this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
331 points (97.4% liked)

Games

18091 readers
251 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

You know what's a really good defence: Not being based in the fucking US.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All that needs to be asked of them is "are you willing to pay the court costs associated with Nintendo taking you to court, and then the millions of dollars to Nintendo if you lose?". If not then they shouldn't even touch it, because Nintendo will come after them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Nah it's pretty easy to kill litigation before it starts if things step up. If you receive a cease and desist and don't want to fight it, you can shut it down and never look back. If you're served paperwork with a court date, the initial hearings can get the lawsuit thrown out if there are no grounds for a case on intellectual property infringement, one of which is "non-profit". In fact, a lot of people would argue that Yuzu was completely in the right to do what they did despite having a link to their patreon, but at that point the courts might decide either way and litigation costs money.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

if there are no grounds for a case on intellectual property infringement, one of which is “non-profit”.

These guys have said right from the get go that they're trying to profit off it though. Whoopsies.

Also the fact that its the exact same code that Yuzu ran, which just settled with nintendo for millions of dollars, is going to influence any future cases.

but at that point the courts might decide either way and litigation costs money.

Yeah so like I said - they have to be prepared to fight nintendo or just shut it down almost immediately.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

After consulting with an unnamed "someone with legal experience" (Sharpie would only say "they claimed three years of law school"), the Suyu development team has decided to avoid "any monetization," Sharpie said. The project's GitLab page clearly states that "we do not intend to make money or profit from this project," an important declaration after Nintendo cited Yuzu's profitability a few times in its recent lawsuit.

From the article, they explicitly state they're not trying to profit.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

but at that point the courts might decide either way and litigation costs money.

It also sets a precedent which makes it easier for Nintendo and other companies to sue open source developers. It would have been bad for everyone in the emulation community if they went to court and lost.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_law

[–] [email protected] 62 points 1 year ago

They could start by developing in the open and not in some shitty discord group.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Still the same Contributor License Agreement as Yuzu to make proprietary versions. They've learned nothing.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

well they're not completely proprietary...
ea is just latest master, merged with unspecified list of work-in-progress prs, and built together with custom branding.
there's zero proprietary code in it....
but you don't know what code specifically was used to build it.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

well they’re not completely proprietary…

The point of a CLA is to eventually sell proprietary versions. There is objectively no need for a CLA in a fully FOSS/GPL application because the GPL already clarifies everything that's needed.

Edit: "suyu also needs to be a product. We need to find ways to monetise the project" Direct quote from https://gitlab.com/suyu-emu/suyu/-/wikis/Contributor-License-Agreement-Policy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

well the limitation was against republishing the ea-branded versions. there's nothing stopping you from doing whatever you want with the regular source tree and all the code is there, even if some of it is not merged...

some form of monetization is pretty much required (due to the hardware required to reverse engineer) and I'm really fond of the yuzu's and skyline's "early access" model (since it doesn't actually paywall anything, and keeps the project fully open)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No CLA is needed to sell open source software. If fact the right to sell is a mandate by both the open source definition and the free software definition.

Also they said no monetisation. That means none at all. Do they want to get sued by Nintendo and pay millions for the rest of their lives?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

well ryu do monetize their work and haven't been sued... yet.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Suyu claims to do no monetisation to avoid getting sued but explicitly spells out to sell partially proprietary versions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What if both the new version and old version of the license has something you disagree with in them?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then they should have forked different software like Ryujinx.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Oh I was thinking it was an original work.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And that's what's gonna fuck them; making money off it. Unless they have enough money to actually go to court and fight Nintendo.

load more comments
view more: next ›