3 ms·
> Valve could have decided to ignore Nintendo with ~ no liability. They decided to just do whatever they were asked, and that's not surprising given they initia
by tssva 3y ago
> Valve could have decided to ignore Nintendo with ~ no liability. They decided to just do whatever they were asked, and that's not surprising given they initiated contact in the first place.
They most certainly would have had liability in this situation. Once informed by Nintendo that they consider Dolphin a circumvention technology, it is highly likely that in any future lawsuit a court would find Valve liable for knowing distributing a circumvention technology.
- makeitdouble 3y agoThey wouldn't have any liability if Nintendo filed no DMCA claim. They would need to comply to the claim if/when filed, but could have passed the bucket to the Dolphin team for any defense while they're off Steam, and let them duke it in court if Nintendo sues.
- tssva 3y agoDMCA notices apply to copyrighted material not circumvention technologies. There is no safe harbor for distributing circumvention technologies. What Nintendo would need to proof to make Valve liable is that they knew or should have known they were distributing software meant to circumvent protection. Once Nintendo told Valve they considered Dolphin to be circumventing their protection mechanisms, proofing the above in court is pretty straight forward.