8 ms·

This is a pretty big case to watch. Are there any cases of emulators being sued successfully? A user being able to provide keys and a rom from which they coul

This is a pretty big case to watch. Are there any cases of emulators being sued successfully? A user being able to provide keys and a rom from which they could own or be homebrew doesn't seem to violate copyright to me. edit: seems the consensus is once via legal fund attrition, but the case went to the emulator authors in the end.

monocasa 3y ago
I don't believe so (the Sony v. Bleem cases mainly ended up in favor of Bleem), but also I don't think anyone has tried since the DMCA. It looks like Nintendo is taking a 'trafficking in circumvention device' legal strategy as opposed to a strictly anti-emulator legal strategy.
- stonogo 3y ago
  DMCA was in effect the year before Sony first sued Bleem -- and it's notable that Bleem mostly won the lawsuits, but legal fees bankrupted them anyway.
  - monocasa 3y ago
    The DMCA was in effect but not applicable to the case since the DRM scheme of the PS1 doesn't block access to the files of the disc, but instead simply attempts to block the usage of non DRMed media on legitimate PS1s.
- Natsu 3y ago
  It's funny, the game companies lost the emulator court cases. But the companies behind those emulators still went out of business.
  - hn_acker 3y ago
    Right. What I hate about copyright is that winning a copyright infringement lawsuit with a fair use defense (fair use being by definition not infringement [1]) will still bankrupt you because of the legal fees. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz_v._Universal_Music_Corp.#Circuit_court_ruling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz_v._Universal_Music_Corp.#...
xd1936 3y ago
Sony vs. Bleem! in 2001. Sony lost, but the cost still shut down the project.
- CobrastanJorji 3y ago
  Yep, Sony "lost," but they still killed Bleem and forced the creator into an agreement to, among other things, not make any more Playstation emulators. So really, Sony 100% won. Bleem was a big deal, too. It let you just pop a Playstation game into a PC's CD-ROM drive and play it. When Sony finally nailed the coffin on them, they were working on a followup called "bleemcast" that would've let Playstation games be played on the Sega Dreamcast.
  - prmoustache 3y ago
    Some of it was released as individual emulators to play a single game. I played Gran Turismo 2 on my dreamcast using one of those.
diggan 3y ago
bleem! (PlayStation emulator) was sued by Sony and was forced to close down because of legal fees, so I guess that counts as a success for Sony. I seem to recall a bunch of ROM sites disappearing as well, but not sure if that's because they got sued or for other reasons. Some must have been sued and consequently shut down, so maybe not a bad idea (for the companies) to at least try?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dartos 3y ago
  ROM sites are actually illegally distributing copyrighted content. Emulators are usually not stolen and are just reverse engineered.
  - kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
    Modern consoles and arcades have anti-circumvention measures to restrict access to their internals. Software that bypasses such protections runs afoul of the DMCA even without any copyright violation.
  - DinaCoder99 3y ago
    Those sites are not illegal in all countries.
- ender341341 3y ago
  ROM sites are different in that they are distributing the copywrited media The only 'emulator' cases I've seen be successful are due to the same, they didn't get in trouble for the emulator, they got in trouble for distributing ROMs. I wonder if there's some firmware code being distributed here? that's a common annoyance when it comes to using an emulator.
  - tuetuopay 3y ago
    AFAIK yuzu requires you provide your own firmware dump, so no redistribution happening
johnny99k 3y ago
This won't matter. The goal will be to run them out of money. It's an open source project and they most likely don't have the capital to fund any sort of lengthy lawsuit.
- theultdev 3y ago
  It matters for future precedence. It can be used to win cases against other emulators and even shut them down with limited legal action.
  - johnny99k 3y ago
    I suppose they could use Bleem VS sony
    - theultdev 3y ago
      Bleem won in that case (but ran out of funds), so it's useful for the defendant. If Nintendo loses, the next defendant would have even more precedence. If Nintendo wins, it's easier to go after future emulator projects.
- borski 3y ago
  That’s where approaching someone like the EFF comes in.
  - giancarlostoro 3y ago
    Now would be their time to shine. I know they do plenty, but this would be a great time for them to show up.
- teeray 3y ago
  I really wish our system had some kind of financial handicap when it came to access to the legal system. Weaponizing the legal system to bankrupt people that would be found Not Guilty shouldn't be possible.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
matheusmoreira 3y ago
> Are there any cases of emulators being sued successfully? Sony lost all their cases in the past. They claimed they infringed copyright when copying PS1 BIOS for reverse engineering purposes, court ruled that was fair use as it was necessary to gain access to the unprotected elements of the console. The other case was some bullshit about advertising, they had the audacity to claim screenshots violated their copyrights. They lost in court but won in the market by bankrupting their competitors. Who knows what's gonna happen in 2024 though? Felony contempt of business model seems quite well entrenched at this point. Company puts "IP" into their product and suddenly they get to control what you do with it and it's illegal for you to resist in any way. Common sense says emulators are alternative compatible implementations of the original hardware which increases consumer choice. People should have every right to make an emulator, doesn't matter if it's an old console or one that's just been released. Emulators are competitors to Nintendo. If they don't like it then they should drop their "exclusives" nonsense and start releasing games on PC where they belong with better graphics and performance and all the bells and whistles that emulators provide. Who knows what these courts are gonna decide though. The copyright industry basically buys these laws anyway, there's no reason to believe they will rule favorably to the consumer.

monocasa 3y ago

I don't believe so (the Sony v. Bleem cases mainly ended up in favor of Bleem), but also I don't think anyone has tried since the DMCA. It looks like Nintendo is taking a 'trafficking in circumvention device' legal strategy as opposed to a strictly anti-emulator legal strategy.

stonogo 3y ago
DMCA was in effect the year before Sony first sued Bleem -- and it's notable that Bleem mostly won the lawsuits, but legal fees bankrupted them anyway.
- monocasa 3y ago
  The DMCA was in effect but not applicable to the case since the DRM scheme of the PS1 doesn't block access to the files of the disc, but instead simply attempts to block the usage of non DRMed media on legitimate PS1s.
Natsu 3y ago
It's funny, the game companies lost the emulator court cases. But the companies behind those emulators still went out of business.
- hn_acker 3y ago
  Right. What I hate about copyright is that winning a copyright infringement lawsuit with a fair use defense (fair use being by definition not infringement [1]) will still bankrupt you because of the legal fees. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz_v._Universal_Music_Corp.#Circuit_court_ruling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz_v._Universal_Music_Corp.#...

xd1936 3y ago

Sony vs. Bleem! in 2001. Sony lost, but the cost still shut down the project.

CobrastanJorji 3y ago
Yep, Sony "lost," but they still killed Bleem and forced the creator into an agreement to, among other things, not make any more Playstation emulators. So really, Sony 100% won. Bleem was a big deal, too. It let you just pop a Playstation game into a PC's CD-ROM drive and play it. When Sony finally nailed the coffin on them, they were working on a followup called "bleemcast" that would've let Playstation games be played on the Sega Dreamcast.
- prmoustache 3y ago
  Some of it was released as individual emulators to play a single game. I played Gran Turismo 2 on my dreamcast using one of those.

diggan 3y ago

bleem! (PlayStation emulator) was sued by Sony and was forced to close down because of legal fees, so I guess that counts as a success for Sony. I seem to recall a bunch of ROM sites disappearing as well, but not sure if that's because they got sued or for other reasons. Some must have been sued and consequently shut down, so maybe not a bad idea (for the companies) to at least try?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dartos 3y ago
ROM sites are actually illegally distributing copyrighted content. Emulators are usually not stolen and are just reverse engineered.
- kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
  Modern consoles and arcades have anti-circumvention measures to restrict access to their internals. Software that bypasses such protections runs afoul of the DMCA even without any copyright violation.
- DinaCoder99 3y ago
  Those sites are not illegal in all countries.
ender341341 3y ago
ROM sites are different in that they are distributing the copywrited media The only 'emulator' cases I've seen be successful are due to the same, they didn't get in trouble for the emulator, they got in trouble for distributing ROMs. I wonder if there's some firmware code being distributed here? that's a common annoyance when it comes to using an emulator.
- tuetuopay 3y ago
  AFAIK yuzu requires you provide your own firmware dump, so no redistribution happening

johnny99k 3y ago

This won't matter. The goal will be to run them out of money. It's an open source project and they most likely don't have the capital to fund any sort of lengthy lawsuit.

theultdev 3y ago
It matters for future precedence. It can be used to win cases against other emulators and even shut them down with limited legal action.
- johnny99k 3y ago
  I suppose they could use Bleem VS sony
  - theultdev 3y ago
    Bleem won in that case (but ran out of funds), so it's useful for the defendant. If Nintendo loses, the next defendant would have even more precedence. If Nintendo wins, it's easier to go after future emulator projects.
borski 3y ago
That’s where approaching someone like the EFF comes in.
- giancarlostoro 3y ago
  Now would be their time to shine. I know they do plenty, but this would be a great time for them to show up.
teeray 3y ago
I really wish our system had some kind of financial handicap when it came to access to the legal system. Weaponizing the legal system to bankrupt people that would be found Not Guilty shouldn't be possible.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

matheusmoreira 3y ago

> Are there any cases of emulators being sued successfully? Sony lost all their cases in the past. They claimed they infringed copyright when copying PS1 BIOS for reverse engineering purposes, court ruled that was fair use as it was necessary to gain access to the unprotected elements of the console. The other case was some bullshit about advertising, they had the audacity to claim screenshots violated their copyrights. They lost in court but won in the market by bankrupting their competitors. Who knows what's gonna happen in 2024 though? Felony contempt of business model seems quite well entrenched at this point. Company puts "IP" into their product and suddenly they get to control what you do with it and it's illegal for you to resist in any way. Common sense says emulators are alternative compatible implementations of the original hardware which increases consumer choice. People should have every right to make an emulator, doesn't matter if it's an old console or one that's just been released. Emulators are competitors to Nintendo. If they don't like it then they should drop their "exclusives" nonsense and start releasing games on PC where they belong with better graphics and performance and all the bells and whistles that emulators provide. Who knows what these courts are gonna decide though. The copyright industry basically buys these laws anyway, there's no reason to believe they will rule favorably to the consumer.