8 ms·

>Because a private company has no right to tell me what to do with the hardware and software I legally bought from them. Interestingly, Nintendo's explicit mes

>Because a private company has no right to tell me what to do with the hardware and software I legally bought from them. Interestingly, Nintendo's explicit message was not that the hacking was wrong, but that the sharing of the hacking was wrong, because sharing the hack encourages piracy on a larger scale. It's hard to argue with that logic, TBH. And I actually admire their soft touch approach. My sense is that this is not that big of a deal, to Nintendo or anyone else. The platform, the physicality of "normal" distribution, plus the general inability of people to successfully mod their stuff, all favors Nintendo naturally. Seems like a tempest in a teapot, and if anything, I don't think it harms Nintendo's reputation at all (modulo sensationalist headlines).

zucker42 6y ago
> It's hard to argue with that logic, TBH. If you can't come up with an argument against that then you're not trying hard enough. The most obvious is that sharing a mod is free speech and ought to be protected as such. It's also unclear how mods contribute to copyright infringement in any meaningful way. I'm having trouble finding details about exactly what Neimod's mods entailed, but most mods I have experience with require an existing copy of the game.
- javajosh 6y ago
  Information products require artificial scarcity to be economically viable. If freedom of speech gives individuals a license to say anything in any medium, then this means that artificial scarcity is inconsistent with free speech. If artificial scarcity is immoral, then all information products are immoral. (Note that as a practical matter I suspect that Nintendo only cares about "hacking" insofar as it undermines sales. I can't see why they would care about people modifying the games or equipment they own. I can totally see why they would care if someone invented an SD card cartridge for the 3DS that allows you to run every game ever written from it. Such a device, if mass produced and sold for profit, is clearly intended for piracy. Moreover, its easy to see how such a device is parasitic on the platform itself, so that if Nintendo didn't do something about it then there won't be a Nintendo.)
  - zucker42 6y ago
    > I can't see why they would care about people modifying the games or equipment they own. Nintendo has previously sued a company for selling a device which allows people to mod the device they owned. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._N.... Nintendo is notoriously anti-consumer in this regard. And anyways, restricting mods is unnecessary to encourage the economic viability of video games.
    - javajosh 6y ago
      That link doesn't work. Okay, I admit I don't know much about the modding community these days, but back in the day it used to be ALL about enabling you to play the files you just downloaded. What do mods do these days? I admit that if someone is selling a mod that lets you, I don't know, change the sprites around in your favorite game, that would not affect N's bottom line and it would be a big problem if they confronted people about something like that.
  - Drakim 6y ago
    There is a huge difference between the speech of sharing exact copyrighted material, and the free speech of sharing methods of running whatever software you want on some hardware. If the later is not allowed, this very comment might be illegal, as I'm telling you that such a thing is possible.
shakna 6y ago
> And I actually admire their soft touch approach. Interviewing family members, hiring someone to build a schedule of your coming and goings, and so on... Does not seem like a "soft touch" approach to me. To be frank, it's something I would expect of the Yakuza, not a game company.
- javajosh 6y ago
  Oh, the Yakuza interviews family members and figures out your schedule? And here I thought they trafficked in drugs and humans, and routinely murdered people. Silly me.
  - Talanes 6y ago
    And how do you get in position to murder someone?
belval 6y ago
How is it hard to argue with that approach? I get that a lot of people LOVE Nintendo and their products but this is insanely shady. What would be your reaction if Apple hired private firms to stalk iFixit founders? Would it still be "hard to argue"?
- javajosh 6y ago
  Bad analogy. Information products require artificial scarcity. Literally everyone making a living wage on this site benefits from this fact. If you want to follow your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, then fine. But what I see are people who benefit from this fact taking a holier-than-thou attitude toward Nintendo, and I object to the hypocrisy. iFixit is safe because it doesn't really affect Apple's sales. It may put a slightly downward pressure on Apple Store repair revenue. But iFixit solutions require technical aptitude, time and skill to apply that most people don't have, and wouldn't spend on fixing a laptop even if they had it! But what if iFixit sold a dohicky that defeats the copy protection on all software written for macOS? Do you think that's okay, and that their right to share that device is free speech?
  - stale2002 6y ago
    This is about modding. People have a right to mod their own hardware that they legally purchased. That's all that matters.
    - javajosh 6y ago
      >That's all that matters. No, it isn't. But thank you for illustrating one consequence of "dogmatic belief".
      - stale2002 6y ago
        People have a right to mod their own hardware. Thats the law.
  - belval 6y ago

zucker42 6y ago

> It's hard to argue with that logic, TBH. If you can't come up with an argument against that then you're not trying hard enough. The most obvious is that sharing a mod is free speech and ought to be protected as such. It's also unclear how mods contribute to copyright infringement in any meaningful way. I'm having trouble finding details about exactly what Neimod's mods entailed, but most mods I have experience with require an existing copy of the game.

javajosh 6y ago
Information products require artificial scarcity to be economically viable. If freedom of speech gives individuals a license to say anything in any medium, then this means that artificial scarcity is inconsistent with free speech. If artificial scarcity is immoral, then all information products are immoral. (Note that as a practical matter I suspect that Nintendo only cares about "hacking" insofar as it undermines sales. I can't see why they would care about people modifying the games or equipment they own. I can totally see why they would care if someone invented an SD card cartridge for the 3DS that allows you to run every game ever written from it. Such a device, if mass produced and sold for profit, is clearly intended for piracy. Moreover, its easy to see how such a device is parasitic on the platform itself, so that if Nintendo didn't do something about it then there won't be a Nintendo.)
- zucker42 6y ago
  > I can't see why they would care about people modifying the games or equipment they own. Nintendo has previously sued a company for selling a device which allows people to mod the device they owned. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._N.... Nintendo is notoriously anti-consumer in this regard. And anyways, restricting mods is unnecessary to encourage the economic viability of video games.
  - javajosh 6y ago
    That link doesn't work. Okay, I admit I don't know much about the modding community these days, but back in the day it used to be ALL about enabling you to play the files you just downloaded. What do mods do these days? I admit that if someone is selling a mod that lets you, I don't know, change the sprites around in your favorite game, that would not affect N's bottom line and it would be a big problem if they confronted people about something like that.
- Drakim 6y ago
  There is a huge difference between the speech of sharing exact copyrighted material, and the free speech of sharing methods of running whatever software you want on some hardware. If the later is not allowed, this very comment might be illegal, as I'm telling you that such a thing is possible.

shakna 6y ago

> And I actually admire their soft touch approach. Interviewing family members, hiring someone to build a schedule of your coming and goings, and so on... Does not seem like a "soft touch" approach to me. To be frank, it's something I would expect of the Yakuza, not a game company.

javajosh 6y ago
Oh, the Yakuza interviews family members and figures out your schedule? And here I thought they trafficked in drugs and humans, and routinely murdered people. Silly me.
- Talanes 6y ago
  And how do you get in position to murder someone?

belval 6y ago

How is it hard to argue with that approach? I get that a lot of people LOVE Nintendo and their products but this is insanely shady. What would be your reaction if Apple hired private firms to stalk iFixit founders? Would it still be "hard to argue"?

javajosh 6y ago
Bad analogy. Information products require artificial scarcity. Literally everyone making a living wage on this site benefits from this fact. If you want to follow your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, then fine. But what I see are people who benefit from this fact taking a holier-than-thou attitude toward Nintendo, and I object to the hypocrisy. iFixit is safe because it doesn't really affect Apple's sales. It may put a slightly downward pressure on Apple Store repair revenue. But iFixit solutions require technical aptitude, time and skill to apply that most people don't have, and wouldn't spend on fixing a laptop even if they had it! But what if iFixit sold a dohicky that defeats the copy protection on all software written for macOS? Do you think that's okay, and that their right to share that device is free speech?
- stale2002 6y ago
  This is about modding. People have a right to mod their own hardware that they legally purchased. That's all that matters.
  - javajosh 6y ago
    >That's all that matters. No, it isn't. But thank you for illustrating one consequence of "dogmatic belief".
    - stale2002 6y ago
      People have a right to mod their own hardware. Thats the law.
- belval 6y ago