Nintendo Admits Emulators Are Legal Despite Crackdown

Nintendo's top intellectual property lawyer has acknowledged that video game emulators are technically legal, even as the company continues to shut down popular emulation projects worldwide. Speaking at the Tokyo eSports Festa, Koji Nishiura, deputy general manager of Nintendo's intellectual property department, said emulators violate the law only when they bypass encryption, copy copyrighted console programs, or direct users to pirated material. The statement comes after Nintendo forced the closure of several major emulation projects last year, including Yuzu, Citra, and Ryujinx.

cruel... but fair

[guygo]

"But he nailed your head to a coffee table!"
"No no no... he didn't do ... well yeah he did that, but I deserved it!"

It's the games, stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course emulators are perfectly legal. It's the act of copying the games that is not. Games are covered by copyright and without a license from the copyright holder, making a copy to use in an emulator is illegal.

Re:

[Rinnon]

Unless I am mistaken, copyright would also extend to any code written for the hardware, such as a BIOS. Reverse engineering the hardware and then writing a custom BIOS is fair game; but many emulators require a version of the official BIOS to run. I'm not certain as to the legality of dumping a BIOS file from a console you legitimately own; someone more knowledgeable might be able to offer that tidbit. Offering the original BIOS for download would still be copyright infringement.

There aught to be a law

[sls1j]

Honestly copyrights need to be a quicker removal from software that is written for a specific hardware platform that is no longer in production, I'm thinking like 5 years.

Re:

[Sebby]

Honestly copyrights need to be a quicker removal from software that is written for a specific hardware platform that is no longer in production, I'm thinking like 5 years.

I'd argue that if the copyrighted item (be it software, books, etc.) isn't being commercially sold by a proper licensee anymore, it should be fair game to acquire it by whatever means possible (as long as it's not "sold" by anyone not licensed to do so).

The copyright argument has always been any that any 'unauthorized copying' will "rob" the creators of revenue, but that becomes bullshit if it's not available to be acquired legitimately when there is legitimate demand for it.

more obligations on holder

[FeelGood314]

I might not go so far as if you aren't still selling something but I would say that if you CAN'T sell a copyrighted material anymore then you lose the copyright. So if the hardware no longer exists and no emulation that the copy right holder has access to is available the copyright is void. There should definitely be a requirement of copyright that when the copyright expires that the work be released to the public. So if the BBC does not have a copy of a doctor who episode not only should they lose the

Re:

[alvinrod]

With the advent of the VirtualConsole on the Wii, this argument is effectively dead. At one point it was impractical to manufacture new copies of games because it meant having to crank out new cartridges or other physical media for a hardware platform that was also no longer being manufactured just to compete against a used market that made that action unprofitable. Now these companies can sell digit copies in perpetuity for relatively little cost and utilize DRM to eliminate any used market.

Coincidental

Re:

[narcc]

I like the idea that copy rights should come with copy responsibilities. That is, in order to enjoy the protections provided by copyright, holders need to actively make their works available. As it applies to emulation, this would eliminate the risk surrounding things like abandoned works and bios code.

While this will never happen, given that DRM has the potential to restrict the public's access to future public domain works and infringes on their right to fair use, that works protected by DRM forfeit copy

Re:

[Turkinolith]

Gotta fight the mouse for that one.

So licence the roms

[xack]

Instead of putting them behind proprietary mini consoles or subscription services. If Nintendo let me buy a Mario 64 rom legally i would buy it. I've already purchased Mario 64 for the original N64, for the ds, for wii virtual console and for 3d all stars, I deserve to have a rom licence.