Good grief! I really dislike the more aggressive toward IP companies.
People are out there doing really fun, cool things. Sonic and Mario on the C64, for example.
Much like Disney who climbed their ladder to fortune on the backs of the likes of The Brothers Grimm, only to pull that ladder up hard in the form of way over the top copyright extensions, these companies seek to own culture and ideas even remotely related to some product or other.
The movie and media companies cry, "Theft!" when no theft happened. Infringement did happen and we remain largely unable to talk rationally about that despite decades of experience shows us the end result ends up a net benefit to EVERYONE involved, even the company who was infringed on.
Nintendo stands out as a most aggressive company, though they are definitely not alone. Had they all gotten their way some time back, there would be no meaningful retro culture today, or maybe a shadow of what we have today, but more importantly, none of them would have the gifts from emulator authors and reverse engineers to infringe on for profit today! Many titles have shipped with emulators for one reason or another. Emulators they did not author and do not own. Hubris!
Disgusting. Really. This is raw greed and territorial behavior at its very worst
And this is not right, in this context, and I just don't care:
In general, I am as nice to others as they are to me. And should it go not nice?
This is nothing of the sort. No matter if one thinks whether the Yuzu takedown was justified or not (As I understand it, they distributed the decryption keys for the games, and they took money for providing special builds that were designed to run obviously-pirated games that were not even released yet).... You can't get more "hey we're pirates!" than that...
This was not a lawsuit against emulation. It was a lawsuit against commercial piracy, plain and simple.
> People are out there doing really fun, cool things. Sonic and Mario on the C64, for example.
True, but they're doing that with the IP of Nintendo, and often even copying artwork (sprites, background) pixel-by-pixel. You can cry and moan as much as you want, the law is pretty clearly on the side of Nintendo here in those cases. And this is not about some old, obscure license or character that they have almost forgotten about. It's an IP that they're still actively developing, promoting and selling. I hate stupid useless lawsuits for obscure and forgotten stuff as much as everyone, but in this case I can't help but side with Nintendo (as much as it pains me to say).
People are out there doing really fun, cool things. Sonic and Mario on the C64, for example.
Much like Disney who climbed their ladder to fortune on the backs of the likes of The Brothers Grimm, only to pull that ladder up hard in the form of way over the top copyright extensions, these companies seek to own culture and ideas even remotely related to some product or other.
The movie and media companies cry, "Theft!" when no theft happened. Infringement did happen and we remain largely unable to talk rationally about that despite decades of experience shows us the end result ends up a net benefit to EVERYONE involved, even the company who was infringed on.
Nintendo stands out as a most aggressive company, though they are definitely not alone. Had they all gotten their way some time back, there would be no meaningful retro culture today, or maybe a shadow of what we have today, but more importantly, none of them would have the gifts from emulator authors and reverse engineers to infringe on for profit today! Many titles have shipped with emulators for one reason or another. Emulators they did not author and do not own. Hubris!
Disgusting. Really. This is raw greed and territorial behavior at its very worst
And this is not right, in this context, and I just don't care:
In general, I am as nice to others as they are to me. And should it go not nice?
Game on!
Clowns.
> People are out there doing really fun, cool things. Sonic and Mario on the C64, for example.
True, but they're doing that with the IP of Nintendo, and often even copying artwork (sprites, background) pixel-by-pixel. You can cry and moan as much as you want, the law is pretty clearly on the side of Nintendo here in those cases. And this is not about some old, obscure license or character that they have almost forgotten about. It's an IP that they're still actively developing, promoting and selling. I hate stupid useless lawsuits for obscure and forgotten stuff as much as everyone, but in this case I can't help but side with Nintendo (as much as it pains me to say).
But it is not in isolation.
Expressing my general disgust over the general IP scene is neither crying or moaning.
This will all play out like it always does --a mess.
Peace.