• fern@lemmy.autism.place
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    keep in mind that it’s people like him who make corporations condemn the technology instead of the users of the technology

    Hard disagree. Corporations get to make their own rules, and this person is a scapegoat. They’ve been attacking emulators for a long time.

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      While it’s true that they’ve been trying to stop emulators for a long time, they haven’t been able to do too much about them because of Sony v Bleem.

      Modern emulators exist in a legal gray area, though, and might be violating the DMCA. The more of these assholes that pop up and get sued, the higher the likelihood that one of them refuses to settle, gets steamrolled by Nintendo, and gives them and every other console manufacturer the legal precedent that emulators are piracy/DRM-circumvention tools.

      Even if you disagree with my belief that Nintendo would be less aggressive this year if people hadn’t been spotlighting emulation-based piracy and provoking them, you should be concerned about that.

      • KingRandomGuy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Sony v Connectix is the actual case that set the precedent for emulation, not Bleem. The Bleem case decided whether or not the use of screenshots of copyrighted games to advertise their emulator was legal. I believe it just deferred to the Connectix case for the legality of the emulator.

        • pivot_root@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Thanks for the correction. I sometimes get those two mixed up in my memory, and it’s a really stupid problem that I need to fix.