Nintendo May Sue N64 Emulator Creators 98
ewhac writes
"According to TechWeb, Nintendo
has not ruled out the possibility of suing
the authors of UltraHLE, the Nintendo-64 emulator for
PCs with Voodoo graphics cards. Nintendo holds the
dubious opinion that the emulator is illegal, predicated
on the assumption that the emulator would not have been
possible without circumventing the security chip. (Circumvention
of copy-protection/authentication systems was recently
criminalized in the United States, with fines up to $500K.)
"
Boy this is stupid (Score:1)
Nintendo should lay off. (Score:1)
UltraHLE is out there now, so theres not much they can do about that. Suing the authors will do no good at all. the US's apparently litigation-centric society makes me laugh.
Playstation Mods have been around for years now, and frankly, i wouldn't own a PSX if i couldn't pirate games for it. At the time i bought my gaming console, my purchase decision was solely based on the ease of which i could pirate games.
The main reason why there is so much software, and `so many people who know how to use it is the fact that it is so freely available. I have never worked at a company, or met anybody who owns a computer, who doesn't have at least one piece of pirated software.
Lets face it, nobody has come up with a copy-protection scheme that thwarts everybody, and the one that did show some (albeit limited) potential with Intels P3 IDs has already been removed for fear of privacy infringements.
There is nothing illegal about an emulator, as long as it doesn't use Nintendo code or hardware.
I guess their main fear is losing control of the licensing and distribution of games which will run on the Nintendo or Nintendo-emulator platform.
They have a number of options:
Produce new consoles sufficiently advanced that no general purpose computer can emulate their speed (a futile effort)
focus on the licensing and distribution of high quality games that will run on *any* platform with their own Nintendo Virtual Machine (probably pretty viable)
Ignore the problem, as it is essentially limited to those with expensive computers and high-bandwidth internet connections. (obviously this will change rapidly, but then, so are the consoles)
Suing the authors will only draw attention to their heavy handed tactics (Sony only became a major force in consoles because Nintendo dicked them over majorly on a deal) and will simply send the emulator community further underground. It's like the RIAA vs Mp3 files. Like the US Government vs. people who smoke marijuana.
Despite heavy legal action on all these fronts, essentially nothing has changed, and there are more emulators, MP3s and pot-smokers now than ever before.
This case will be interesting in defining what 'emulation' is considered by the government to be.. it'd be nice for Netscape to sue Microsoft for unlawfully 'emulating' their browser
Hey, i'm just glad i live on the other side of the planet from the US.
Regards
-Pete
Boy this is stupid - from original poster (Score:1)
^o^ wishful thinking!!!!
Free speech not free beer. (Score:1)
No one is lending any credibility to the Free software movement by lumping in emulators which may be ilegal by nature since the ROM images that must be used to use the emulator bypassed Nintendo's security features. Maybe UltraHLE did not do this, but if it did, it's ilegal.
This is not like Sony, it's not a clean-room reverse engineering thing where the actual retail
media containing the copy-protection can be put inside a different machine and read. I dont know the details but if someone had to subvert a Nintendo copy protection scheme to get access to the ROM, it's ilegal. Real Simple. Anything else is piracy.
If you want to pirate roms and psx games, go right ahead, it's within your rights to do so. But dont complain when the authorities try to take that right away, they have the law on their side.
On Piracy... (Score:1)
"Unless they already own the cartridge for the N64, $0. That is the piracy... use of merchandise that is being sold without having paid for it, or something like that. "
That is not their obligation. You don't sue Colt because some nut decides to take an AR-15 and mow down school children with it.
Their product is (as far as we can tell) legal. If People choose to use it for illegal ends that's not their problem. Nor is it their responsibility.
Nintendo is scared out of their pants because an Emulator for their flagship product will put a serious dent in their bottom line. Do you think they care if that competitive product is legal or not? No, Nintendo is using their might and money to bully these people into de-inventing their product.
LK
Security Circumvention (Score:1)
Disclamer: the following is not necessarily accurate legal information. The author is not responsible for any damages caused by the implementation of his word.
Despite what Nintendo claims about the release of UltraHLE, it appears that this program has no code to circumvent security measures. Even if Nintendo were to prove that there is no code to enforce them (which, perhaps there is none) there is no grounds for suit. An international treaty was recently ratified by the government which does, indeed, ban the use of technologies which circumvent anti-piracy measures. However, as with all laws, there must be intent. If the authors never intended to bypass these procedures, Nintendo cannot request damages.
Also, as was determined by the suit "Sega vs. Accolade", it is legal to reverse engineer a computer for development purposes so long as no Nintendo code was used. So, the implimentation of anti-piracy measures would constitute a violation. In other words, the authors could possibly be found to infringe on Nintendo's copyright had they used Nintendo's code. If Nintendo presses charges on these grounds protected quite clearly by the new treaties, they could lose the suit and could also have a suit returned by the authors
Just my two cents
Steve Sawyer majeredb8@hotmail.comsuing Colt (Score:1)
Two points. Even though this is not the correct forum for a debate of the flaws or merits of Gun Control, I'm going to respond to your ignorance with truth.
First, none of the civil suits against gunmakers which try to hold them financially responsible for the criminal actions of others have been successful.
Second, firearms are used decisively more often for LEGAL activities than illegal ones. 2.5 million times per year, firearms are used to thwart crimes.
LK
Boy this is stupid (Score:1)
>Uh-huh! And every 7 year old will want a new >$2000 PC for Christmas. Sure.
> Actually, the reverse should be done. >A cheap, console-like appliance, that would let people do what
they do on the computer, like surfing.
> WebTV anyone?
Ooh, boy... now he's got me started on my WebTV kick. These boxes are STUPID. If all you're doing on your computer is BROWSING the web, then buy a set-top box. Ever hear of DOWNLOADING programs, music, etc... like to see you download new software for your WebTV. Using the web for research? How in the heck do you get the information into your computer. You have to print it out and then re-type it... what's the point. With $399 computers from MicroCenter now available, there's no reason to buy a set-top box.
I know this was OT, but I just had to vent... haven't had a chance to go off on webtv lately...
(P.S.... and you can't run Linux on a WebTV;-)
Boy this is stupid - from original poster (Score:1)
What kind of crack do you smoke? (Score:1)
If I bought Microsoft Office and decided to write a program that will open up Office documents, manipulate them and run Office plug in applications, that is called being innovative. There are no laws against that. In fact, you could probably put up a case that it is monopolistic to make a product that others can not compete with...
Stop your Microsoft thinking and get back to the real world.
IBM versus Compaq (Score:1)
Thus started the clones.
Thus spoke Zarathustra.
Boy, this is great! (Score:1)
Cases brought by the gov't are often dropped if they threaten to result is certain laws being taken off of the books. An example are anti-bigomy laws (which define marriage as a union of exactly two people). When people of islamic/mormon/etc. faith get the gov't after them for violating bigomy laws, they *always* eventually back down if they fail to intimidate the involved parties to dissolve their marriage (at least on paper). Why? Because anti-bigomy laws flie in the face of Amendment I: "Freedom of Religion" Now gov't wants to look good by keeping these laws around. And they make sure they stay there by never letting them go to trial.
Its all a big con!!! (Score:1)
and they fake the whole thing and make it look like some backyard
dudez did this with no knowledge"
Bah, if you're going to put forward a conspiracy theory, may as well make it interesting.
*I* reckon Nintendo wrote UltraHLE. Think - existing emulators weren't good enough
or relevant enough to modern high-profile consoles to capture the public and media interest. In order to get
a test case with which they could set a precedent and go on to crush other emulators,
they needed a high quality emulator for a current console, to use as a strawman.
The reverse-vampires were involved somewhere, too...
Bull Shit! (Score:1)
(a) Nintendo has so much money that if these people go to court (which I doubt they will), they will almost certainly be found to be 'pirates' even if they can produce God Himself in court to testify for them.
(b) People don't seem to realize it, but emulation really is a Cool Thing to code. Emulation!=Piracy. Emulation==Making One Computer Think It's Another. It may be that there's no way to legally create an N64 emulator, because Nintendo keeps too tight a hold on the specs. IMO, that's just obnoxiousness on Nintendo's part.
(c) Illegality does not imply Wrongness. Especially these days when companies can buy custom-built laws. I do not personally pirate software but that doesn't mean that I think that (eg) copying a game you own onto a computer disk for your own use deserves the sort of retribution that it can legally receive. Software piracy laws have passed the point of absurdity and are now living in some little fantasy world of their own on the other side.
Daniel
Fuzzy Logic (Score:1)
(a) Pirating ROMs is illegal
No-brainer.
(b) 'Pirating' ROMs is Wrong.
I put quotes around pirating because AFAIK, what Nintendo is complaining about is not piracy but the copying of ROMs. This is not the same thing, in my understanding. Copying ROMs is when someone copies a ROM to (eg) a file image. Piracy is when that someone then gives or sells that image to another someone. There is a huge difference there! One should be entirely legal by any reasonable standard, the other is much hazier (although around here people will argue that both should be legal but I'm not going there
(c) Making emulators is illegal
The crux of your argument here is (summarized):
Copying ROMs is illegal. They must have copied ROMs to mke the emulator. Therefore they are evil, villanous software pirates.
A couple of possibilities come to mind (although I don't know the specifics of the case)
First: They did copy ROMs and bypass the copy-protection scheme when making the emulator.
Since I'm only dealing with legalities here..you're right. But I'm not sure that makes the emulator itself illegal. No really! The emulator is just a bunch of code that acts like an N64. If it doesn't contain any copyrighted Nintendo information, and doesn't itself bypass Nintendo security devices, I don't see how it can be illegal in and of itself. Only the creation of it involved an illegal act. It may be impossible to use it legally--BUT THIS TOO MIGHT BE POSSIBLE!!
Second: They didn't copy ROMs. Then, you ask, how did they make the emulator? I assume Nintendo has released specs for people to write games for the N64. Using those specs, it should be able to create an emulator that will run N64 games.
Third: They didn't copy ROMs and they couldn't get specs. In this case, assuming they have equipment to make their own ROMs, they still could have done it. It would be tedious, but I believe it would be possible to reverse engineer the N64 by creating their own ROM images, transferring them to cartridges, and then plugging them into the N64. I don't know whether this requires bypassing the copy protection, but it shouldn't.
Fourth: Well, I don't know everything there is to know about the N64. There may be another way to reverse-engineer it that is legal. So far, I don't think anyone really knows exactly how they did it; Nintendo is just trying to make an example of these people for daring to write a computer program that acts similarly to a Nintendo machine.
(d) Making emulators is Wrong
See my comment above on moral outrage. This is the most ridiculous statement I have heard in a long, long time. Heck, I've _written_ an emulator. It was for a chip I made up, and no-one's heard of it before or since, but I wrote it. Emulation is an incredibly fascinating technique and I suspect that people who pooh-pooh the technical interest argument aren't programmers, or have never done something for the sake of doing it. If the second case holds, I pity them.
(e) People who defend emulators are pirates or supporters of piracy.
McCarthianism at its best (or perhaps worst). First you try to demonize a group of people..then, when someone speaks out against it, you say "well, they're just the same!" Continue until all opposition shuts up. Not too logical but it works awfully well.
Daniel
more greedy madness (you lot not nintendo) (Score:1)
Yep
but the logical conclusion of emulators is no games.
Uh? Eh? What? How? If I can play the games I bought for my N64 on my computer, will this lead to the collapse of the gaming industry?
until we live in an energy free society, artists/programmers need (want) to be paid and if they don't get paid they have to work in mcdonalds etc.
This nicely ignores the fact that plenty of good (although often not flashy) games (and software!) have been made for free. But I still have no objection to paying for a game.
hiding behind oh well coding emulators isn't illegal, using ROMS is, is just facile.
It is? Well, let's see your analogy:
its a bit like saying oh well building nuclear warheads isn't wrong, just using them is.
No, it's a bit like saying that oh well running debuggers isn't wrong, just using them to break copy protection is. Or oh well, running tcpdump isn't wrong, just using it to snoop on other people's packets is. Got it?
this is *not* an indirect attack on opensource software, it's a direct attack on people who rip other people off 'just because they can'.
But what does that have to do with emulators? My guess is that you've never even seen an emulator, and you don't even know what one is. I'll give you a hint: an emulator is not a device that lets you pirate ROMs.
Daniel
i knew it (Score:1)
As I said before... (Score:1)
Pretty soon, when everything in America is made into a crime, only criminals will live in America.
jesus h (Score:1)
But even then, why don't they pursue the N64 console (warez) manufacturers instead? It doesn't matter what anyone does, because there's always going to be piracy. But even then, if you waste 60 bucks on a game, you should be able to play it on any freakin' system you want.
-mickey
Where do these ROMS come from? (Score:1)
Frankly, I don't know that using an emulated N64 is so much worth it. Unless you are a software pirate and plan on using the ROMS instead of paying for the game, you might as well just rent or borrow the game to try it out. For the old arcades there is more motivation, since everyone's not gonna put an arcade in their room; and many of the old arcades aren't even around anymore.
--
Aaron Gaudio
"The fool finds ignorance all around him.
Reverse Engineering (Score:1)
And before you call me a dumb pirate, I already own an N64, and I have about 10 games. I would just like to be able to play those games on my computer too, and having UltraHLE open-sourced would mean that it would run on more platforms, probably support more 3D cards, and would support more games.
Civil vs. Criminal law (Score:1)
No, the FBI doesn't have hordes of agents to try to enforce all of the laws all of the time. Actions regarding civil law usually must be brought by the (alegedly) damaged party.
Nintendo is just as dumb as Atari... (Score:1)
Not very surprising from a company that disingeniously standardized on expensive cartridges instead of 50 cent CD's.
Nintendo engineers truly come up with some good stuff... just that their management needs to keep their fingers out of it some. Even the SNES was a marginal success because of the limited selection of games... and they have a history of announcing vaporware, Microsoft-style, to stifle the current market until Nintendo get's its act in gear with the next generation of wuss games. Blech.
This is proof of why people prefer computers. They don't get it...
What idiot is doing this??!?!? (Score:1)
They have every right. If you don't like it, don't buy their products.
the problem is nintendo is stupid and only wants $.
If you doubt this of any corporation, then you are truly naive.
Don't get me wrong here; I am not advocating Nintendo. (In fact, I don't even think they have a case.) I am merely pointing out (as I'm sure I'm not the only one who's noticed) that you sound like a moron. I'm sorry, but with a nick like "WaReZ dUdE" you can't expect us to believe you're angry because of the principal.
Jason.
This is different then the Playstation Emulator... (Score:2)
Nintendo and Sony. (Score:1)
Am I missing something ? (Score:1)
Erm... (Score:1)
They will also settle out of court.. prior to any decision being made.. after as much court procedure as possible...
This shows that they can hurt a company that tries to do this.. without risking the right to sue other companies...
Basically, if there is a decision reached, and it's not in the favor of the person suing, they would have a *much* harder time suing someone else on the same grounds later... that's why they prefer to settle out of court.... no precedents are set.. and they can keep threatening.
How come you never find lawyers commenting? (Score:1)
Better Screen Quality (Score:1)
Well, the emulator also does. And no, you can't sue me, I own a N64 and all the games i got on ROM.
Besides, I live in Europe
Nintendo wants money... (Score:1)
Erm... (Score:1)
Erm... (Score:2)
They aren't claim copyright violation, they are claiming the UltraHLE people broke a law...shouldn't they just call up the FBI, or whoever would have juristidiction over this?
more greedy madness (you lot not nintendo) (Score:1)
until we live in an energy free society, artists/programmers need (want) to be paid and if they don't get paid they have to work in mcdonalds etc.
hiding behind oh well coding emulators isn't illegal, using ROMS is, is just facile. its a bit like saying oh well building nuclear warheads isn't wrong, just using them is.
this is *not* an indirect attack on opensource software, it's a direct attack on people who rip other people off 'just because they can'.
Way off (Score:1)
Not at all, I never said I wanted to pirate software. I have better things to do than try to get a hacked piece of virus infested, illegal software working. Since when is an *emulator* a "piracy"? You make no sence. Sure, there will be those that share roms, but that shouldn't restrict my desire to play N64 games on my PC. This emulator was not pirated from anyone, it was developed by a couple of individuals. Nintendo is just mad because these emulators allow users to choose on what hardware they play thier games (ie I don't have to buy N64 to play)
"I cant walk into Redmond steal MS's code base, slap on a GPL, post it on the internet, and expect no legal recourse"
Nor did I claim you could - your argument is malformed. You did not author any MS code, therefore you cannot copyright it. However, if you wrote an emulater, you could copyleft it if you so wished - according to the courts it is your IP.
"The GPL is for protecting authors, not subverting them. Free speech, not Free beer."
??? I don't see your point. Again, I am not saying I want everything for free (as in free beer), I'm just saying that I want the freedom to decide where I use software (I will still buy the games). In other words, I don't agree with this trend of companies that provide a product and then try to legally prevent anyone from competing with them. This has happened with the Rio, N64, and others. So if emulators increase piracy, should we outlaw them - of course not. If this did happen, the courts could also rule that the internet is illegal because it encourages the piracy of copyrighted matterials (ie: texts and pictures). Its hardly worth protecting Nintendo (or any company) if it means setting such a precedence.
Microsoft IE emulates Netscape (Score:1)
Skipping the Chip (Score:1)
Just my thoughts.
Better Screen Quality (Score:1)
Boy this is stupid (Score:1)
Actually, the reverse should be done. A cheap, console-like appliance, that would let people do what they do on the computer, like surfing.
WebTV anyone?
DD64 (Score:1)
About 20 odd games can fit on a normal CD-R and they are fully playable.
This is something that they should be pursuing. A friend of mine just borrows the games from places like Blockbusters and then copies them.
This lawsuit is completely unfounded
Console Linux (Score:1)
suing Colt (Score:1)
Wow, what a narrow scope you have. I own several guns, along with several people that I know that all have guns. I know of nobody that uses them for illegal activities except the occasional shooting of glass bottles. useing them exclusively for illegal activities just tells me that you watch way too much tv. Get a life and spend some time in the real world.
ArsonSmith
how can they sue that which they cannot see? (Score:1)
So I am not sure how Nintendo plans on suing them?
Correct me if I am wrong.
k.
Nintendo is just as dumb as Atari... (Score:1)
eg: No center hole, or different wavelength of light required so it would be imposible to read with a regular cdrom or cd-burner etc...
illegal? (Score:1)
i thought there wasn't any problem with reverse-engineering as long as you don't have any prior knowledge of the technology that's being reverse-engineered.
someone tell me i'm wrong.
This seems like it has dubious legal merit (Score:1)