3 ms·
"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
by 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 agoThe authors of re3/revc thought the same and now they're going to court
- zamadatix 5y agore3/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 agoJust 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 agoLegal or not also has only tenuous correlation to github taking action.
- devwastaken 5y agoIt 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.