this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
708 points (98.2% liked)
Games
32724 readers
1351 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They might have a case if yuzu is actually decrypting switch software. That would be stupid of the developers, though. I would assume that they require you to provide decrypted games.
That's basically the only leg nintendo has to stand on here, but nintendo can out lawyer you into the poor house regardless.
AFAIK rooted Switch consoles are used to decrypt the games and Yuzu just tries to execute whatever nonencrypted Switch binary. Unless Nintendo can prove that either the Yuzu developers themselves are behind ripping commercial Switch games or directly colluded with the rippers, they'd have a hard time to actually win. That said, regular people with normal income levels will probably just sign everything because a prolonged lawsuit is about just bankrupting them, not being ruled the win by the judge.
From their own guide
Their guide also talks about dumping games from your console so I'm not sure how far it goes, but if they want console keys they are likely decrypting something
Yuzu doesn't do any encryption breaking. The user is meant to use their Switch to dump their keys, which are legally owned by the user. Then it uses those legal keys to decrypt the ROMs by the exact normal method that the Switch itself uses. They were going based on precedent legal rulings about console emulation. Copying the decryption keys and making copies of the software for archival purposes have both been previously ruled to be perfectly legal for the enduser and don't constitute piracy. This suit will challenge that notion.
this is the part where they circumvent the copyright protection, even if you do it "the same way" it's still not authorized, the DMCA is fairly broad about this stuff, one of the reasons it's so bad