4 ms·

It's hard to defend what Nintendo is doing because no one can actually buy old NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, and Wii titles online legally.

Wowfunhappy 5y ago
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Super-Mario-Galaxy-Marketplace-Brands-Nintendo-Wii-Refurbished/757842271 https://www.walmart.com/ip/Super-Mario-Galaxy-Marketplace-Br... I realize that's not a digital download, but these titles were never offered as digital downloads, and Nintendo isn't obligated to use the exact format which suits your needs. (And while Nintendo isn't directly profiting from used sales, high prices on the secondary market make their new games seem like good investments.) (If we were talking about WiiWare exclusively, I'd have a very different attitude.)
- chaostheory 5y ago
  > I realize that's not a digital download, but these titles were never offered as digital download That's not a good excuse. > Nintendo isn't obligated to use the exact format which suits your needs You're right. They're just providing a really good argument for the continuation of mass piracy of their products.
avindroth 5y ago
Why is Nintendo obliged to provide older content, or otherwise allow emulation? If a company ceases to provide something, does that give you rights to acquire that something illegally?
- chaostheory 5y ago
  It doesn't give anyone the rights to anything. What it does though is provide a massive incentive for piracy. While I don't pirate myself, I can see many rational people do it for Nintendo products, and I don't have a good argument against it.
- EMIRELADERO 5y ago
  > Why is Nintendo obliged to provide older content, or otherwise allow emulation? Provide older content, no, "allow" emulation, yes. It's not even "allow", Nintendo doesn't have the authority to allow or disallow anyone from making, distributing and running emulators.
  - avindroth 5y ago
    They might not have the legal authority, but is their firm stance against emulators morally questionable? I may agree their methods are questionable, but I don't know if their stance is. Nintendo's stance against emulation seems consistent with their approach to game design and game management.
    - EMIRELADERO 5y ago
      Is the question of whether a company's action is "morally questionable" dependant on that action being consistent with similar actions done by the same company in the past?
- namlem 5y ago
  Legally? No. Morally? Yes.
  - avindroth 5y ago
    How are they morally obligated (or suggested) to provide access to older games?
    - namlem 5y ago
      They're not, but people are morally entitled to pirate them if they don't.
    - Talanes 5y ago
      I view the morality around IP law as an implicit contract with society. Actual theft is wrong because I am depriving someone of something without their consent. Pirating is wrong because it disincentives the production of further work. If there's no option to pay, then piracy doesn't affect the incentive structure at all, except possibly sending a a signal that there's still demand there.
- antifa 5y ago
  Nintendo is not obligated to offer services people would pay for, that's true.

Wowfunhappy 5y ago

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Super-Mario-Galaxy-Marketplace-Brands-Nintendo-Wii-Refurbished/757842271 https://www.walmart.com/ip/Super-Mario-Galaxy-Marketplace-Br... I realize that's not a digital download, but these titles were never offered as digital downloads, and Nintendo isn't obligated to use the exact format which suits your needs. (And while Nintendo isn't directly profiting from used sales, high prices on the secondary market make their new games seem like good investments.) (If we were talking about WiiWare exclusively, I'd have a very different attitude.)

chaostheory 5y ago
> I realize that's not a digital download, but these titles were never offered as digital download That's not a good excuse. > Nintendo isn't obligated to use the exact format which suits your needs You're right. They're just providing a really good argument for the continuation of mass piracy of their products.

avindroth 5y ago

Why is Nintendo obliged to provide older content, or otherwise allow emulation? If a company ceases to provide something, does that give you rights to acquire that something illegally?

chaostheory 5y ago
It doesn't give anyone the rights to anything. What it does though is provide a massive incentive for piracy. While I don't pirate myself, I can see many rational people do it for Nintendo products, and I don't have a good argument against it.
EMIRELADERO 5y ago
> Why is Nintendo obliged to provide older content, or otherwise allow emulation? Provide older content, no, "allow" emulation, yes. It's not even "allow", Nintendo doesn't have the authority to allow or disallow anyone from making, distributing and running emulators.
- avindroth 5y ago
  They might not have the legal authority, but is their firm stance against emulators morally questionable? I may agree their methods are questionable, but I don't know if their stance is. Nintendo's stance against emulation seems consistent with their approach to game design and game management.
  - EMIRELADERO 5y ago
    Is the question of whether a company's action is "morally questionable" dependant on that action being consistent with similar actions done by the same company in the past?
namlem 5y ago
Legally? No. Morally? Yes.
- avindroth 5y ago
  How are they morally obligated (or suggested) to provide access to older games?
  - namlem 5y ago
    They're not, but people are morally entitled to pirate them if they don't.
  - Talanes 5y ago
    I view the morality around IP law as an implicit contract with society. Actual theft is wrong because I am depriving someone of something without their consent. Pirating is wrong because it disincentives the production of further work. If there's no option to pay, then piracy doesn't affect the incentive structure at all, except possibly sending a a signal that there's still demand there.
antifa 5y ago
Nintendo is not obligated to offer services people would pay for, that's true.