App developers are responsible for the content the emulators can include (which are called mini-apps)
So let’s say I am Square Enix. I own the rights to Chrono Trigger. I can release an emulator with Chrono Trigger SNES ROM and can sell it as Chrono Trigger. I cannot have said emulator allowed to run Super Mario World, as that would get my program delisted from App Store.
This is not limited to just emulators though. We can classify the games in roblox as mini apps; so let’s say if Roblox doesn’t remove a game that clearly infringes copyright; they too will get removed from App Store. (Which is one of the many reasons why they try to remove the games that contain these content)
The wording of the new App Store rules say developers are responsible for any software offered in an app, and there’s been a bit of debate going on as to what that means in practice.
I haven’t heard if any emulators have or haven’t passed Apple’s review process yet.
Emulation for game preservation is fine, these ones getting taken down by Nintendo aren’t doing that. They are promoting piracy, providing the keys to play games, and making a profit.
Theres ways to go about this legally, advocating piracy, profiting and providing the keys are what’s not legal.
Your confusing the product and the creators of it.
They are one and the same. If you knew where to look, they provided means. This is one case that didn’t even make it to discovery before settling, that just tells you how fucked they were and how wrong they did everything.
What’s wrong with Twitter? You could also just google this and find the information yourself, don’t know why I have to provide what should be common knowledge on this subject. They were not a legal emulator, full stop, sorry.
They are one and the same. If you knew where to look, they provided means.
Tools are agnostic to their use. Tools do not have a preference how they are used. Hammers that are used are agnostic to if they are hammering a nail into a wall or caving in a skull. Yuzu would work exactly the same if you dumped your own carts. Same for emulators for Genesis and Atari 2600 and PlayStation.
What’s wrong with Twitter? You could also just google this and find the information yourself, don’t know why I have to provide what should be common knowledge on this subject.
If you make a claim, you need to provide the evidence. That’s how these things work. You say a claim, you give us the proof. And I can say on Twitter “Yuzu was 100000% legal and Nintendo actually is the real illegal operation”. Now that’s a valid source too, right?
Sorry but that biggest technology legal experts and defenders of the little guys who get sued by the big companies you polish the boots with your tongue strongly prove you wrong.
Stop peddling that stupid lie already. They didn’t use any key period; we literally have backups of the entire GPL source code will all of the commit history dating all the way back to August 30, 2013, stop spewing bullshit out your mouth.
You had to rip your own key from your own legally purchased switch hardware using legally protected homebrew tools and manually add it to Yuzu configs.This process is protected under Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act.
Under the fair use doctrine in Section 107, modifying your own legally purchased console hardware and running homebrew software for personal, non-commercial use has been considered a lawful fair use in certain legal precedents, even if it requires circumventing the console’s technological protection measures (TPMs) as its considered non-profit, educational or transformative use, as described in the fair use doctrine of Section 107.
Section 107 of the Copyright Act establishes the fair use exception, which allows for the reproduction of copyrighted works for purposes such as “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research”.
Clean Room design reverse engineering for the purpose of creating an Emulator falls under “research” as listed by section 107 and independent creation as protected by existing judicial precedents.
Section 107 is intended to restate the present judicial doctrine of fair use, not to change, narrow, or enlarge it in any way.
Meaning Clean Room design reverse engineering as independent creation & modifying your legally purchased hardware with homebrew tools as fair use being protected by existing judicial precedents is also in turn protected by Section 107.
And the Twitter thread had the sources
Twitter doesn’t allow us to reverse the thread, kindly link the exact source you’re referring to.
Queues arguement doesn’t work since they didn’t reverse engineer their key….
I’m not defending Nintendo, I am providing information on the subject, it just unfortunately only looks bad for one side here. I even said legal emulation has its place…. So how am I “shill” and “defending” Nintendo? Because I proved you are fucking wrong? Lmfao. Why is THAT always the comeback in this scenarios?
App developers are responsible for the content the emulators can include (which are called mini-apps)
So let’s say I am Square Enix. I own the rights to Chrono Trigger. I can release an emulator with Chrono Trigger SNES ROM and can sell it as Chrono Trigger. I cannot have said emulator allowed to run Super Mario World, as that would get my program delisted from App Store.
This is not limited to just emulators though. We can classify the games in roblox as mini apps; so let’s say if Roblox doesn’t remove a game that clearly infringes copyright; they too will get removed from App Store. (Which is one of the many reasons why they try to remove the games that contain these content)
The wording of the new App Store rules say developers are responsible for any software offered in an app, and there’s been a bit of debate going on as to what that means in practice.
I haven’t heard if any emulators have or haven’t passed Apple’s review process yet.
Emulation for game preservation is fine, these ones getting taken down by Nintendo aren’t doing that. They are promoting piracy, providing the keys to play games, and making a profit.
Theres ways to go about this legally, advocating piracy, profiting and providing the keys are what’s not legal.
deleted by creator
Yuzu was not a legal emulator, they pretended to be while promoting piracy. If they were a legal emulator, they would still be around.
https://twitter.com/0JMachine/status/1764707969092985085?s=20
deleted by creator
They are one and the same. If you knew where to look, they provided means. This is one case that didn’t even make it to discovery before settling, that just tells you how fucked they were and how wrong they did everything.
What’s wrong with Twitter? You could also just google this and find the information yourself, don’t know why I have to provide what should be common knowledge on this subject. They were not a legal emulator, full stop, sorry.
Tools are agnostic to their use. Tools do not have a preference how they are used. Hammers that are used are agnostic to if they are hammering a nail into a wall or caving in a skull. Yuzu would work exactly the same if you dumped your own carts. Same for emulators for Genesis and Atari 2600 and PlayStation.
If you make a claim, you need to provide the evidence. That’s how these things work. You say a claim, you give us the proof. And I can say on Twitter “Yuzu was 100000% legal and Nintendo actually is the real illegal operation”. Now that’s a valid source too, right?
https://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq
Sorry but that biggest technology legal experts and defenders of the little guys who get sued by the big companies you polish the boots with your tongue strongly prove you wrong.
Uhhh they didn’t reverse engineer the key they used, that’s the entire stickler here……
And the Twitter thread had the sources, so why are you saying the onus is on me? I provided it, even though it should be common knowledge.
Stop peddling that stupid lie already. They didn’t use any key period; we literally have backups of the entire GPL source code will all of the commit history dating all the way back to August 30, 2013, stop spewing bullshit out your mouth.
You had to rip your own key from your own legally purchased switch hardware using legally protected homebrew tools and manually add it to Yuzu configs.This process is protected under Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act.
Clean Room design reverse engineering for the purpose of creating an Emulator falls under “research” as listed by section 107 and independent creation as protected by existing judicial precedents.
Meaning Clean Room design reverse engineering as independent creation & modifying your legally purchased hardware with homebrew tools as fair use being protected by existing judicial precedents is also in turn protected by Section 107.
Twitter doesn’t allow us to reverse the thread, kindly link the exact source you’re referring to.
Removed by mod
Queues arguement doesn’t work since they didn’t reverse engineer their key….
I’m not defending Nintendo, I am providing information on the subject, it just unfortunately only looks bad for one side here. I even said legal emulation has its place…. So how am I “shill” and “defending” Nintendo? Because I proved you are fucking wrong? Lmfao. Why is THAT always the comeback in this scenarios?
deleted by creator
Objection hearsay! Some jackass on Twitter saying some crap without proof is not proof. We need screenshots of the actual incidents at the minimum.
arrrghhhh