3 ms·
> ultimately this is just another corporation trying to disturb people in their ownership of their purchased property, in specific video games. Is it reasonabl
by cubefox 2y ago
> ultimately this is just another corporation trying to disturb people in their ownership of their purchased property, in specific video games.
Is it reasonable to assume the majority of Ryujinx users merely emulate Switch games they legally own? That only a minority uses the emulator to play pirated Switch games?
- doctorpangloss 2y agoI don’t know why you are being downvoted. Of course emulators are being used to play pirated games.
- cheeze 2y agoYeah. It's a bummer because I actually own the games and just want to play them at 4k60 rather than on the weak HW of the Switch. But I understand why Nintendo would target emulators of a _current gen console_. To say that this is solely an attack on law abiding folks who own the game is... being willfully ignorant because you don't want to accept that a large percentage of installs are doing so for piracy.
- Ajedi32 2y agoOf course it's not solely an attack on law abiding folks who own the game. But is is an attack on them nonetheless. Its also an attack on open source, software freedom, and digital preservation. Further, assuming there were legal threats involved, its an abuse of the legal system to harass open source developers working on perfectly legal software. Emulators are also direct competition to Nintendo's hardware, so you could see this as an anti-competitive move as well. There are lots of problems with this, and they're only mostly Nintendo's fault.
- ethbr1 2y agoIt's also important to remember that emulators exist without ROMs. All the code that's in an emulator isn't infringing on any Nintendo's IP -- it's re-implementing Nintendo's hardware interface. That it can be used to make piracy easier is unfortunately, but isn't really the emulator developers' concern, given... There are substantial, legal, non-infringing uses. In most legal jurisdictions, thankfully you can't ban something useful just because it might be used to commit a crime.
- cubefox 2y agoBut what if it is mainly used to commit a crime?
- FactKnower69 2y agoplaying video games is a CRIME against hard working RIGHTS HOLDERS
- doctorpangloss 2y agoThis is the same as saying that most of the money can only be earned by Fortnite. Surely you see that the status quo has given you much worse, not better, games?
- cubefox 2y agoYou mean pirating video games is a crime against hard working video game developers.
- wilsonnb3 2y agoI feel like the blame mostly lies on people who pirate games. It's a sort of tragedy of the commons. We could have a better world (Nintendo not caring if we play switch games we bought at 4k60 on a PC) but people who pirate games mucked it up.
- boltzmann-brain 2y agoDownloading files is mostly used for piracy. At some point, 70% of all internet was used for torrents and nothing else. Are you trying to tell me the internet should have been shut down?
- cubefox 2y agoAnalogous question: At what percentage of uses for crime should guns be banned?
- pokerface_86 2y agofalse equivalence, guns kill people, piracy doesn’t
- cubefox 2y agoAnalogous question: At what percentage of uses for crime should train ticket copy machines be banned?
- pokerface_86 2y agoi’m okay with them not being banned? i don’t really give a shit if municipalities and train companies lose money
- cubefox 2y agoYou would give "a shit" if you relied on the train and the company closed down. Certainly the people that do, do.
- consteval 2y agoIt's not unusual for law-abiding folks to be collateral damage for criminal activity. One example I saw recently on here: locking up stuff in supermarkets. It sucks for real consumers because now they have to go out of their way to buy a razor. But it's intended to discourage theft. The difference is that that is even worse, IMO, since the vast majority of people affected are real customers. For this switch emulator I'm not sure this is the case - I'd say the vast majority are people pirating.
- Ajedi32 2y agoThis isn't collateral damage though; Ryujinx's developers (read: "law-abiding folks") were the target of this attack by Nintendo. That piracy may be impacted as a result is incidental.
- consteval 2y agoI would argue that while the developers where the de-facto targets, the true targets are individuals who pirate. However, they're too plentiful and too anonymous to pursue. So, instead, innocent people were targeted. This, to me, aligns with what we see with many measures, like locking up razor blades. The thiefs are the true target, but they're hard to sift out. So we target the average consumer in practice, who is innocent. They become collateral. It's a difficult problem because there are both innocent people and actual economic harm being done, and we really need to resolve both of those. Technology helps a lot with this, I mean this is essentially why DRM exists. Yes DRM is sucky, but DRM also allows you to have media on your devices at all. Otherwise, it wouldn't be economically viable, and it would be pulled across the board.
- ksec 2y ago>Yeah. It's a bummer because I actually own the games and just want to play them at 4k60 rather than on the weak HW of the Switch. But I understand why Nintendo would target emulators of a _current gen console_. People here are either pro open source and nothing should be copyrighted or patented, on the other end where company has the right to do what ever it want. This comment finally has someone hitting the middle ground somewhere.
- boltzmann-brain 2y ago"criminals will do crime" is a crappy argument for making the lives of law abiding citizens considerably worse.
- cubefox 2y agoNot sure if not being able to play Zelda at 4k60 is making life considerably worse.
- boltzmann-brain 2y agoYes, because the counter point to that reduces to "criminals do crime" and that is never a good argument against the personal rights of the smallest, lest powerful, most vulnerable, and most disenfranchised unit in the legal system, the private person.
- cubefox 2y agoThe private person is vulnerable because he maybe can't use an emulator and need to buy a Switch instead?
- boltzmann-brain 2y agono one ever said that, stop derailing arguments. this is bs.
- cubefox 2y agoSo why specifically is the private person vulnerable in this case?