this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
342 points (97.5% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54577 readers
195 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Emulation is perfectly legal if you own the game.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

And yet Nintendo files bogus copyright claims against emulators.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 month ago (5 children)

They're not bogus. The emulator that shut down were selling a product using a proprietary encryption key owned by Nintendo.

That's why Dolphin still exists.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

Well the dev closed it without any public c&d...

Maybe the thousands of copyrighted images of amiibos hosted on https://amiibo.ryujinx.org/ ?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I disagree. Sure, companies have a moral right to recoup their R&D costs on a console, but I fully reject the Divine Right of Shareholders. As long as the emulators aren't sold for profit and no one is hurt, a multibillion dollar company like Nintendo has zero moral ground to tell us that we cannot emulate consoles that we have bought to play games that we also bought.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

The emulator they shut down was being sold for a profit. They haven't gone after Dolphin, which is free.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Proprietary encryption key

What if the key was in a book? It would have to be protected by free-speech, which makes it uncensorable.

What if the key contents were used as hex values to make a flag? Would you censor a flag too?

No such thing as "proprietary encryption keys" exist.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The key wasn't used in a book or in the hex values for a flag. That's like saying the formula for Coke can't be proprietary because it could be put in a book.

Software can absolutely be proprietary, and that key is part of the software.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

IANAL, but from a EU-centric perspective on copyright (which is the only one I can reliably talk about) the idea of a proprietary encryption key is bogus. A creative work can be copyrighted if it has sufficient originality (or under some other very specific conditions). Smaller parts of such a work are not copyrighted if they don't meet that criteria on their own. The encryption key (which is very probably randomly generated and definitely not a creative work) thus can't be copyrighted on it's own. At least in the EU, there should be no argument against sharing said key (at least in respect to copyright).

I honestly can't talk about other jurisdictions (maybe someone else here can) but I imagine it should be similar to this in many other countries.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Sharing isn't the issue. The emulator was profiting from it.

If I copied your house key and sold it, would that be alright?

For the record, I support emulation, but I don't lie to myself that it's morally defensible.