4 ms·

ROM site owner made $30k a year–now owes Nintendo $2.1M

31 points by TMWNN 5y ago

TMWNN 5y ago
From the article: >Storman has admitted that, in 2019, the site made up the bulk of his $30,000 to $36,000 a year in income. This included direct revenue from the sale of "premium unlimited accounts" for $30 per year that provided users with faster downloads and no limits. By the time Storman signed a September 2020 agreement with Nintendo to shut the site down, he said he was deriving $800 a month from the site. According to court documents, Storman's income is now derived primarily from "unemployment and food stamps."
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
crumpled 5y ago
He uploaded the content. You can't safe harbor your own self. Then he charged people for premium access. So blatant. It's humane that the damages were capped by the judge.
- BoorishBears 5y ago
  > It's humane that the damages were capped by the judge. Is this satire? Damages were capped at $1.715 million. Nintendo claimed based on each download being one lost sale they lost 1 to 3 million in revenue. So essentially damages were capped at "Just about each download was a lost sale"... except a stock Nintendo Switch can't play pirated games. - This isn't like PC piracy where a pirate game can be as quick and easy as a paid game, so the "conversion rate" from paid to pirate can be made higher just by offering a download. Every download has to be someone who had already decided to modify their console for illegal content or use a 3rd party emulator. So how asinine is it for Nintendo to claim more than even a pittance of those downloads were lost sales???
  - powerapple 5y ago
    It is a loss for the public that old games are not available any more to play. People should be able to play the game they bought when they were kid. Emulation should be a consumer right. I have bought the original games, then emulation games on Wii, later Switch (through online play), why do I have to pay for the same game so many times. People downloading roms could very likely have bought the original games anyway, there is no damage to Nintendo in most cases.
  - bluefirebrand 5y ago
    Just to clarify, ROMs are not only used on hacked Nintendo Switches or consoles at all, they are often just played on computers using emulators. People have been doing this for Nintendo (NES, SNES, Gameboy and GBA at least) for like 20 years or more.
    - BoorishBears 5y ago
      I'm well aware of that. From the comment you just replied to: > Every download has to be someone who had already decided to modify their console for illegal content or use a 3rd party emulator. If I download a 3rd party emulator there's only two options: 1) I own the game and wanted a convenient back up, no sale lost 2) Or I don't own the game, so I had already decided I was going to use an emulator with a game I don't own. The site is not why the sale was lost.
tluyben2 5y ago
This is not a 'sad little guy got f*cked over by corporate overlords'; illegal software sharing site owner has to pay fair fine. Very unusual compared to these things as they usually get into the news; they are often entirely over the top normally, like (bittorrent sharer of 1 blockbuster movie is order to pay $100quazillion in fines because it was maybe downloaded 1000x and losses blahblahblah!).
- BoorishBears 5y ago
  I'm not pro-piracy, I stopped pirating content when I got a job many years ago. But this is 100% sad little guy got fucked over by corporate overlords. His site wasn't the only place to get roms, people would have gotten them anyways. Their claim this was a number one destination would be awesome if torrents didn't exist. He made peanuts, his portion of the damages ROMs do to Nintendo is probably peanuts, yet he's being fined a deleterious amount. How is that justice? This is just high powered lawyers using the court system as a lap dog to make an example.
  - tluyben2 5y ago
    Maybe you are right: my mind is just warped by seeing too many articles about far more 'sad' cases. This seems not so unreasonable at first sight: offering recent roms for download. He must have known that was dangerous. I saw people getting sued for offering 80s roms not so long ago: now that is real rubbish. And about the number 1 destination: I know this site and I don't download roms... Anecdotal, not very telling sample but it must have been big. But yes I might want to review my realities in the matter. Thanks for the perspective.
    - BoorishBears 5y ago
      The main issue is the Nintendo Switch is locked down So the only people who would even go to this site were already investing effort in breaking the security on their devices to pirate It's true there've been much more unjust cases than this, but even something like just the profits (not revenue) of the "premium" subscription would have been fair, and honestly still incredibly hard on someone unemployed... I'd love a world where a guy doing this gets sentenced to community service and maybe Nintendo gets to take over the domain and make their case for not pirating or something.
charles_f 5y ago
Two things I'm wondering about though. 1) if that guy was making only 30k a year, there's no way he's sitting on a pile of cash somewhere. How will he pay? What's happening if he doesn't? Will he be endebted for life or just bankrupt and start again? 2) the claim of loss of 20 to 60buck a pop is far fetched in my opinion. Have we not known for a while that 1 download does not equate to one lost sale?
- BoorishBears 5y ago
  1) Nintendo has made him an indentured servant. This type kind of judgement can't be erased by bankruptcy, so if he works, his wages will be garnished. If permanently unemployed normally that can't be garnished, but there are exceptions and I wonder if this type of judgement qualifies. 2) Nintendo's console can't even play ROM backups without a detailed jailbreaking process. So a prerequisite for even using the site was to have pre-emptively decided you were going to pirate. I can't believe a judge would understand that and somehow think giving Nintendo the middle of their lost revenue estimate based on every download being a missed sale was realistic or just.
guilhas 5y ago
99% of people using ROM websites were Never going to buy from Nintendo anyway I have sometime ago downloaded the Super Mario World ROM, for fun, I probably would not have played if I had to pay. Is it even for sale anywhere? Also I have owned the game in the past, just remembering...
- sschueller 5y ago
  Or like me have the actual game cartridges but want to play the game on other devices.

31 points by TMWNN 5y ago

From the article: >Storman has admitted that, in 2019, the site made up the bulk of his $30,000 to $36,000 a year in income. This included direct revenue from the sale of "premium unlimited accounts" for $30 per year that provided users with faster downloads and no limits. By the time Storman signed a September 2020 agreement with Nintendo to shut the site down, he said he was deriving $800 a month from the site. According to court documents, Storman's income is now derived primarily from "unemployment and food stamps."

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

crumpled 5y ago

He uploaded the content. You can't safe harbor your own self. Then he charged people for premium access. So blatant. It's humane that the damages were capped by the judge.

BoorishBears 5y ago
> It's humane that the damages were capped by the judge. Is this satire? Damages were capped at $1.715 million. Nintendo claimed based on each download being one lost sale they lost 1 to 3 million in revenue. So essentially damages were capped at "Just about each download was a lost sale"... except a stock Nintendo Switch can't play pirated games. - This isn't like PC piracy where a pirate game can be as quick and easy as a paid game, so the "conversion rate" from paid to pirate can be made higher just by offering a download. Every download has to be someone who had already decided to modify their console for illegal content or use a 3rd party emulator. So how asinine is it for Nintendo to claim more than even a pittance of those downloads were lost sales???
- powerapple 5y ago
  It is a loss for the public that old games are not available any more to play. People should be able to play the game they bought when they were kid. Emulation should be a consumer right. I have bought the original games, then emulation games on Wii, later Switch (through online play), why do I have to pay for the same game so many times. People downloading roms could very likely have bought the original games anyway, there is no damage to Nintendo in most cases.
- bluefirebrand 5y ago
  Just to clarify, ROMs are not only used on hacked Nintendo Switches or consoles at all, they are often just played on computers using emulators. People have been doing this for Nintendo (NES, SNES, Gameboy and GBA at least) for like 20 years or more.
  - BoorishBears 5y ago
    I'm well aware of that. From the comment you just replied to: > Every download has to be someone who had already decided to modify their console for illegal content or use a 3rd party emulator. If I download a 3rd party emulator there's only two options: 1) I own the game and wanted a convenient back up, no sale lost 2) Or I don't own the game, so I had already decided I was going to use an emulator with a game I don't own. The site is not why the sale was lost.

tluyben2 5y ago

This is not a 'sad little guy got f*cked over by corporate overlords'; illegal software sharing site owner has to pay fair fine. Very unusual compared to these things as they usually get into the news; they are often entirely over the top normally, like (bittorrent sharer of 1 blockbuster movie is order to pay $100quazillion in fines because it was maybe downloaded 1000x and losses blahblahblah!).

BoorishBears 5y ago
I'm not pro-piracy, I stopped pirating content when I got a job many years ago. But this is 100% sad little guy got fucked over by corporate overlords. His site wasn't the only place to get roms, people would have gotten them anyways. Their claim this was a number one destination would be awesome if torrents didn't exist. He made peanuts, his portion of the damages ROMs do to Nintendo is probably peanuts, yet he's being fined a deleterious amount. How is that justice? This is just high powered lawyers using the court system as a lap dog to make an example.
- tluyben2 5y ago
  Maybe you are right: my mind is just warped by seeing too many articles about far more 'sad' cases. This seems not so unreasonable at first sight: offering recent roms for download. He must have known that was dangerous. I saw people getting sued for offering 80s roms not so long ago: now that is real rubbish. And about the number 1 destination: I know this site and I don't download roms... Anecdotal, not very telling sample but it must have been big. But yes I might want to review my realities in the matter. Thanks for the perspective.
  - BoorishBears 5y ago
    The main issue is the Nintendo Switch is locked down So the only people who would even go to this site were already investing effort in breaking the security on their devices to pirate It's true there've been much more unjust cases than this, but even something like just the profits (not revenue) of the "premium" subscription would have been fair, and honestly still incredibly hard on someone unemployed... I'd love a world where a guy doing this gets sentenced to community service and maybe Nintendo gets to take over the domain and make their case for not pirating or something.

charles_f 5y ago

Two things I'm wondering about though. 1) if that guy was making only 30k a year, there's no way he's sitting on a pile of cash somewhere. How will he pay? What's happening if he doesn't? Will he be endebted for life or just bankrupt and start again? 2) the claim of loss of 20 to 60buck a pop is far fetched in my opinion. Have we not known for a while that 1 download does not equate to one lost sale?

BoorishBears 5y ago
1) Nintendo has made him an indentured servant. This type kind of judgement can't be erased by bankruptcy, so if he works, his wages will be garnished. If permanently unemployed normally that can't be garnished, but there are exceptions and I wonder if this type of judgement qualifies. 2) Nintendo's console can't even play ROM backups without a detailed jailbreaking process. So a prerequisite for even using the site was to have pre-emptively decided you were going to pirate. I can't believe a judge would understand that and somehow think giving Nintendo the middle of their lost revenue estimate based on every download being a missed sale was realistic or just.

guilhas 5y ago

99% of people using ROM websites were Never going to buy from Nintendo anyway I have sometime ago downloaded the Super Mario World ROM, for fun, I probably would not have played if I had to pay. Is it even for sale anywhere? Also I have owned the game in the past, just remembering...

sschueller 5y ago
Or like me have the actual game cartridges but want to play the game on other devices.