5 ms·

I immediatly had a chain of questions: * how will they pay $2M? * why did they settle for that much? * isn't strict emulation legal? Maybe not in the US...

I immediatly had a chain of questions: * how will they pay $2M? * why did they settle for that much? * isn't strict emulation legal? Maybe not in the US... * is there something fishy that was hidden somewhere?

aaomidi 3y ago
> * how will they pay $2M? Probably patreon > * why did they settle for that much? Because Nintendo will just ruin their lives otherwise > * isn't strict emulation legal? Maybe not in the US... Thank you DMCA for ruining this scene. The federal government should not be the one interjecting itself into this area, but here we are. Because of the anti-circumvention rules of the DMCA, right to repair is completely broken. Heck, WV was able to hide them lying about emissions because of it.
KomoD 3y ago
> * how will they pay $2M? They actually made quite a bit of money, around ~$30k/mo from just Patreon, wouldn't surprise me if they had that much money. > * why did they settle for that much? Expensive to fight it, and if they lose they'd have to pay even more. Nintendo can go on forever, they have so much money and the best lawyers.
- waffleiron 3y ago
  30k a month is only (roughly rounded) 1 mill per 3 years. So that be 6 years income without spending, and it’s likely their income wasn’t always at this level.
  - archy_ 3y ago
    Taxes will also eat away at that
johnnyanmac 3y ago
>how will they pay $2M? The same way Bowser did, I suppose. Wage garnishing + whatever Patreon money they earned? Apparently it's estimated to have made some $1.2 million from patreon so that may help >why did they settle for that much? Bad crooked lawyers that said they had no chance or very good lawyers that said they had no chance. IANAL, so I can't truly say which. > isn't strict emulation legal? Maybe not in the US... It is AFAIK, apparently the judgement's big argument here is >Developing or distributing software, including Yuzu, that in its ordinary course functions only when cryptographic keys are integrated without authorization, violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s prohibition on trafficking in devices that circumvent effective technological measures, because the software is primarily designed for the purpose of circumventing technological measures. Again, I don't know how much water that holds. >is there something fishy that was hidden somewhere? Depends on if you think whether or not it would have cost more than $2.5m dollars to fight nintendo in a full battle. I imagine Yuzu doesn't have such funds nor means to. So this was the cheapest option for them.
- thesnide 3y ago
  I guess the fishy thing was the Patreon, which I was not aware of. Hell, I just even knew about Yuzu because of that lawsuit. #streisand
  - kevingadd 3y ago
    The relevant precedent is Bleem, which was for-profit
    - Narishma 3y ago
      It's not really a precedent since PS1 games weren't encrypted.
- darig 3y ago
  [dead]
- 1231232131231 3y ago
  Another case of Nintendo ruining peoples' lives [1] [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/games/2024/feb/01/the-man-who-owes-nintendo-14m-gary-bowser-and-gamings-most-infamous-piracy-case https://www.theguardian.com/games/2024/feb/01/the-man-who-ow...
  - theshackleford 3y ago
    Seems to me more like he ruined his own life through poor choices. Actions have consequences, I won’t be shedding any tears.
    - throwaway48r7r 3y ago
      Won't somebody think of the multinationals.
      - flykespice 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ipaddr 3y ago
They have paid themselves out already and will declare bankruptcy.
- OJFord 3y ago
  If down voters want to explain their objection we'd probably all benefit - this may sound pithy but afaict parent is correct: Tropic Haize LLC is the defendant in TFA; LLC stands for Limited Liability Company. IANAL but this essentially means the company is on the hook for the damages, if it doesn't have that much then Nintendo probably becomes it's most senior creditor (gets paid first) in bankruptcy, but its directors (the emulator devs, presumably) are unlikely to be personally liable, at least wouldn't be in a judgement on this case. Settling would I assume imply that Nintendo thinks it is getting paid (won't bankrupt the company, or directors agreed to kick it in) though.
  - throwaway48r7r 3y ago
    They're about as likely to get paid as the poor sods the RIAA sued. It's just about using their legal muscle to shut them down. They will get the assets though. So $30k in patron money for the month, the domain, the trademark, and the copyright to the GPL'd code.
    - OJFord 3y ago
      They didn't win in court though, they settled, so the money would be a strange and arbitrary amount if they don't think they're getting it?
      - throwaway48r7r 3y ago
        Pretty much. The term for this is judgement proof.
throwaway48r7r 3y ago
As far as I know (IANAL) it was Tropic Haize LLC that was sued and is on the hook for the $2M.
super256 3y ago
> * how will they pay $2M? They most likely don't. Most of these settlements have another agreement made behind closed doors. I was alleged to do stuff related to video game cheats, and was in settlement talks with a company bigger than Nintendo. I didn't end up signing, so a quick overview of what such secret agreements include (the money point is the last one): - keep everything of the following secret - be truthful with us and tell us everything - hand over source code, server access, chats - shut down social media, websites related to the cheats - if defendant cant shut down the cheat site, defendant has to try to shut it down via other various means and email the plaintiff once every quarter for three years with the efforts made - plaintiff will make a public announcement that defendant owes 2.5 million USD (used by the plaintiff for marketing / scaring people off). After X years, the plaintiff agrees to file a full satisfaction of the monetary award (aka plaintiff files that the defendant paid the money and so their credit score isn't totally fucked), BUT in reality the defendant only has to pay the money if they breach any of the terms above.
- throwaway48r7r 3y ago
  Was your name on the lawsuit or was it an LLC?
  - super256 3y ago
    The complaint listed the company (a German Unternehmergesellschaft; which is basically an LLC), but my name and many others too.
    - KomoD 3y ago
      Lol, the engineowning lawsuit?
- Sammi 3y ago
  Thanks for this insight. This honestly sounds like the reasonable solution for both parties. Everyone just walks away, and no ones life is ruined.
- notso411 3y ago

aaomidi 3y ago

> * how will they pay $2M? Probably patreon > * why did they settle for that much? Because Nintendo will just ruin their lives otherwise > * isn't strict emulation legal? Maybe not in the US... Thank you DMCA for ruining this scene. The federal government should not be the one interjecting itself into this area, but here we are. Because of the anti-circumvention rules of the DMCA, right to repair is completely broken. Heck, WV was able to hide them lying about emissions because of it.

KomoD 3y ago

> * how will they pay $2M? They actually made quite a bit of money, around ~$30k/mo from just Patreon, wouldn't surprise me if they had that much money. > * why did they settle for that much? Expensive to fight it, and if they lose they'd have to pay even more. Nintendo can go on forever, they have so much money and the best lawyers.

waffleiron 3y ago
30k a month is only (roughly rounded) 1 mill per 3 years. So that be 6 years income without spending, and it’s likely their income wasn’t always at this level.
- archy_ 3y ago
  Taxes will also eat away at that

johnnyanmac 3y ago

>how will they pay $2M? The same way Bowser did, I suppose. Wage garnishing + whatever Patreon money they earned? Apparently it's estimated to have made some $1.2 million from patreon so that may help >why did they settle for that much? Bad crooked lawyers that said they had no chance or very good lawyers that said they had no chance. IANAL, so I can't truly say which. > isn't strict emulation legal? Maybe not in the US... It is AFAIK, apparently the judgement's big argument here is >Developing or distributing software, including Yuzu, that in its ordinary course functions only when cryptographic keys are integrated without authorization, violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s prohibition on trafficking in devices that circumvent effective technological measures, because the software is primarily designed for the purpose of circumventing technological measures. Again, I don't know how much water that holds. >is there something fishy that was hidden somewhere? Depends on if you think whether or not it would have cost more than $2.5m dollars to fight nintendo in a full battle. I imagine Yuzu doesn't have such funds nor means to. So this was the cheapest option for them.

thesnide 3y ago
I guess the fishy thing was the Patreon, which I was not aware of. Hell, I just even knew about Yuzu because of that lawsuit. #streisand
- kevingadd 3y ago
  The relevant precedent is Bleem, which was for-profit
  - Narishma 3y ago
    It's not really a precedent since PS1 games weren't encrypted.
darig 3y ago
[dead]
1231232131231 3y ago
Another case of Nintendo ruining peoples' lives [1] [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/games/2024/feb/01/the-man-who-owes-nintendo-14m-gary-bowser-and-gamings-most-infamous-piracy-case https://www.theguardian.com/games/2024/feb/01/the-man-who-ow...
- theshackleford 3y ago
  Seems to me more like he ruined his own life through poor choices. Actions have consequences, I won’t be shedding any tears.
  - throwaway48r7r 3y ago
    Won't somebody think of the multinationals.
    - flykespice 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ipaddr 3y ago

They have paid themselves out already and will declare bankruptcy.

OJFord 3y ago
If down voters want to explain their objection we'd probably all benefit - this may sound pithy but afaict parent is correct: Tropic Haize LLC is the defendant in TFA; LLC stands for Limited Liability Company. IANAL but this essentially means the company is on the hook for the damages, if it doesn't have that much then Nintendo probably becomes it's most senior creditor (gets paid first) in bankruptcy, but its directors (the emulator devs, presumably) are unlikely to be personally liable, at least wouldn't be in a judgement on this case. Settling would I assume imply that Nintendo thinks it is getting paid (won't bankrupt the company, or directors agreed to kick it in) though.
- throwaway48r7r 3y ago
  They're about as likely to get paid as the poor sods the RIAA sued. It's just about using their legal muscle to shut them down. They will get the assets though. So $30k in patron money for the month, the domain, the trademark, and the copyright to the GPL'd code.
  - OJFord 3y ago
    They didn't win in court though, they settled, so the money would be a strange and arbitrary amount if they don't think they're getting it?
    - throwaway48r7r 3y ago
      Pretty much. The term for this is judgement proof.

throwaway48r7r 3y ago

As far as I know (IANAL) it was Tropic Haize LLC that was sued and is on the hook for the $2M.

super256 3y ago

> * how will they pay $2M? They most likely don't. Most of these settlements have another agreement made behind closed doors. I was alleged to do stuff related to video game cheats, and was in settlement talks with a company bigger than Nintendo. I didn't end up signing, so a quick overview of what such secret agreements include (the money point is the last one): - keep everything of the following secret - be truthful with us and tell us everything - hand over source code, server access, chats - shut down social media, websites related to the cheats - if defendant cant shut down the cheat site, defendant has to try to shut it down via other various means and email the plaintiff once every quarter for three years with the efforts made - plaintiff will make a public announcement that defendant owes 2.5 million USD (used by the plaintiff for marketing / scaring people off). After X years, the plaintiff agrees to file a full satisfaction of the monetary award (aka plaintiff files that the defendant paid the money and so their credit score isn't totally fucked), BUT in reality the defendant only has to pay the money if they breach any of the terms above.

throwaway48r7r 3y ago
Was your name on the lawsuit or was it an LLC?
- super256 3y ago
  The complaint listed the company (a German Unternehmergesellschaft; which is basically an LLC), but my name and many others too.
  - KomoD 3y ago
    Lol, the engineowning lawsuit?
Sammi 3y ago
Thanks for this insight. This honestly sounds like the reasonable solution for both parties. Everyone just walks away, and no ones life is ruined.
notso411 3y ago