Nintendo Accuses Console-Emulator of Hacking Mario Kart, Zelda
news.bloomberglaw.com
The video game emulator Yuzu circumvents encryption on Nintendo Switch games, making them available on other platforms like personal computers and mobile phones in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, according to a lawsuit from Nintendo of America Inc.

Nintendo’s full case filing

https://twitter.com/stephentotilo/status/1762576284817768457/

"NEW: Nintendo is suing the creators of popular Switch emulator Yuzu, saying their tech illegally circumvents Nintendo’s software encryption and facilitates piracy. Seeks damages for alleged violations and a shutdown of the emulator.

Notes 1 million copies of Tears of the Kingdom downloaded prior to game’s release; says Yuzu’s Patreon support doubled during that time. Basically arguing that that is proof that Yuzu’s business model helps piracy flourish."

  • Atemu@lemmy.mlEnglish
    11·
    9 months ago

    They’re using the DMCA to say that because Yuzu lets someone circumvent their encryption (which is illegal, but shouldn’t be), that’s the same as Yuzu circumventing their encryption.

    Yes, yes they are. That’s how the DMCA works. It’s mental.

    • hperrin@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      9 months ago

      That’s not how the DMCA works, or tons of other software would be illegal. It’s illegal to circumvent copy protection under the DMCA (something I wholeheartedly disagree with), but it’s not illegal to make something that can be used to circumvent copy protection.

      In fact, there are exemptions to that provision and one of them states that circumventing copy protection in order to play a video game using assistive technologies is legal.

      • Atemu@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        8 months ago

        It’s illegal to circumvent copy protection under the DMCA (something I wholeheartedly disagree with), but it’s not illegal to make something that can be used to circumvent copy protection.

        It is explicitly illegal to produce any thing whose purpose it is to circumvent DRM:

        (1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—
        (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;

        I’m telling you, that law is mental.

        In fact, there are exemptions to that provision and one of them states that circumventing copy protection in order to play a video game using assistive technologies is legal.

        Could you point that specific exception in the law? I can’t find it.

        Link for convenience: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-105publ304/pdf/PLAW-105publ304.pdf

        • hperrin@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          8 months ago

          The exceptions are handled by the Library of Congress and go through a renewal process every three years. Here’s the one from 2021:

          https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-10-28/pdf/2021-23311.pdf

          The accessibility use exception is on the last page, middle of the page, paragraph labeled 21.

          It’s illegal to make something that’s sole purpose is to circumvent copyright. Yuzu does not have that sole purpose, and doesn’t include the code necessary (prod.keys) to even accomplish it.

          • Atemu@lemmy.mlEnglish
            11·
            8 months ago

            The actual text for reference:

            Video games in the form of computer programs, embodied in lawfully acquired physical or downloaded formats, and operated on a general-purpose computer, where circumvention is undertaken solely for the purpose of allowing an individual with a physical disability to use software or hardware input methods other than a standard keyboard or mouse.

            That explicitly only applies to physically disabled people. Yuzu is not specifically targetted at providing a different input method (at all) and certainly not solely for the physically disabled.

            That exception is not relevant to this case.

            • hperrin@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              8 months ago

              I didn’t say it was. I used it as an example of when circumventing copy protection is allowed under the DMCA.