[echelon]

> ...I don't follow? You're suggesting businesses have a right to attention?

Companies should be able to be paid for their products. You have the freedom of taking your money and attention elsewhere, but the illicit piracy of these products is not good for the labor and capital that went into making the product.

In a market of entertainment choices, there are a limited number of dollars that can and will be spent. Certain people are cheating the system to get free entertainment and to double dip.

A gamer that enjoys both Xbox and Nintendo games can get two for the price of one by pirating the latter. Even if there is equal demand for both products, the supply side has been illegally distorted. This doubly lowers the competitive fitness of the latter company.

If I bought and paid for the game, I should be free to emulate. But that's not what's happening here.

> As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, they had rules against ROM distribution and some of the links shared as evidence that they didn't have been by unrelated people.

As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, Yuzu embraced piracy. They knew it was happening and focused their energies on enabling new releases and getting users to pay for early access builds.

[maxrecursion]

Emulation is great because it preserves games that would be lost to time after the physical media dies off. Emulation that allows piracy of brand new games is straight up stealing. While I don't feel sorry for large corporations because they screw everyone over as well, there are plenty of cheap older games people can play, or get game pass.

People like to act like they are entitled to these new releases for free. They aren't. Play another game and get it for cheaper later, or emulate it long after its release.

[autoexec]

Copying isn't theft, and while you might personally feel that there are zero valid reasons to emulate a game other than for the preservation of old titles I'd expect plenty of others would disagree.

[sonnhy]

I think the difference between copying 1:1 game and re-creating the game is what can be the discriminator. If you get a game, raw data, and copy bit per bit you're pirating, while if someone re-creates a whole game fro scratch it's a different story.

I would argue that re-creating from scratch is more legal than a straight copy of the original data.

[pxc]

> I would argue that re-creating from scratch is more legal than a straight copy of the original data.

Maybe it should be, but it isn't. From-scratch fan remakes get shut down on copyright grounds all the time.

[echelon]

> Copying isn't theft

What about your private key?

What about your bitcoin?

What about your nude photos, sex videos, text messages, emails, and personal health information?

What about your brain and its memories?

What about your intellectual outputs for training AI and selling your skills below your wage?

What if you worked for a game company and they let you go because they didn't hit sales targets?

...

> I'd expect plenty of others would disagree.

What's your use case? That you want better wifi or faster FPS on the Switch?

Because a lot of people on this same forum argue that we need complete control over our iPhone/Android devices. No App Store, no Apple fees, no Apple control. Yet these same people get argued down by much of the audience here.

I'd imagine that many of those arguing in favor of Apple's racket are the same ones arguing it's okay to pirate Nintendo games.

Nintendo has one device that is specialized for a single purpose, and it's positioned in a marketplace full of alternatives. People have broken it and are circumventing its only revenue lever.

This isn't as inconvenient for you as it is for the company scrambling to maintain its most important revenue stream.

[autoexec]

> What about your private key? What about your bitcoin? What about your nude photos, sex videos, text messages, emails, and personal health information? What about your brain and its memories?

Those are private. Things openly for sale to the public are not. Someone copying my private data still isn't theft though, since I still possess what was "taken". Much of what you listed (text messages, emails, nudes, health info) have already been copied many times by third parties and on hardware I have no access to or control over and some will likely continue to be copied. As long as my privacy is preserved it really isn't a problem because regardless of those copies I haven't lost anything.

> What about your intellectual outputs for training AI

That may or may not be copyright infringement (we'll see), but it isn't theft.

> What if you worked for a game company and they let you go because they didn't hit sales targets?

That's just life.

> What's your use case? That you want better wifi or faster FPS on the Switch?

There are endless reasons why people might want to emulate a game. Better portability, better performance, personal backups, correcting bugs, accessibility, fan/hobbyist projects, tool assisted speed runs, etc.

> a lot of people on this same forum argue that we need complete control over our iPhone/Android devices.

I'd agree with those people

> I'd imagine that many of those arguing in favor of Apple's racket are the same ones arguing it's okay to pirate Nintendo games.

I'd imagine that a lot of people who feel that we should have control over the software we use and the environment we use it in would support emulation since it too empowers the user.

> Nintendo has one device that is specialized for a single purpose, and it's positioned in a marketplace full of alternatives. People have broken it and are circumventing its only revenue lever.

No one owes Nintendo or their bad business model anything. If I buy a game, I should have the right to do what I want with it. If I come up with a way to play that game on other hardware, or to edit the code in memory to give me extra lives, or to enable the use of a new interface/controller, I should be able to. If having the ability to do those things allows pirates to play a game without paying Nintendo for it that's not my problem. There are perfectly valid reasons beyond piracy for emulation, and that's enough to justify its existence.

It's on Nintendo to change their business model to make their products more appealing to people who currently choose not to give them money. The rest of us shouldn't be forced to have our hands tied in order to preserve Nintendo's desired profits.

[account42]

> Companies should be able to be paid for their products. You have the freedom of taking your money and attention elsewhere, but the illicit piracy of these products is not good for the labor and capital that went into making the product.

Do companies also have a moral obligation to release their creations in the public domain once their investment has been recouped? Why not?

[sifar]

What about people borrowing video games from the library ? Should we ban that too since the companies are missing on those apparent sales.