Nintendo blitzes GitHub with over 8k emulator-related DMCA takedowns

The issue is when you bypass encryption keys and systems.

You get a few exemptions for research for security reasons, but it does require it to be on "a lawfully acquired device or machine on which the computer program operates solely". So an emulator doesn't fit the bill at all.

Video games are mentioned: you're allowed to circumvent DRM for games that no longer have their online servers running.

i.e. you cannot put a piece of paper in the box with the words "this is a technical protection mechanism" and claim it is.

But it doesn't mean that what you do has to be infailable, or meet some arbitrary level of doing it's job well, no.

Disclaimer: I have talked to lawyers. Our company makes industrial IoT loggers and during my career I have only been given appropriate documentation twice by manufacturers. Most of the systems have been reverse engineered through packet capture.

[1] https://vidstromlabs.com/blog/the-legal-boundaries-of-revers...

That didn't get tested in court, but I suspect it would have succeeded (this is not legal advice).

Or it’s just different corporate policies at different times being applied inconsistently.

Git in itself is designed to be distributed.

Second, the DMCA has nothing in it that explicitly targets emulators. Now what some hardware makers have done is include some kind of cryptography and called it an anti-circumvention method, but that is a later phenomenon and the earlier attempts at this didn’t amount to much in most cases.

Third, the Yuzu Devs brought the wrath of Nintendo of America down upon them through means other than merely writing an emulator, in particular they were likely engaged in actual piracy. They probably knew they were cooked and chose to settle rather than go to trial.

So again, FUD. There’s been a lot of it everywhere on this specific topic, so quit spreading it around like so much manure to nurture Nintendo of America’s basic stance towards emulation. They can have their opinion, but it doesn’t overrule judicial precedent.

The US one is actually pretty toothless compared to many.

You're effectively left with rogue states, who tend not be to very good hosting partners.

However, I do not see any good reason to not enjoy their games. Yeah, if everyone does as I do, they go bankrupt. I do not care. Try not to be hated by people using your product, I guess.

We can observe that the nature of information is that it is free to copy. This is not a new observation; the myth of Prometheus tells us of this nature, and of the power that the gods foolishly attempt to shore up by pretending that it can't be copied.

Of course I agree that solid games are worth money, but if you have to avert your eyes to the entire evolution of the way information propagates in the universe in order to achieve that, you've gone down an incorrect path.

And yes, building entire media empires designed to leverage your right to distribute bytes as you see fit, while prohibiting others from distributing them under threat of violence, is most certainly rent-seeking.

The silly fiction that someone "owns" that information because of a previous historical event is not in keeping with any part of nature that I'm able to observe.

What makes anyone think that on sufficiently long time scales the internet will continue to abide this?