3 ms·

Oh no it's a public GitHub. Nintendo will throw their lawyers at this. Download while you can.

ksaj 5y ago
"The kind of reverse engineering ZRET do is made legal because the fans involved did not use any leaked content. Instead, they painstakingly recreated the game from scratch using modern coding languages. The project also does not use any of Nintendo’s original copyrighted assets such as graphics or sound."
- bogantech 5y ago
  The authors of re3/revc thought the same and now they're going to court
  - zamadatix 5y ago
    re3/revc is going to court largely because they included assets in their repository and advertised derivative works/ports. zret purposefully avoided all of these points making this oot mq decomp. Of course Nintendo can submit a case if they like but it'd be a lot less likely to enter an actual trial like re3/revc. A better comparison would be https://github.com/n64decomp/sm64 https://github.com/n64decomp/sm64 which followed the exact same guidelines as this project. Nintendo chased after and DMCA'd many projects based on it but never the original project.
- Rebelgecko 5y ago
  Just saying that doesn't make it true through. If they ran the source code through a decompiler and then cleaned up the output, they're not using any leaked content but it's still potentially infringing on Nintendo's copyrighted source code. That's why some projects choose to make "clean room implementations".
  - klyrs 5y ago
    Legal or not also has only tenuous correlation to github taking action.
- devwastaken 5y ago
  It doesn't matter if you use original assets or not. Duplicating the heart of a work, in any way, is copyright infringement. Even streaming a video game, against the wishes of the copyright holders, is copyright infringement. Recording of playing a video game is not your own work. U.S. copyright law is absolutely gross, we are used to these companies choosing to not enforce infringement and targeting specific people/projects.
sschueller 5y ago
It's legal and should be legal. You purchased the game, it is yours to do with what you want including converting the machine code into C. Decompiling Adobe cloud is illegal because you are just renting a seat to use it. It's not yours. This modern garbage of paying 70k for a car that isn't really yours needs to stop and people need to stop paying a purchase price for something they are just "renting".
- devwastaken 5y ago
  In the U.S. that is not accurate. Any form of breaking DRM, under the DMCA, is infringement. Even cracking DVD is infringement. Even if the product had a fixed key of 1234. Even if it were legal with your single product, releasing it to the wider web would be illigal. Same as distributing digital copies is. Again, U.S. copyright law is designed heavily against individual owners. It is designed for big corporations to own anything forever. Research how Disney has changed copyright limits if you don't believe me. Look up copyright cases on YouTube.

ksaj 5y ago

"The kind of reverse engineering ZRET do is made legal because the fans involved did not use any leaked content. Instead, they painstakingly recreated the game from scratch using modern coding languages. The project also does not use any of Nintendo’s original copyrighted assets such as graphics or sound."

bogantech 5y ago
The authors of re3/revc thought the same and now they're going to court
- zamadatix 5y ago
  re3/revc is going to court largely because they included assets in their repository and advertised derivative works/ports. zret purposefully avoided all of these points making this oot mq decomp. Of course Nintendo can submit a case if they like but it'd be a lot less likely to enter an actual trial like re3/revc. A better comparison would be https://github.com/n64decomp/sm64 https://github.com/n64decomp/sm64 which followed the exact same guidelines as this project. Nintendo chased after and DMCA'd many projects based on it but never the original project.
Rebelgecko 5y ago
Just saying that doesn't make it true through. If they ran the source code through a decompiler and then cleaned up the output, they're not using any leaked content but it's still potentially infringing on Nintendo's copyrighted source code. That's why some projects choose to make "clean room implementations".
- klyrs 5y ago
  Legal or not also has only tenuous correlation to github taking action.
devwastaken 5y ago
It doesn't matter if you use original assets or not. Duplicating the heart of a work, in any way, is copyright infringement. Even streaming a video game, against the wishes of the copyright holders, is copyright infringement. Recording of playing a video game is not your own work. U.S. copyright law is absolutely gross, we are used to these companies choosing to not enforce infringement and targeting specific people/projects.

sschueller 5y ago

It's legal and should be legal. You purchased the game, it is yours to do with what you want including converting the machine code into C. Decompiling Adobe cloud is illegal because you are just renting a seat to use it. It's not yours. This modern garbage of paying 70k for a car that isn't really yours needs to stop and people need to stop paying a purchase price for something they are just "renting".

devwastaken 5y ago
In the U.S. that is not accurate. Any form of breaking DRM, under the DMCA, is infringement. Even cracking DVD is infringement. Even if the product had a fixed key of 1234. Even if it were legal with your single product, releasing it to the wider web would be illigal. Same as distributing digital copies is. Again, U.S. copyright law is designed heavily against individual owners. It is designed for big corporations to own anything forever. Research how Disney has changed copyright limits if you don't believe me. Look up copyright cases on YouTube.