>yuzu is a Nintendo Switch emulator capable of running many games! With yuzu, you can play such games as Pokémon Sword & Shield, Xenoblade Chronicles 3, Super Mario Odyssey, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Pokémon Legends: Arceus, Fire Emblem:Three Houses, and Super Smash Bros. Ultimate — on your PC.
Regardless of the legal status of an emulator, I wouldn't list game titles if I were writing that copy.
Zelda BoTW being released 7 days BEFORE being on Switch, and 60FPS, and better gameplay on a real computer is what caught Nintendo's attention.
And with Yuzu and joycons, you can have EVERY game, including their online only stuff. And if you pay for those online only, piracy is the only way to guarantee that you'll keep them.
They've destroyed the: NDS, Gamecube, Wii, WiiU stores/online content. They never needed to. They *chose* to.
It's illegal to pirate games. Being able to emulate things you purchased is a convenient scapegoat for people to pirate games.
Why should I not be able to emulate them?
Well, there's a bunch of places where that's not true. Then it's a question of morality, although that usually gets unfairly asked of the individual but never asked of giant mega corporations.
/s
Thinking further on it I wouldn't write "Nintendo" either: "yuzu is a Switch emulator that runs your games on PC/Mac/Android - often with better resolution, framerates, ..." is fine - people already know about the games they want to play.
titles are mainly protected by trade markes so you can freely mention and speak about them anywhere as long as you are not creating a situation where s judge might find that Nintendo customers might thing Yuzo made by Nintendo or any of the listed games are made by Yuzu or shipped by Yuzo or similar
I hope this doesn't spell the end of Yuzu, because I use it to play switch games that I own on my steam deck.
But they can be legally blamed for not taking any steps to prevent it.
Which means there are two avenues for Nintendo to attack this situation.
Similar to the approach that have been used in various jurisdictions against torrent sites.
Jennifer Crumbley was found guilty of manslaughter for doing nothing to prevent her son from shooting up his school.
That was criminal court with a much higher standard than a civil case.
Nintendo has consistently been one of the strongest protectors of their IP, and a defense that says “We tell users not to commit piracy” is about as effective as a sex workers disclaimer that “money is exchanged for time.”
Software developers should not be held liable for what their users do with the software unless the software itself does something illegal (such as malware that gains unauthorized access to secure systems). If developers were responsible for their users then you would have all kinds of bizarre lawsuits. You would be able to sue Microsoft for things written by users in Word. It wouldn't be a stretch to sue Linux contributers because someone used the OS to perform a DOS attack or to host a scam site.
I think Nintendo would be banking that the Yuzu team likely had lax (if at anything) policies and processes for compliance to their public stance on piracy.
The whole point of emulation is that you want to play content for which the original hardware no longer exists. And so there is no harm being done to anyone.
This situation is obviously quite different because Nintendo is being harmed.
It's not piracy to play a game that you've backed up on different hardware than the original developers intended.
But there is also the DMCA, and the anti-circumvention provision, which can be attributed a lot more to the user backing up their game than it can be to the developers of the emulator. But that wouldn't be the same thing as copyright infringement.
That said, if the"interoperability exception" applies to anything at all, I feel like it should apply here. You are circumventing copy protection mechanisms for the explicit purpose of interoperability with other software.
On moral grounds, I also have absolutely no qualms whatsoever with someone circumventing copy protection mechanisms to make a copy of a thing they bought to use for personal use. The fact that that could be potentially illegal at all is disgusting.
If only we had a universal way to easily distribute data, without need to heavily license it, instead opting for easily accessible licenses from reputable sources at market prices...
(we do, but torrents got a bad name)
Netflix was a success not because it was a streaming service with a license fee, but because it provided unfettered access to data for a small fee.
Of course, now there are AIs which can or will shortly be able to trivially reproduce most data formats, so that's a separate issue as far as that goes (and that's bad too, if AI spells the complete death of DMCA), but it really didn't need to be this complicated.
Make your brand well recognized, make your products easy to obtain, go after the pirates not the users. I own a switch and TBH a lot of my enthusiasm is pretty chilled by Nintendo's dickery - I'm less likely to purchase their products (and I'll elsewhere with non-Nintendo stuff - and Nintendo's stuff is honestly becoming a lot of locked down crap these days).
https://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions/#Is_lib...
And the weak chipset on the switch is a big reason to want to use emulators without piracy.
And there's modding too.
Your "whole point" is very far from whole.
Your OS emulates. The companies that made the chips you run them on emulate their own hardware. The company in the headline emulate their own video game hardware and sell it to their customers.
I would've paid full price to play the game on my deck natively, but Nintendo doesn't consider the PC market worth entering it seems
Seems like it’d be more productive to reduce attrition of this sort by releasing a Switch with less-anemic hardware. There’s clearly a market for a “Switch Pro” or similar that can run TotK, etc at 60FPS without frame drops.
Truly, but you are preaching to the choir. I am a big fan of SMTV series, and since it was a Switch exclusive, I bought it on the release day. I wasn't happy about 30fps (which I knew about beforehand), but it wouldn't be a barrier for me to enjoy a great game, so I went into it despite knowing that.
Long story short, I dropped the game just a few hours into it, and decided to wait until it gets a release on absolutely any other platform (and luckily enough, it was announced just last week). Turns out, 30fps was an aspirational goal, as literally in the first non-tutorial area of the game (the desert, I forgot the name), 30fps would rarely even hit, and the game would hover between 15-25fps the entire time. I just couldn't do it, no matter how good the game is.
Nintendo straight up ruined a game for me that I was already liking, all due to the Switch hardware. I am not even asking for much, even 30fps would be fine. But I cannot stomach FPS oscillating between 15-25fps in multiple major areas where you spend a lot of time in a game.
That is difficult for Nintendo, the GPU architecture used on the switch is long dead, so Nintendo has no easy way of releasing a better switch. Because of that they will probably wait as much as possible and then release a completely new console with only limited backwards compatibility.
>> I played it on Yuzu (on PC) because it was a much better experience than on the switch.
I blame you, actually, (somewhat jokingly) because I own TotK for Switch, and ended up putting it away really quickly because the resolution in handheld mode looked awful. I actually couldn't stand playing the game in handheld mode while my wife took over the TV for her shows.
It's Nintendo. They sue everybody.
Also, there are other git hosting providers out there.
Easy.
Just like it was for Ross Ulbricht!
THAT was the point but thanks for being the thread police and a conversation killer. Next time if I want to digress a little I'll run it past you first.
For other tools/plugins that you can't be certain about you would have to run things in a VM that prevents non-Tor connections - e.g. this is how Qubes/Whonix does things.
Replace Tor with VPN as desired.
Whether the use is for-profit is not a factor either. It's part of a factor. The first factor of the fair use test [1] is:
> the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
"including" is not "limited to", so something as simple as whether the use brings in any revenue, whether through donations or sales, could be one consideration within the first factor. Whether the use is for-profit is another consideration.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#U.S._fair_use_factors
Justice costs money.