4 ms·
This is not a popular opinion but I've become more sympathetic to the idea that Nintendo has some obligations to defend their intellectual property, and that "v
by __loam 3y ago
This is not a popular opinion but I've become more sympathetic to the idea that Nintendo has some obligations to defend their intellectual property, and that "vigorous" legal defense is partly why they're still around and still very profitable. If yuzu didn't want to get a takedown notice, they shouldn't have included software for breaking encryption. That's the specific illegal thing they did, and to be fair to Nintendo, they did have people playing pirated copies of Tears of the Kingdom on day 0. There's clearly damages here.
I think there should be some kind of compromise here where people are allowed to preserve older games (by rom dumping and archiving them) that have reached a certain age and enter the public domain. It's obviously a bad faith argument to say you should be able to play a pirated copy of a game on the day it came out. Nintendo should have an enforced monopoly on their ip for a fixed amount of time. But I should also be allowed to do whatever I want with my 3ds and the games I own for it after they end long term support. If I can't realistically purchase a game at retail from Nintendo, I should be allowed to access the game through other means.
- Andrex 3y agoThe Gen Z hyperbolic "this is the worst ever in gaming" betrays a lack of knowing Nintendo's history. They're conservative (business-wise) to a fault and this has served them well. Nintendo fan projects do exist, hell Dolphin has existed for decades now. If you saw the Yuzu situation play out and immediately lept to Yuzu's defense, hopefully Nintendo's request for discovery in that case disabused any notions that Yuzu is somehow "the good guys fighting against corporate tyranny." We also have real world examples of piracy harming systems (Dreamcast, PlayStation Portable). Software is a console's lifeblood and it has to make sense as an investment. It's like fraud: you can never achieve 0.0% and must accept that reality, but you shouldn't let the situation go hog-wild either. And yes, whether it's a small indie or Nintendo, if I lend my creative voice to a company I expect that company to protect what we make. This is why so many got pissed at WB disappearing Batgirl and Coyote vs. Acme. Creatives are protective of their work and may factor that into employment considerations.
- __loam 3y agoI'm still upset that they took down AM2R which was the best 2D metroid since zero mission. I get it but it's sad.
- Andrex 3y agoAs someone following that project for a long time: they just took too long to finish it. The only reason it got targeted is Samus Returns was releasing on 3DS soon after IIRC. Edit- First demo released in 2011, DMCA was in 2016. As they say, timing is everything. Five years of undisturbed development isn't bad for de facto copyright infringement.
- __loam 3y agoI think it was also that they were taking donations so there was a monetary aspect to the take down.
- Shawnj2 3y agoPokémon prism was DMCA’d right when it was about to release because there was a bunch of press about it coming out soon so Nintendo DMCA’d it. Although it mostly survived unscathed because a late beta leaked and another dev team took over it
- pcchristie 3y agoWell said. I totally agree with the need/desire to preserve games, but I think people misrepresent how much of Wii U/Switch emulation was PC gamers wanting to play BOTW and TOTK on their PC because it's convenient and free.
- __loam 3y agoThere's another big aspect which is performance. I do believe that if you buy software and hardware, you should be able to do whatever you want with it including dumping the rom and/or bios, but obviously it's very easy to distribute and illegal to break encryption due to dmca.
- ranger_danger 3y agoany project that doesn't want to get taken down should publish their work anonymously.