Seriously what is this? Nintendo argues that by instructing users how to extract the prod.keys from their own switch the yuzu developers are essencially infringing on the DMCA.
So what? Now you can’t even freely use your own property anymore because it goes against the design intentions of some big company that just want’s to milk their users?
So now in addition to “right to repair” we now need a “right to break” so companies can disappear off the planet if they try this shit.
wants* to milk their users
yes :)
The username just cracked me up btw.
Trust me. I speak the truth :)
You mean the truth proper?
Welcome to the age of the licence, where you pay to be given permission to use something in a specific way.
According to what scott ross from the accursed farm youtube channel discovered, you actually don’t have the right to own the software you bought ! if you live in US
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
don’t have right to own the software you bought
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
If buying isn’t owning, the piracy isn’t stealing.
Shit, piracy isn’t stealing either way if you ask me but that’s another debate entirely.
This is nothing new. There is no “age of the licence”. “Intellectual property” is much of what modern “capitalism” is about, and has been for several decades.
The initial idea of capitalism was to have capital to back up your activity, and use that activity to develop your capital. The capital was composed of whatever you could “retain” as yours, by your own means. Meaning you had to get the skills, you had to actively retain the capital, etc. So it was self limiting. One cannot possibly retain more than one estate or learn more than a couple lines of work all by themselves.
But then, people started selling services in addition to goods, and those who had capital quickly realised that it was far more profitable to pay someone a fraction of their capital to extend their possibility beyond their own means.
So capitalism became some kind of club: if you already had established trust with a group that let you grow capital beyond your own means, you could effortlessly obtain capital, and grow it steadily, with virtually no limits. It was then still possible to become part of that club (given some starting capital and an ever increasing amount of work).
However, that changed in the 70s when nixon decided to abandon the gold standard in 1971. This move essentially got rid of the need for a tangible capital, and allowed the mental concept of “trust” to be the only necessary metric by which capital is measured.
This is the exact reason people like trump can strive. Con artists love this system, because they only need their skills, which consist solely of lying, to develop any amount of wealth, out of thin air.
The damage effected by nixon on the north american societies, and by extension on the western societies, and by transaction, on all societies worldwide, will only be truly understood in centuries, by historians, when our epoch will be studied as a static set of facts, rather than a dynamic stream of information of varying veracity.
Anyway, to the point: this in itself was the beginning of the end of capitalism as a meaningful economic system. But it wasn’t the last blow to its integrity. Progressively, Intellectual Property, a falsehood according to which information exhibits the same set of properties as matter, went on to relentlessly turn capitalism into a kleptocracy.
Since the 80s, and the advent of computing, information has taken an ever more important part in society. And with it, “intellectual property”.
By now, any capitalist with the “title to” an information can effectively forbid anyone else from having that idea.
This is the actual problem. That and the imaginary money. It allows all kind of abuse, and it does so nonlinearly. Which is an especially bigger problem now that anyone can automate nearly anything.
People naturally have issues understanding nonlinear progressions, and that is why Ponzi schemes work. And, also, why no meaningful majority rebels against our current system. They simply are unable to truly understand it.
I fear regardless of the merits of the case, that Nintendo will just batter Yuzu with lawyers until they win.
they will never win, it’s an open source code, anyone can fork an re-distribute It, they can’t realistically lawsuit tens of thousands of people, some of which sre totally incognito
I fucking hate Nintendo buytI do like to pirate their games.
Where do we donate for legal fees?
It’s futile. You are no match against a multi national corporation.
Give up, you are no match against the universe, time, gravity and other powers. Just end it. Why even bother continuing.
Could you stop with your nihilism?
But he is right though. If Nintendo really wants it gone they’ll just pull a sony-bleem. As long as there is no real regulation for this stuff, there is not much you can do.
a) Your license footer is really cool! I will start including it as well.
b) Aren’t quotes a bit problematic, as you include them in your work? This one is probably fine, as you (quite artistically) paraphrased it but direct quotes would be a problem, right?
a) 💖
b) I’m not entirely sure how quotes should work. I imagine that if you quote such licensed text immediately after, it’s quite obvious who you’re quoting. But if you quote it on some blog somewhere out in the interwebs, proper attribution must be given.
Newspapers do have to attribute whatever they quote (and if they’re respectable, they will) because they’re trying to earn money with it, but beyond that… no idea. I’m not a lawyer.
Good question thoughYou sure you don’t want to keep your comments GPLv2-only?
IMO the license footer is a bit sovereign-citizen-y, and likely unenforceable.
I think the Creative Commons would fail to apply to the source material, but using the source material should be fair use in almost every context on Lemmy.
GAMESTOP
Patreon?
It is morally ethical to pirate products from companies like Nintendo, Adobe, Apple et al. (Add all corporations to become a pirate captain.)
Imo, obtaining, distributing and consuming pirated IP is a grey area. Selling pirated IP is not okay. Interwebs pirates should share, not sell.
they (nintendo) could sell me their games any day, I’m waiting to give them my hard earned money. just gonna sit over here with my sustainable linux non e-waste silicon and look at my nice pile of money now, don’t mind me 🥰
Well that program is downloaded now.
Never heard of this thing. Does it work well?
Yuzu and Riyujinx (another switch emulator) work great, expect a bit of setup though
Streisand effect :)
instructing users how to extract the prod.keys from their own switch
Yuzu’s quick start guide links to the old download link for Lockpick RCM from the same repo that is still inaccessible ever since Nintendo’s DMCA takedown last year (source: arstechnica). They never updated the page to link to any mirrors of Lockpick RCM or any other options to extract the keys; the guide doesn’t even work right now. You can see in Yuzu site’s changelog on github that the only changes made to that page in the last year are to minimum/recommended hardware requirements.
It seems even more absurd to argue that instructions are somehow infringing when the allegedly infringing part of them has already been broken for almost a year. Even the standing for taking down Lockpick RCM in the first place seems questionable, and telling users to use it with a broken link seems several layers further detached from that.
Just owning lockpicks does noy make you a thief.
Unfortunately, a lot of places have insanely draconian laws regarding “criminal tools”.
Ethically, I agree with you. More than that, using a lockpick on a lock you bought shouldn’t make you a thief. Unfortunately, DMCA has abysmal anti-circumvention measures that make the legality of using a device you own in ways you should be able to become questionable under US law, in the digital equivalent of Master Lock suing you for picking a lock you bought from them.
Who said that I would use them? Maybe I just want them laying around and collecting dust? /s
Depends where younlive
My favorite thing about the modern world is how we don’t get to own the computers we purchase…
I love how people just keep giving such companies money.
is there a choice? every machine is like this now.
I build my own. Though I still need non-free software to run, I don’t think it is from any DMCA enforcers.
System76 is not too bad if you want something mildly customizable but don’t want to futz with doing assembly yourself. I get my laptops from them.
I’ve tried open phones (multiple) and I still use a Pixel. There is a choice, but I was willing to trade off my freedom for function there. I wish that wasn’t the choice and when I can I support efforts to make it easier for people to choose freedom there.
So, yeah, there is often a choice. Doesn’t make the status quo acceptable.
Most desktops have a freely accessible ROMs, its definitely getting worse though but most consoles are a portal to subscriptions
I build my main PCs from parts. Have since I was a kid and I always will because of bullshit like this.
Every other device I have can serve as a dumb terminal connected to my main PC via either SSH or Moonlight.
Not sure. ThinkPads are desktop equivalents in portable form and have no equivalent in portable form. Boutique Linux laptop companies can do the same, but are incomparable as far as aftersales, third party parts availability and user repairability guides go.
Desktops are open but not portable.
Framework seems promising, considering how good support for the upgrades and repairs for the 13 have been.
But ThinkPads have been sold in millions for a couple decades at this point. There will always remain that gap.
Sure, and in terms of extended warranty and aftermarket parts the support is probably better/more guaranteed on a Thinkpad, but in terms of repairability, Framework sells the only 2 laptops that iFixit gave a 10/10
So I was just adding it on to your analysis. I’d say that warrants consideration, at least.
Yes. You never and have never HAD to buy Nintendo.
oh i meant more like computing devices in general, but fair enough, thats part of the reason im more like a pc person.
Yea, Microsoft is rapidly making Linux a MUCH more attractive OS, especially in spite of their effort to keep DirectX off of it.
thank god for the ability to install any OS you please on computers.
imagine if you were locked to windows like phones are to android/ios.
They’re trying. It’s one reason they wanted to require a TPM 2.0 module. It doesn’t allow it itself, but it makes hardware MUCH easier to identify and block off hardware regardless of MS accounts and go further in the future.
Were they sleeping for almost a decade now? Doesn’t the prod keys users extract belong to them? Fuck capitalism
No you misunderstood, when you bought your Switch you didn’t buy the hardware and the software on it, you only bought the right to use the hardware and software. It still belongs to Nintendo, and you better watch out you do nothing bad with it!
The thing is, Apple already went through the same lawsuit against jailbreaking a while back and lost. I don’t think Nintendo is going to like where this goes.
They’re not betting on winning. They’re betting on Yuzu developers being too poor to fight back
Obviously not ^^
This is Nintendo’s point, making use of the prod keys goes against the DMCA
If Nintendo can prove that the primary purpose of Yuzu is to circumvent Nintendo’s encryption, there is a very real and very scary chance they could win the lawsuit.
17 USC §1201 (a)(2)
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 a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
© is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person’s knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
I’m no lawyer so I could be completely off-base, but I think the existence of homebrew can make all 3 points defensible, depending on what evidence exists about their primary intent being breaking the DRM. If they have posted publicly things like “this patch should bypass DRM for this particular game” then they would be screwed, but posts like “supports/extends this feature so we can better emulate the functionality in this particular game” should be fine? At least if I understand the precedent set by the Connectix ruling in addition to the wording of what you pasted?
It’s less about being right and more about Yuzu devs willing to spend a million dollars to defend themselves and risk a tens of millions of dollars ruling against them. The best case Yuzu will have is winning and court costs. Worse case is owing God knows how much to Nintendo. The system is bullshit.
The system is absolutely bullshit. If this makes it into a courtroom, the odds will likely be even further stacked against Yuzu. The chance of getting a judge that goes out of his/her way to understand the technical arguments is extremely low, and it’s a lot easier to argue that unauthorized decryption is bypassing something than it is to argue that software needing to do it to work isn’t primarily designed to do it.
Unless the EFF steps in and bankrolls Yuzu, the most realistic case here is that they settle out of court and Nintendo gets exactly what they want.
Maybe instead of going after a way to make switch games more accessible to people outside of your ecosystem, you should expand your ecosystem to include them.
