Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Portables (Games) Entertainment Games

GBA Emulator Creators Vow To Take On Nintendo 51

Justin Nolan writes "According to a PDALive article, Kyle Poole of Crimson Fire Entertainment has decided to take on Nintendo after their legal threats regarding his Zodiac Tapwave-based Game Boy Advance emulator, Firestorm gbaZ. The following post can be found in his forum: 'We believe that the US Patent No 6,672,963 does not apply to Firestorm gbaZ, as the patent clearly covers optimizing an emulator based on detecting a predetermined video game title... Because of this, we have decided that we will release the emulator early next week as a free open source project, covered by the GPL license. We will of course provide a compiled version for you to use, but the full source code will also be available. This will provide us further legal protection, as we will not be profiting from it.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

GBA Emulator Creators Vow To Take On Nintendo

Comments Filter:
  • by Operating Thetan ( 754308 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @07:04PM (#8555320) Journal
    Because of this, we have decided that we will release the emulator early next week as a free open source project, covered by the GPL license. We will of course provide a compiled version for you to use, but the full source code will also be available.

    eg You can stop us making a profit, but we'll use what we have to fuck you over in return.
    • by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @07:16PM (#8555523) Journal
      It's still possible to make a profit, just indirectly. The GPL doesn't mandate releasing associated data files with programs.

      I've never figured out why emulator groups were always so rabid about keeping their emulators closed-source -- they are tinkerers, systems people, reverse engineerers, and seem like *exactly* the kind of people that fit into the open source world. Yet emulators stayed closed source for the longest time, with much duplication of effort and people screaming that people stole code from them...ack. How many people have really made a decent sum of money from writing a console emulator? Given the number of closed-source projects out there, probably not many...

      It is nice to see this open-sourced, though. Since VisualBoyAdvance is also GPLed, perhaps the two projects could share effort to some degree.
      • Well, ePSX was open source and arguably the best PS1 emulator. The only ones I can think of off hand are bleem and VGS, which were both commercial. Initially though, VGS was quite a bit better then ePSX.
      • by Haeleth ( 414428 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @08:01PM (#8556279) Journal
        I've never figured out why emulator groups were always so rabid about keeping their emulators closed-source...

        Because there are a lot of lamers out there who like nothing better than to steal other people's work and pass it off as their own.

        Why might these people target emulators in particular and not other types of program? Because in an emulator, unlike (say) a text editor or an original game, the majority of the difficult code is in the engine rather than the interface, but its visible output is very well defined: two emulators might be totally different inside, but if they do their jobs well enough their output should be indistinguishable.

        That's the argument, anyway. In practice it doesn't actually seem to be true, but that's a different matter. ;)
  • Smart (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @07:29PM (#8555724) Homepage Journal
    "Because of this, we have decided that we will release the emulator early next week as a free open source project, covered by the GPL license. We will of course provide a compiled version for you to use, but the full source code will also be available. This will provide us further legal protection, as we will not be profiting from it"

    Brilliant move. I'd have more respect for these guys if they started it as an Open Source project to begin with. Now they're just being asses. What they should have done instead is marketed it as a development tool.

    Let me give you all a piece of advice: Don't use Open Source to advocate (either directly or indirectly like in this case) piracy. You don't want corps like Nintendo burned by actions like this. How do you really think other software development houses are going to see it?
    • Phoinix is an open source GB (Not A) emulator for the Palm that's on SourceForge, if I'm not mistaken. Although I still would have paid for the GBA emulator.
    • Smrt (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Now they're just being asses.

      No, Nintendo were being asses. Crimson Fire apparently has been advised that their legal case is stronger without a commercial interest, and if they're going to give it away, why not give the whole thing?

      What they should have done instead is marketed it as a development tool.

      It'd still be an emulator, Nintendo still would be unhappy (it's not as if Big N likes independent games, either), and that claim would be difficult to support given the earlier game-playing focus and la

      • Re:Smrt (Score:2, Informative)

        by NanoGator ( 522640 )
        "No, Nintendo were being asses."

        Predictably so, yes. Sell a product that plays a version of their games that can be acquired without paying Nintendo a cent, and you can bet your ass Nintendo will crack down on you. It's not just Nintendo, either. Remember Conectix and Sony?

        • Hmm, Nintendo isn't suing VisualBoy or any of the other slew of GBA emulators out there. Nor have they shut down the SNES emulators, NES emulators, N64 emulators, gone after MAME because it can play donkey kong, and you can still get flash carts as of this writing.

          They're concentrating pressure at one point, a GBA emulator that was sold for portable platforms(on a competing hardware product no less).

          Now, why would they do that?

          Oh, and I agree with you, the primary(and only) purpose of this product is to
        • Precedent (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Sell a product that plays a version of their games that can be acquired without paying Nintendo a cent, and you can bet your ass Nintendo will crack down on you.

          They won't, because they can't. Richard Bannister has been selling Mac ports of Nintendo system emulators for years unmolested. Nintendo threatened to sue Gambit Studios into a fine mist if they released Liberty, a commercial Game Boy emulator for Palm OS; Gambit did, Nintendidn't. If you read Nintendo's correspondence with Crimson Fire, the onl

    • Re:Smart (Score:4, Interesting)

      by MMaestro ( 585010 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @10:53PM (#8559186)
      How do you really think other software development houses are going to see it?

      They're going to see this as an reason to NOT use Open Source. The public and corporations (most of them) are idiots. If push comes to shove in this case and Nintendo stomped on them, every techie news site will report something along these lines :

      'Nintendo Stops Open Source Piracy Project, Claims Open Source Is A Danger To Intellectual Rights By Bypassing Anti-Piracy Systems.'

    • What, a lack of respect for intellectual property from the group that released buyo [crimsonfire.com] burst? [puyo.gq.nu]

      Actually, I did want to congratulate the developers for not backing down, as this is a frivolous patent. And the whole buyo bop thing is forgivable with Kyle's Quest Dungeons [crimsonfire.com].
  • Good friggin luck (Score:5, Interesting)

    by xenocide2 ( 231786 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @07:54PM (#8556162) Homepage
    This guy's written a closed emulator, and has taken preorders for it. He advertises with screenshots without mentioning any standard way of interfacing gameboy games into the platform his software runs on. Of course Nintendo's pissed, he's selling tools to pirate games. Ironically, now several of his own customers are pissed as well and want their preorder money back (dipshits, its not like software runs out).

    You'll notice in the patent several emulators and website references to emulation. The patent makes several claims, and I'm not certain the only claim made within the patent is an emulator that can determine what kind of game is played. This "innovation" would be to look at offset in the rom that indicates which platform the game is intended for. Its also hardly revolutionary. No$gmb can accomplish this feat. And I believe visual boy advance can as well.

    The lesson is that most companies take a dim view of profiting from their hard work. If you just want to build an emulator, the easiest part of steering clear of trouble is to make it open source. It's worked for zsnes and snes9x. And in the process we've seen a far greater application of emulators than before when handled by a small clergy of programmers and friends.
    • Ironically, now several of his own customers are pissed as well and want their preorder money back

      Well I wouldn't blame them if it's going to be released GPL in a week.

      By the way, isn't it weird to see Nintendo in the role of Evil Oppressor again?
    • > This guy's written a closed emulator, and has taken preorders for it.

      Go capitalism.

      > He advertises with screenshots without mentioning any standard way of interfacing gameboy games into the platform his software runs on.

      Like how magazines do screenshots? Or Nintendo does pre-release screenshots?

      > Of course Nintendo's pissed, he's selling tools to pirate games.

      Is Nintendo pissed about the GBA which allows for pirating games? What about Nintendo selling rather expensive development tools tha
    • It "worked" for the snes emulators because the snes is obsolete. Nintendo really can't make quite as much profit off the older systems anymore. Things are different when they can lose out several million dollars and lose market share. I mean, imagine if there was a Gamecube emulator on PS2. Or worse yet: GBA emulator on PSP. The GBA is Nintendo's current top selling unit, and in my opinion, the only thing keeping Nintendo in the hardware business. With the GCN not faring too well, Nintendo's got to pus
  • No profit? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Gothic_Walrus ( 692125 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @08:38PM (#8556917) Journal
    This will provide us further legal protection, as we will not be profiting from it.

    In that case, there go your legal defense funds...

    Seriously: how the bloody hell will these guys be able to defend themselves against Nintendo without any money?

    • considering the amount of money nindento will likely invest into the suit and how much they woudl expect to sell they are at a minimal disadvantage and when you consider that their defence is much stronger now this would be the best move for them. clearly they have had legal advise on this.
  • This is insane. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by silentbobdp ( 157345 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @09:52PM (#8558486) Homepage
    I can't imagine a better way to fuck oneself. Not only are they going to kill themselves off, they're going to hurt Open Source in the process.
  • by JVert ( 578547 )
    If the emulator goes down your taking the GPL with it?
  • by GaimeGuy ( 679917 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @10:50PM (#8559174) Journal
    Seriously, I don't see how this can uphold in court: an emulator which copies the hardware structure of a game boy advance deliberately meant as a development kit or a way to get free GBA games just won't cut it. Either way, they're taking Nintendo's product and distributing it that directly interferes with Nintendo's business: If they market it as an emulator, it gets ruled against for the piracy of games: If it's marketed as a development tool, it gets shut down for a deliberate attempt at prevention of revenue for Nintendo: Development kits cost money to make, and this could legally be proven to unlawfully interfere with Nintendo's business practices.
    Not to mention the fact that this "development kit" was designed for use with a Nintendo product which, by law, Nintendo owns all rights to, including the ability to deny and/or approve of who can develop for it. Saying that what they're doing is legal is just a load of bull
    Even if Nintendo still makes millions, the law applies equally to everyone: It protects small companies from the loss of their products, and, depending on the size and/or stability of such company, potential bankruptcy. It also protects the large companies, like Nintendo, from being denied the profits of their products.
    Whether you like it or not, the law just wouldn't be justified if it didn't apply equally.
    • -1, Wrong (Score:4, Informative)

      by EvilSporkMan ( 648878 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @12:15AM (#8559511)
      Not to mention the fact that this "development kit" was designed for use with a Nintendo product which, by law, Nintendo owns all rights to, including the ability to deny and/or approve of who can develop for it.
      WHAT law? They have rights to all the standard libraries, sure, but if someone were to write code for the machine from the ground up, make carts, and sell them, Nintendo couldn't do a damn thing (provided that there was no use of Nintendo seals on packaging, etc.). See all the public-domain ROMs for reference, or Feet of Fury [lik-sang.com] for the Dreamcast.
    • In past court cases, emulators have been fine, so long as they do not distribute copyrighted code in the hardware, such as bios images, without permission.

      Furthermore, it has been held to be legitimate to copy copyrighted code, or statements about licensing in software required for interoperability. See Sega v. Accolade.

      If Nintendo were to patent the entire operation of the Gameboy, it might be possible to sue emulators for patent infringement, but the novel parts of a Gameboy are going to be the circuit
  • This is exactly the type on nonsense we DON'T need as all this SCO stuff is going down.
  • You forget -- Bleem kicked Sony's ass all over the place in the courts
  • I'm not sure how many people have checked out the other stuff on their site, but this [crimsonfire.com] looks like it has been built with RPG Maker 2000, and I'm not sure if it's even legal to seel games you make with that program. Anyway, this company just seems like a hack; they design a product, get in hot water because a large corporation claims it infringes on their patents, then release it as open source to misdirect things away from the fact that they are trying to turn a profit? Maybe Infinium Labs [infiniumlabs.com] can learn somethin
  • Does anyone else here think non-profit projects should be exempt from patents?

    Patents are intended to award a monopoly to a company in a market, not to hinder progress.

    But there could be something I've missed?
    • [quote] Does anyone else here think non-profit projects should be exempt from patents? [/quote]

      So what you are saying is, someone takes the patent application for your new "killer ap" and copies it, then replicates and gives the actual "killer ap" away for free? Seems like a recipe for bankruptcy to me.
      In this case, say the Nintendo patent does apply. Someone creates a way to play those games without paying Nintendo. Assuming that everyone who uses this would have bought the stuff from Nintendo otherwis
      • It is a recipe for bankruptcy.

        I do think the minority should go bankrupt so that the majority can benefit from cheaper software.

        Also, don't forget patents cost ~5000-8000 excluding lawer fees in the UK alone. Global cover can cost millions. That isn't protecting anybody but the already successful. The already successful should be penalized for the sake of economy.

        "the stimulus driving the economy would suffer considerably"

        That's right. I believe that people would spend less money on Nintendo and
  • Funny, put don't most Z-machine emulators for the old infocom games include a number of tricks to change and optimize behavior based on certain game titles - not just on z-code version.

    It might fall under prior art.

The first 90% of a project takes 90% of the time, the last 10% takes the other 90% of the time.

Working...