3 ms·

Cryptographic key doesn't matter. It's covered explicitly under the exemptions listed in Section 1201. Discovering the cryptographic key using reverse engineeri

Cryptographic key doesn't matter. It's covered explicitly under the exemptions listed in Section 1201. Discovering the cryptographic key using reverse engineering and using it for system interoperability is legal. They explicitly call this out: > to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; Nintendo has no standing.

gjsman-1000 3y ago
If only it were that easy. The EFF had long warned that the interoperability exception is legally much weaker when it conflicts with 1201 than it appears, and is (in their view) legally almost useless. “The "act" prohibition, set out in section 1201(a)(1), prohibits the act of circumventing a technological measure used by copyright owners to control access to their works ("access controls"). So, for example, this provision makes it unlawful to defeat the encryption system used on DVD movies. This ban on acts of circumvention applies even where the purpose for decrypting the movie would otherwise be legitimate. As a result, it is unlawful to make a digital copy ("rip") of a DVD you own for playback on your video iPod. The "tools" prohibitions, set out in sections 1201(a)(2) and 1201(b), outlaw the manufacture, sale, distribution, or trafficking of tools and technologies that make circumvention possible. These provisions ban both technologies that defeat access controls, and also technologies that defeat use restrictions imposed by copyright owners, such as copy controls. These provisions prohibit the distribution of "DVD back-up" software, for example. Section 1201 includes a number of exceptions for certain limited classes of activities, including security testing, reverse engineering of software, encryption research, and law enforcement. These exceptions have been extensively criticized as being too narrow to be of real use to the constituencies who they were intended to assist.“ https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-seven-years-under-dmca https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-seven-year... This comes up elsewhere on this Hacker News thread, because Dolphin actually does contain a Nintendo encryption key. Which makes Dolphin almost indistinguishable from, say, a DVD ripper or counterfeit DVD player, which this law was specifically designed to crush. If you want a further example, look into Apple v Psystar, where Psystar broke Apple’s DMCA 1201 locks to run macOS on unofficial hardware with “interoperability between hardware” being one of their many legal defenses. They were squashed in hearing after hearing and declared bankruptcy after having exhausted all legal options.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  > As a result, it is unlawful to make a digital copy ("rip") of a DVD you own for playback on your video iPod. Strictly speaking, this is true. It is not unlawful to plug a DVD player into your iPod and play the DVD back digitally though. That's basically what Dolphin is doing - it runs unmodified disc images, copy protection and all. They've even abstained from using code or insights gained from the Wii's source code leak. The emulator should be clean, outside of any legal complaints about "damages". You're correct to highlight that it's still an ambiguous area, but in a post-Bleem! world it's hard for Nintendo/Microsoft/Sony to find the legal willpower to stop these people. They'll settle for easy wins like harassing Valve's legal staff with scary looking letters instead. > If you want a further example, look into Apple v Psystar There's more recent precedent with Corellium. Their commercial product is allowed to create iOS VMs on unofficial hardware. Running their code is considered fair use, the most valid legal claim Apple had for shutting them down was their violation of icon and wallpaper trademarks.
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    > It is not unlawful to plug a DVD player into your iPod and play the DVD back digitally though. That's basically what Dolphin is doing - it runs unmodified disc images, copy protection and all. If it can play disc images with copy protection, it de facto requires a way around that copy protection that is unlicensed, slamming it squarely into Section 1201. > The emulator should be clean, outside of any legal complaints about "damages". Dolphin contains Nintendo decryption keys; which is actually very likely illegal when the rest of the emulator is not. Recall 09 F9… A competing emulator developer (for Citra) has also commented on this and said what Dolphin did there was legally dangerous and very much not endorsed by courts. https://www.reddit.com/r/emulation/comments/13ss1o9/comment/jlry1kq/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/emulation/comments/13ss1o9/comment/... > Their commercial product is allowed to create iOS VMs on unofficial hardware. If you read the ruling, the fair use won because Corellium successfully argued there was no way that their product could impact Apple in any substantial negative way in the general market. They also argued that their products do not perform as substitutes to any products that Apple provides. And lastly, their products offer a unique benefit for a unique, niche, special interest, with vetting and similar procedures to ensure only people with those interests used their software. If, however, they had done that to make their own smartphones, or a general iOS emulator for playing games on PC, they would have been annihilated. Nintendo easily has a case that emulation causes substantial financial and business harm; and that emulation can serve as a replacement for their products. Courts don’t like that. Edit (“posting too fast”): Unlike the GameCube, Wii games are digitally signed and encrypted. This specific line of code contains the illegal key: https://github.com/dolphin-emu/dolphin/blob/34527cadcce49a9a78f05949973b0930ac4dd999/Source/Core/Core/IOS/IOSC.cpp#L575 https://github.com/dolphin-emu/dolphin/blob/34527cadcce49a9a... As the developer of Citra (above) noted, big no-no. The emulator is legally fine, but encryption keys are a no-go. Bleam was OK because keys were not involved. Every case that has involved keys for a non-extremely-specific use (Psystar, RealPlayer, VidAngel) has gone down in flames.

gjsman-1000 3y ago

If only it were that easy. The EFF had long warned that the interoperability exception is legally much weaker when it conflicts with 1201 than it appears, and is (in their view) legally almost useless. “The "act" prohibition, set out in section 1201(a)(1), prohibits the act of circumventing a technological measure used by copyright owners to control access to their works ("access controls"). So, for example, this provision makes it unlawful to defeat the encryption system used on DVD movies. This ban on acts of circumvention applies even where the purpose for decrypting the movie would otherwise be legitimate. As a result, it is unlawful to make a digital copy ("rip") of a DVD you own for playback on your video iPod. The "tools" prohibitions, set out in sections 1201(a)(2) and 1201(b), outlaw the manufacture, sale, distribution, or trafficking of tools and technologies that make circumvention possible. These provisions ban both technologies that defeat access controls, and also technologies that defeat use restrictions imposed by copyright owners, such as copy controls. These provisions prohibit the distribution of "DVD back-up" software, for example. Section 1201 includes a number of exceptions for certain limited classes of activities, including security testing, reverse engineering of software, encryption research, and law enforcement. These exceptions have been extensively criticized as being too narrow to be of real use to the constituencies who they were intended to assist.“ https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-seven-years-under-dmca https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-seven-year... This comes up elsewhere on this Hacker News thread, because Dolphin actually does contain a Nintendo encryption key. Which makes Dolphin almost indistinguishable from, say, a DVD ripper or counterfeit DVD player, which this law was specifically designed to crush. If you want a further example, look into Apple v Psystar, where Psystar broke Apple’s DMCA 1201 locks to run macOS on unofficial hardware with “interoperability between hardware” being one of their many legal defenses. They were squashed in hearing after hearing and declared bankruptcy after having exhausted all legal options.

smoldesu 3y ago
> As a result, it is unlawful to make a digital copy ("rip") of a DVD you own for playback on your video iPod. Strictly speaking, this is true. It is not unlawful to plug a DVD player into your iPod and play the DVD back digitally though. That's basically what Dolphin is doing - it runs unmodified disc images, copy protection and all. They've even abstained from using code or insights gained from the Wii's source code leak. The emulator should be clean, outside of any legal complaints about "damages". You're correct to highlight that it's still an ambiguous area, but in a post-Bleem! world it's hard for Nintendo/Microsoft/Sony to find the legal willpower to stop these people. They'll settle for easy wins like harassing Valve's legal staff with scary looking letters instead. > If you want a further example, look into Apple v Psystar There's more recent precedent with Corellium. Their commercial product is allowed to create iOS VMs on unofficial hardware. Running their code is considered fair use, the most valid legal claim Apple had for shutting them down was their violation of icon and wallpaper trademarks.
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  > It is not unlawful to plug a DVD player into your iPod and play the DVD back digitally though. That's basically what Dolphin is doing - it runs unmodified disc images, copy protection and all. If it can play disc images with copy protection, it de facto requires a way around that copy protection that is unlicensed, slamming it squarely into Section 1201. > The emulator should be clean, outside of any legal complaints about "damages". Dolphin contains Nintendo decryption keys; which is actually very likely illegal when the rest of the emulator is not. Recall 09 F9… A competing emulator developer (for Citra) has also commented on this and said what Dolphin did there was legally dangerous and very much not endorsed by courts. https://www.reddit.com/r/emulation/comments/13ss1o9/comment/jlry1kq/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/emulation/comments/13ss1o9/comment/... > Their commercial product is allowed to create iOS VMs on unofficial hardware. If you read the ruling, the fair use won because Corellium successfully argued there was no way that their product could impact Apple in any substantial negative way in the general market. They also argued that their products do not perform as substitutes to any products that Apple provides. And lastly, their products offer a unique benefit for a unique, niche, special interest, with vetting and similar procedures to ensure only people with those interests used their software. If, however, they had done that to make their own smartphones, or a general iOS emulator for playing games on PC, they would have been annihilated. Nintendo easily has a case that emulation causes substantial financial and business harm; and that emulation can serve as a replacement for their products. Courts don’t like that. Edit (“posting too fast”): Unlike the GameCube, Wii games are digitally signed and encrypted. This specific line of code contains the illegal key: https://github.com/dolphin-emu/dolphin/blob/34527cadcce49a9a78f05949973b0930ac4dd999/Source/Core/Core/IOS/IOSC.cpp#L575 https://github.com/dolphin-emu/dolphin/blob/34527cadcce49a9a... As the developer of Citra (above) noted, big no-no. The emulator is legally fine, but encryption keys are a no-go. Bleam was OK because keys were not involved. Every case that has involved keys for a non-extremely-specific use (Psystar, RealPlayer, VidAngel) has gone down in flames.