna decide though. The copyright industry basically buys these laws anyway, there's no reason to believe they will rule favorably to the consumer.
Things like this and companies like Nintendo must be stopped, it's both morally and legally correct to emulate when people actually owns the machine and cartridges.
Disagreed. I'm guessing that 99.99% of Switch emulator users do not own the cartridges. They're stealing, which is not only morally wrong, but legally wrong.
Nintendo has the right to protect their IP and they have the right to make money.
Furthermore, I disagree in general that it's morally and legally correct to emulate something you purchased.
When the game isn't be sold any more, along with the console, emulation makes sense.
But the switch emulation for at least 2 years now has been more than good enough to run games of a current gen system, and you're absolutely kidding yourself if you think any meaningful percentage own the game.
The emulator also requires Nintendo data they're not actually allowed to ship (there's a number of resources to download it though), but they specifically coded to support it.
Imo switch 2 is coming and it'll likely be almost the same system just beefier, so going after the emulators makes sense for them.
Looking over the legal document, realistically, their arguments are so damaging from a software perspective that they should lose. IANAL, but from skimming the legal document:
The two major notions are that Yuzu violates Nintendo's copyright [1] by allowing people to play unauthorized copies [2]. In order to do so it allows for bypassing Nintendo's encryption (by taking in the keys, it does not embed the keys in the software) it falls under a violation of the DMCA [3]. Essentially, trying to argue that the keys are copyrighted. Additionally, they claim that every user that has either dumped Nintendo games they lawfully owned and play in Yuzu, or have pirated the roms and played in Yuzu have violated copyright and thus Yuzu should pay up [4].
[1] "In effect, Yuzu turns general computing devices into tools for
massive intellectual property infringement of Nintendo and others’ copyrighted work"
[2] "In other words, without Yuzu’s decryption of Nintendo’s
encryption, unauthorized copies of games could not be played on PCs or Android devices. "
[3] "Recognizing the threats faced by copyright owners like Nintendo in the age of digital piracy, Congress enacted the Anti-Circumvention and Anti-Trafficking provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), making it illegal to circumvent or traffic in devices that circumvent technological measures put into place by copyright owners to protect against unlawful access to and copying of copyrighted works."
[4] "On information and belief, Yuzu users have (1) dumped Nintendo games they
have lawfully purchased and copied the game ROMs into Yuzu; and (2) obtained Nintendo games online from pirate websites and copied those game ROMs into Yuzu. Each such reproduction constitutes a violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501(a) for which Plaintiff is entitled to damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504 and injunctive relief under § 502"
I feel like there ought to be a sliding scale of cost associated with filing a law suit. If you're a very large company suing a very small company, it should be very expensive to file. Expensive enough to make your lawyers encourage you to think really hard about whether or not this is actually a threat to your business.
Of course, applying that to the real world would obviously fall apart quickly. It's not hard to think through loopholes.
It just seems to easy to crush a small company/group who are just doing something you don't like.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Nintendo caught using an open source emulator for the switch, without any sort of credit to the authors after suing? If so, I have no empathy for them.
This is unfortunate. The switch is probably coming to the end of its life soon. As soon as Nintendos next gen (announced or not) console is released, the switch will be a legacy system and emulation is important for archiving purposes.
This does make it less likely that i'll be buying any Nintendo products in the future.
I wish they'd offer a legal avenue to play Switch games at 4K/60 instead of 720p/20-30. Anyone looking for a higher fidelity experience than the 2017 Switch hardware is able to provide is forced to use software like Yuzu to enable it. Even Sony has started porting their crown jewel games to PC to enormous commercial success, allowing players with high-end hardware to legally enjoy a higher fidelity experience, but Nintendo is stuck in the past.
This is truly awful for the gaming community at large. If this case makes a ruling then it will most likely have an impact on all emulation projects. If Nintendo decides to sue your open source project, how do you mount a legal defense?
It feels like a claim against free speech. Yuzu makes an emulator and states it can play Switch games. That is a statement. If others illegally trade binaries, that’s not the emulator’s fault. By attacking them, it feels like the only thing “wrong” was making the emulator available. Caveat - IANAL.
> The legal document claims that over a million copies of last year's The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom were downloaded prior to the game's official retail release. As a result, the company is now seeking damages and is demanding that the Yuzu emulator is shut down.
Quite the leap from existing as an emulator to inexplicably being held liable for some independent leak.
There's actually multiple arguments with zero proof there.
- they didn't prove that Yuzu contributed to piracy (and since the amount of piracy tools on the Switch itself that's far from obvious that Yuzu is a first choice)
- they didn't prove that the leak itself lead to a loss of revenue. And that's also very hard of an argument to make considering that this game was a huge commercial success.
It is also fully their fault the game was leaked early. They released the game carts to buyers too early, and their system5 crypto scheme was already broken by the time the game came out. Yuzu didn't break system5, nor do they ship the keys needed to decrypt the dumped game files. They did release patches which specifically fixed issues with Zelda, and that wasn't a good look legally - but it isn't illegal to fix inaccuracies with the software.
Not necessarily. It's fairly easy to prove that if the emulator did not exist, the leak would be fairly inconsequential; and considering how easy it is to show the percentage of pirating users versus legitimate users (probably 95%+), it's not a good look.
There's also the issue that, unlike prior emulators, Yuzu risks running afoul of DMCA anti-trafficking provisions for circumvention devices and software that uses circumvention devices. So, while per se emulating the Switch might be legal, decrypting the games may be illegal (as would software that is useless if it is unable to do that decryption).
It's called contributory copyright infringement. The Supreme Court only ruled that the VCR was legal based on a very narrow use case: if a television broadcast aired once and only once, never to be seen again, and the user could not see it as scheduled, they were legally entitled to use a device to record the broadcast and watch it at a later time -- once, after which they would presumably have to destroy the recording. And there are legal experts who believe even that is a yard too far.
Nintendo's case is a lot more airtight. To play anything on yuzu, you have to defeat the encryption on Switch games, itself a felony DMCA violation (irrespective of how good or bad the encryption is). Therefore, yuzu can only be used to play pirated material, therefore it contributes to copyright infringement.
"But muh homebrew" -- people who want to develop for Switch can get a development license from Nintendo. The fact that this is an option would weaken developing for Switch as a legitimate use for yuzu.
Ironically, I own more than one Switch and all the games I play using an emulator. After the Steam Deck came out, I just preferred using the emulator on the Steam Deck because it allowed me to backup and share save files, so I had the convenience of a handheld with the ability to play on my gaming PC at home and in both cases have performance unrestricted. When the Switch OLED came out I was hoping it would be a performance boost also, but unfortunately that wasn't the case so I didn't buy one.
I /really/ really like the Switch hardware. I think the Switch is arguably one of the best consoles ever made, especially for it's ergonomics and UX. The detachable joycons, the subtle integration of motion control, and it's light weight with good battery life made it an exceptionally good gaming product. I truly love my Switch(es), but they are very long in the tooth in 2024, running off what is basically a 2017 smartphone hardware. If Nintendo releases a Switch 2 with full games backwards compatibility, I'd prefer to play on first-party hardware vs using an emulator, but from my perspective I just want the best gaming experience, I don't care about their greedy interpretation of the law. Software is software and hardware is hardware, it makes no sense to restrict emulation in any way as long as you legally own the games.
>(A)to “circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure” means avoiding, bypassing, removing, deactivating, or otherwise impairing a technological measure;
If this is what Nintendo alleges yuzu facilitates, does Nintendo have a case?
Reimplementing the security measures seems like a reaffirmation of the security measures, not an impairment.
Lawyers always kill the fun. Piracy and emulation is still legal in many other countries, however. Emulator projects should always be hosted in piracy-friendly nations.
[+] [-] Lammy|2 years ago|reply
In 2022 Nintendo starting taking down Youtube videos showing Steam Decks running Switch games: https://www.resetera.com/threads/nintendo-started-blocking-v...
And last year went after Dolphin (GCN/Wii emulator) as soon as they announced plans to be listed on Steam: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36090755 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36100732
[+] [-] jsheard|2 years ago|reply
It was quickly taken down and re-posted without any references to Yuzu, probably after a panicked email from legal.
https://www.pcgamer.com/valve-edits-steam-deck-trailer-to-re...
[+] [-] viraptor|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] carlosrg|2 years ago|reply
What are they supposed to do? Leave videos about piracy of their own IP untouched?
It baffles me how people believe they have a fundamental right to pirate Nintendo software without consequences.
[+] [-] dev1ycan|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pipeline_peak|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robbiet480|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ryzvonusef|2 years ago|reply
A lot of Chinese sff pc/handheld producers (GPD/Minisforum/Ayaneo/Beelink etc)[1] are now creating device with the explicit understanding that these devices will be used for emulation, and are creating devices as such.
even if Yuzu is banned...Chinese will take over, and nothing any american/japanese game manufacturers can do to stop it.
----
[1] AyaNeo literally created a DS clone called the Flip DS... doesn't get more explicit then that: https://www.ayaneo.com/product/AYANEO-FLIP-DS.html
[+] [-] theultdev|2 years ago|reply
Are there any cases of emulators being sued successfully?
A user being able to provide keys and a rom from which they could own or be homebrew doesn't seem to violate copyright to me.
edit: seems the consensus is once via legal fund attrition, but the case went to the emulator authors in the end.
[+] [-] monocasa|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] johnny99k|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] diggan|2 years ago|reply
I seem to recall a bunch of ROM sites disappearing as well, but not sure if that's because they got sued or for other reasons. Some must have been sued and consequently shut down, so maybe not a bad idea (for the companies) to at least try?
[+] [-] matheusmoreira|2 years ago|reply
Sony lost all their cases in the past. They claimed they infringed copyright when copying PS1 BIOS for reverse engineering purposes, court ruled that was fair use as it was necessary to gain access to the unprotected elements of the console. The other case was some bullshit about advertising, they had the audacity to claim screenshots violated their copyrights. They lost in court but won in the market by bankrupting their competitors.
Who knows what's gonna happen in 2024 though? Felony contempt of business model seems quite well entrenched at this point. Company puts "IP" into their product and suddenly they get to control what you do with it and it's illegal for you to resist in any way.
Common sense says emulators are alternative compatible implementations of the original hardware which increases consumer choice. People should have every right to make an emulator, doesn't matter if it's an old console or one that's just been released. Emulators are competitors to Nintendo. If they don't like it then they should drop their "exclusives" nonsense and start releasing games on PC where they belong with better graphics and performance and all the bells and whistles that emulators provide.
Who knows what these courts are gonna decide though. The copyright industry basically buys these laws anyway, there's no reason to believe they will rule favorably to the consumer.
[+] [-] xd1936|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] _imnothere|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aurareturn|2 years ago|reply
Nintendo has the right to protect their IP and they have the right to make money.
Furthermore, I disagree in general that it's morally and legally correct to emulate something you purchased.
[+] [-] ApolloFortyNine|2 years ago|reply
But the switch emulation for at least 2 years now has been more than good enough to run games of a current gen system, and you're absolutely kidding yourself if you think any meaningful percentage own the game.
The emulator also requires Nintendo data they're not actually allowed to ship (there's a number of resources to download it though), but they specifically coded to support it.
Imo switch 2 is coming and it'll likely be almost the same system just beefier, so going after the emulators makes sense for them.
[+] [-] fzeroracer|2 years ago|reply
The two major notions are that Yuzu violates Nintendo's copyright [1] by allowing people to play unauthorized copies [2]. In order to do so it allows for bypassing Nintendo's encryption (by taking in the keys, it does not embed the keys in the software) it falls under a violation of the DMCA [3]. Essentially, trying to argue that the keys are copyrighted. Additionally, they claim that every user that has either dumped Nintendo games they lawfully owned and play in Yuzu, or have pirated the roms and played in Yuzu have violated copyright and thus Yuzu should pay up [4].
[1] "In effect, Yuzu turns general computing devices into tools for massive intellectual property infringement of Nintendo and others’ copyrighted work"
[2] "In other words, without Yuzu’s decryption of Nintendo’s encryption, unauthorized copies of games could not be played on PCs or Android devices. "
[3] "Recognizing the threats faced by copyright owners like Nintendo in the age of digital piracy, Congress enacted the Anti-Circumvention and Anti-Trafficking provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), making it illegal to circumvent or traffic in devices that circumvent technological measures put into place by copyright owners to protect against unlawful access to and copying of copyrighted works."
[4] "On information and belief, Yuzu users have (1) dumped Nintendo games they have lawfully purchased and copied the game ROMs into Yuzu; and (2) obtained Nintendo games online from pirate websites and copied those game ROMs into Yuzu. Each such reproduction constitutes a violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501(a) for which Plaintiff is entitled to damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504 and injunctive relief under § 502"
[+] [-] sircastor|2 years ago|reply
Of course, applying that to the real world would obviously fall apart quickly. It's not hard to think through loopholes.
It just seems to easy to crush a small company/group who are just doing something you don't like.
[+] [-] GrabbinD33ze69|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aussieguy1234|2 years ago|reply
This does make it less likely that i'll be buying any Nintendo products in the future.
[+] [-] deminature|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gamepsys|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jamesear|2 years ago|reply
This might HN readers a skewed perspective on how much Yuzu is used for piracy.
I have many acquaintances/friends in different circles, with the means to pay, who use Yuzu for piracy.
There are dedicated forums of people who coordinate on how to do this.
Emulation is great as a means to study or play backups, but its also fair that Nintendo has legitimate business interest in curtailing this.
IANAL, and have no idea how their case against Yuzu developers will go.
[+] [-] russfink|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Springtime|2 years ago|reply
Quite the leap from existing as an emulator to inexplicably being held liable for some independent leak.
[+] [-] burnte|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] realusername|2 years ago|reply
- they didn't prove that Yuzu contributed to piracy (and since the amount of piracy tools on the Switch itself that's far from obvious that Yuzu is a first choice)
- they didn't prove that the leak itself lead to a loss of revenue. And that's also very hard of an argument to make considering that this game was a huge commercial success.
[+] [-] a_vanderbilt|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gjsman-1000|2 years ago|reply
There's also the issue that, unlike prior emulators, Yuzu risks running afoul of DMCA anti-trafficking provisions for circumvention devices and software that uses circumvention devices. So, while per se emulating the Switch might be legal, decrypting the games may be illegal (as would software that is useless if it is unable to do that decryption).
Edit: Strongly recommend reading my follow up comment explaining historical precedent: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39530558
[+] [-] bitwize|2 years ago|reply
Nintendo's case is a lot more airtight. To play anything on yuzu, you have to defeat the encryption on Switch games, itself a felony DMCA violation (irrespective of how good or bad the encryption is). Therefore, yuzu can only be used to play pirated material, therefore it contributes to copyright infringement.
"But muh homebrew" -- people who want to develop for Switch can get a development license from Nintendo. The fact that this is an option would weaken developing for Switch as a legitimate use for yuzu.
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] CaliforniaKarl|2 years ago|reply
https://youtu.be/wROQUZDCIMI
“Why Are Emulators Legal? Dolphin vs. Nintendo, and the Fate of Dolphin Emulator”
[+] [-] tristor|2 years ago|reply
I /really/ really like the Switch hardware. I think the Switch is arguably one of the best consoles ever made, especially for it's ergonomics and UX. The detachable joycons, the subtle integration of motion control, and it's light weight with good battery life made it an exceptionally good gaming product. I truly love my Switch(es), but they are very long in the tooth in 2024, running off what is basically a 2017 smartphone hardware. If Nintendo releases a Switch 2 with full games backwards compatibility, I'd prefer to play on first-party hardware vs using an emulator, but from my perspective I just want the best gaming experience, I don't care about their greedy interpretation of the law. Software is software and hardware is hardware, it makes no sense to restrict emulation in any way as long as you legally own the games.
[+] [-] skupig|2 years ago|reply
If this is what Nintendo alleges yuzu facilitates, does Nintendo have a case?
Reimplementing the security measures seems like a reaffirmation of the security measures, not an impairment.
[+] [-] ken47|2 years ago|reply
And what’s Nintendo supposed to do here? Most here would do the same thing if they were in Nintendo’s shoes. They have employees to pay.
Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
[+] [-] 1970-01-01|2 years ago|reply
https://www.reddit.com/r/Piracy/comments/b6rpzx/here_are_som...