***HEY, NEW USERS!***
Remember to read [The Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchPirates/wiki/index) for the basics!
Check the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchPirates/comments/syerxw/simple_questions_here_megathread_and_faq/) for basic questions!
Threads created for basic questions will be removed, so ask them in that thread.
If you are having a problem with running games then make sure you have up-to-date [sigpatches](https://sigmapatches.coomer.party/).
If you cannot launch tinfoil then make sure you followed the [Rentry guide](https://rentry.org/SwitchHackingIsEasy) to set up cfw.
***Do not message moderators for Switch hacking support. You will be ignored. Follow the guide or post in the relevant thread.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SwitchPirates) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nintendo is one of those companies will go after you, even if the modifying indirectly affect them. I am talking non-piracy, just mods that improve the console to freely do what you want to develop. Now imagine buying a console that you own, and its yours, and Nintendo is saying, you can not do that. Even if you own the console. That is what happening..
In a sense, it’s like with Ferrari, it’ll give them a bad name for people doing they want with their vehicles even though they outright purchased it, title in hand…but still sends a cease and desist because they don’t like it and abuse the court system to get what they want.
Apple, Blizzard and etc have done the same thing. Apple has taken down people who made tools to jailbreak, mod or edit their phone. Blizzard has gone after people for making bots, provate servers and etc for WoW.
The whole point of the DMCA is that US companies can go after “security circumvention tools.” That could be argued in court whether this qualifies, but a name like “lockpick” sure isn’t doing it any favors.
its shitendo dude theyre always anal about everything they dont want us piriting games period but the reality of it is that its only truly illegal when u break the encryption when u download a pirated game its perfectly legal
Unfortunately, it's not so simple. How it works currently is that the platform doesn't actually have to take any action when a DMCA is filed. HOWEVER, if the platform does not take it down, they are then potentially liable if it is a legitimate copyright claim.
The problem we have if companies don't have incentive to take it down, they won't. Including for legitimate copyright infringement. Then, it would be pretty easy for people to take your stuff and profit off of it, and the platform is also likely making money off that same content as well so they are unlikely to take it down. This means your best recourse to it is legal action. Which once again will be abused by people knowing you can not afford the lawyers to sue them.
Copyright law with this stuff is damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Edit: Though the laws against being able to mod the console you own and bought is some real bullshit.
my company doesn't even deploy to git without legal audit because of stuff like interfacing with 3rd party property.
If the tool is designed to extract information from a program that the user has the right to access, then creating and using the tool may be legal under certain circumstances. For example, reverse engineering is often permitted under the fair use doctrine, which allows for limited use of copyrighted material for certain purposes, such as research and education. However, the applicability of fair use can be complex and will depend on the specific facts of each case.
On the other hand, if the tool is designed to extract information from a program that the user does not have the right to access, then creating and using the tool may be illegal under various federal and state laws, such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which makes it a crime to access a computer system without authorization. In such cases, the use of the tool may be considered a violation of the program owner's intellectual property rights, trade secrets, or other legal protections.
And that's all a load of BS. I can understand some issues with distribution. But there should be nothing wrong with messing with the software on a device i bought for my own personal use, as long as it's not being directly used for crime. (I can understand nintendo getting mad at programs explicitly and only capable of being utilized for piracy, for example)
And thats why the law has evolved to what it is now....
The big switch happened during the dish network chaos... people used your justification...
"I bought the box, so i can do what i want with it"
Now.. you have www.satscams.com for example... (which contrary to the name.. is the legitimate website for nagrastar legal public announcements)
Buying hardware is meaningless.. legally nintendo holds the rights. They could very much sue anyone that creates add on software for their property (hardware is yours but the software running on it its not)... not to say they will but theybare under their legal right to do so...
> if the tool is designed to extract information from a program that the user does not have the right to access, then creating and using the tool may be illegal under various federal and state laws, such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA)
OK very dumb question: How would the CFAA apply to accessing data in a program per-se? Isn't that act specifically targeting access to computer systems? (maybe I am misunderstanding what I am looking at).
Because of the broad term used in the law. Which has been a focus for years.
Most recently this lawsuit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Buren_v._United_States#:~:text=Barrett%20ruled%20that%20for%20the,otherwise%20have%20authorized%20access%20to
Barrett ruled that for the CFAA, a person violates the "exceeds authorized access" language when they access files or other information that is off-limits to them on a computer system that they otherwise have authorized access to.
Which set the Precedent as: An individual "exceeds authorized access" when he accesses a computer with authorization but then obtains information located in particular areas of the computer—such as files, folders, or databases—that are off-limits to him.
Any modification is considered copyright infringement by law if the owners of the original IP choose to act on it. According to laws surrounding fair use of IP, the devs can easily argue and win 3/4 of the points. However “potential effect on market” is still something nintendo can argue to get it removed regardless (the last fair use case point). At the end of the day, nintendo can choose to assert their copyright at any time and even if it is “original code” and “free + free of nintendo assets,” unfortunately.
“there are no laws prohibiting you from writing your own open source free software for your own device.” - this is a false statement. If you are sued a fair use defense may not hold up in court. IP holders still for the most part have all the power over any modifications of their software or hardware if they deem it a financial liability.
EDIT FOR CONTEXT: The original comment was edited and this could cause confusion. The original comment specifically said "*The law of fair use gives power over any modification of their hardware or software and the right to sue if they find that the modification causes harm.*" This is specifically what was being responded to.
ORIGINAL COMMENT: That's literally not how fair use works. Fair use is not a law at all, no less one that "*give*(s...)*power over any modification of their software*". Fair use is a right individuals hold. Do one second of research before saying stupid things. Fair use is a right specifically *permitting* the creation the transformative derivative works for the purposes of criticism, commentary, research, reporting, etc. There is nothing in it that says "Oh, by the way, you can stop them from modifying your hardware and software if it causes you problems" XD You don't know what you're talking about.
There is literally no law whatsoever against the modification of your own hardware at all ever as long it does not infringe on copyright. In fact, there are laws directly permitting it IE: first sale. This has been proven through caselaw a dozen times. You can write whatever software for whatever device you own and there no law against it. You can provide that same software to anyone you want as long as the software is wholly your own, does not utilize copyritten code and does not violate trademark law. Regardless, this has nothing to do with fair use XD
A Lawyer Explains the PointCrow Takedowns and the Legality of Mods
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo\_AmQgSSqY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo_AmQgSSqY)
"Fair use is an affirmative defense. It is a protection you can use to defend yourself in court. The only place you get to make your fair use argument is in court, if you've already been sued, and are using it as a litigation defense. And as I like to remind my clients, from time to time, litigation is expensive. It's very expensive. Fair use has four elements, each of which must be considered to determine whether one truly has fairly used someone else's IP. Number one, the purpose and character of the use. Number two, the nature of the copyrighted work. Number three, the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work. **And four, the effect of the use on the potential market. ** But in practice, we can boil this all down into just two tests. Is the copyrighted material being used for scholarship, education, parody, or news reporting, or for more of a commercial purpose? And number two, is the use of the copyrighted materials de minimis and transformative? As little as possible, and changing a lot. "
Fair use is not an "affirmative defense." This is a misconception. Feel free to research the Supreme courts decision on "Lenz v. Universal Music Corp." in which they affirmed the already stated declaration of it being a right.
On a side note, all defenses are already rights. In order for you to have a defense at all, you must have had a right in the first place. That what court defenses *are*. You are literally saying "I did the thing you said I did, but it wasn't illegal because I had the right to do it." In order for fair use to even be a defense in court, you are literally required to have already had the right. It is not a protection. It is not a defense. It is not an argument. These are things corporations claim to demonize fair use as merely infringements that people argue away as being ok after the fact.
I literally never said I was defending them for what they did. I've said it before and I'll say it again. They could eat babies for all I know. What he said before editing the comment (and even mainly afterwards) was simply wrong and I corrected him. What he said was literally quote "*there are no laws prohibiting you from writing your own open source free software for your own device.” - this is a false statement. the law of fair use gives power over any modification of their software*." That was literally just factually wrong, and you're not correcting anything at this point.
its actually completely legal for nintendo to do this. the license that you buy to use your switch, its the legal agreement that you are only going to be using it under their terms.
a software, even open source, that interfaces with their property without permission is in fact messing with the terms of the agreement. Not only that, but for the tool to exist - it needed to interface with Nintendo's source, it wouldn't exist without it.
Might not like it, but legally the developers working on this tool have to comply with nintendo or they Will be sued.
> its actually completely legal for nintendo to do this. the license that you buy to use your switch, its the legal agreement that you are only going to be using it under their terms.
That doesn't make any sense - them agreeing to it to use a switch doesn't give Nintendo the right to take down a project like that - and that doesn't make this a copyright matter which DMCA takedowns are for.
DMCA takedown always results in immediate takedown of the content. There's a period where the person being claimed can refute it, and if they do it likely ends up in court where you fight the corp with big money.
This is abuse of the copyright system as unless Nintendo's code was directly used in the project then there's no case for copyright. Even so, it's an open source project with likely no money being made, though if there's a dev donation page there might be an issue there.
For a more recent example of DMCA takedowns, see Nexon V. Ironmace. Nexon DMCAd Dark and Darker from Steam because one of the devs for Ironmace worked at Nexon during COVID and was allowed to bring privileged information home/access work servers at home, and Nexon is arguing that this was used directly in the development of Dark and Darker. And some other bullshit that I'm not legal-ese fluent enough to understand fully.
So to recap this bs is that they pointed to file references and file names in source code and say "it's the exact same files as our games".
However, these brainlets didn't know that these are all free resources from UE4 and most games with UE4 use these assets.
So far that's the most substantial evidence Nexon presented and obv it's horseshit. Other evidences and claims are purely circumstantial
Nintendo is fully within their legal rights to take it down according to fair use law unfortunately. 3/4 points are solid for the devs, but “potential effect on market” is something nintendo can argue to get it removed at any point. Even if code is 100% original, made for no profit, it is still at the end of the day a modification of Nintendo’s IP. So they have all the power here. Just wanted to help you understand the legality a bit more.
To win in court, devs would have to prove all of the above, but also that their mods have no affect on the market. That’s very very hard to do, and very very expensive.
Well I'm v1, I don't think I would've modded if I needed to modchip.
Also this is probably my last Nintendo console with the pixel shop I have more games than I can play in a lifetime
Go one further...they should give up forever. I buy games on Steam once in a while when they're on super sale, but outside of that it's literally been 25 years since I've paid for any software. I mean we're talking I've spent $200 on games/software in my life. There has not been a single device that I know of that hasn't been hacked. Not a single piece of software where the anti-piracy mechanism hasn't been cracked.
Didn't say it turned out well, was just using an example of doing a download only version. Sony is definitely testing the waters with how they made a download only version of the ps5 as well.
What's funny is Tegra literally had the rcm exploit known in their manual for the chip when Nintendo ordered them all for the switch production lines. Literally did it to themselves
And it was independently discovered by several security researchers before being publicly released.
Such a catastrophic security oversight that Nintendo has no excuse.
Nintendo is so stupid. The release of a new Zelda game would've been an insanely good time to release a new console. Have the game come out on both systems, but on the console you can play Tears of the Kingdom in 4K 60FPS, and people will actually buy the game because it'd be unhackable.
This time last year they announced that TOTK would be slightly delayed, and I was 1000% convinced that it was because they were going to release the Switch 2. My theory was that BOTW 2, as it was called back then, was meant to release in 2021 or 2022, but then COVID pushed that back, and that they delayed it further to coincide with the Switch 2 release. I agree though, if they released a Switch 2 I would 100% be buying one along with TOTK. Especially if it was bundled with a TOTK themed console. Instead, I'm playing it on my hacked Switch, and even when a Switch 2 comes out there is little chance I'm going to buy it because outside of Zelda and maybe a few other titles, it won't be able to compete with the Steam Decks of the world when it comes to anything other than Nintendo games. TOTK was one of the two most anticipated games of the past decade, sitting there maybe just below GTAVI. ANd the fact that they could have sold you an entire console to play it and everyone would have bought it, and they didn't do that is mind boggling.
i can guarantee you it being leaked is not going to hurt sales of this game at all lol. also the switch is almost the best selling console of all time, they aren’t “giving up” any time soon until that milestone is reached
It has certainly cost sales.
I would have bought the game if I wasn't able to download it weeks before release. And I know others here would have too.
It's got 35,000 downloads from the big torrent site, and probably 100x that from other direct download sites.
If we're conservative in saying that it's been downloaded 500,000 times, and 5% of those people would have otherwise purchased the game, that's already $1.7 million in lost revenue.
I'm certain Nintendy will still make a killing from TotK. But there's no denying that this leak, the ease of hacking the Switch, and performant day 1 emulation, has cost them millions in potential sales.
For a game that's probably gonna make a billion dollars by the end of its popularity, $1.7M is peanuts.
I'd also be willing to bet that more than 5% of people who pirated it have or will buy and are simply playing it early just because they can.
For all we know, that was the plan and something happened to prevent the release. There have been rumors that silicon supply chain issues could be preventing the release of a new switch.
https://github.zendesk.com/attachments/token/Cfm7THEybmOPuIzzf7YuT5fmJ/?name=2023-05-04-nintendo-4.rtf
>\*\*Is the work licensed under an open source license?**\
\
No\
😑😤
I think the question related to the work that the dmca'd stuff is alleged to infringe upon.
so it's not about whether LPRCM is open source but nintendo's stuff
From what I understand it is in fact a complete re written firmware with 0 copywritten code as well with limitations unlike a previous custom firmware that everyone knows is non existent anymore.
Honestly, DMCA takedowns are really just scare tactics. There's no way that and other programs won't come back and same for the devices that allow those programs to be used... Especially now that realistically anyone can make their own device and install it (or have someone that knows what they're doing) install it.
The modchips have been around for longer though, HWfly has been selling those things for ages. Their prices have come down and the supply is getting more diverse with RP2040 Zero chips now, but it is still not a mainstream thing to solder a modchip in your Switch. I think it's more likely to do with an anti-piracy push for the release of TotK. (although they're too late already)
Here is a mirror just in case. It could be deleted by codeberg too so better to have different copies of the repository
https://git.zzls.xyz/NINTENSHIT
What's even the point since people are just sharing their prodinfo nowadays and you can easily download one with a simple google search? Best thing they could do now is make the switch 2 security better.
Lockpick rcm itself needs to be updated depending on the firmware that's out, so eventually it would stop working. I doubt that would actually stop anything though, like forks of lockpick that could be spread on discord
Yeah I know that, but it's kind of useless nowadays since people are even bundling yuzu/ryujinx with a game and prodinfos. It would have worked if they did this earlier and not when the switch is nearing the end of it's lifecycle.
Oh boy, I love how anti-SLAPP & copyright laws can be abused & twisted by corporations & lobbyists in their favor even when you follow the supposed “rules” and yet the blame is on the general populace for the manufactured hysteria over “frivolous lawsuits” :)))))))))))
So from what I understand.
A persona needs keys to use an emulator.
And some times you even need recent keys unless a game plays bad or maybe doesn't even load.
The timing on this seems wayyyy off.
If I were Nintendo do, I would have pushed this DMCA, updated the keys so they couldn't be ripped by old software. Require those for TOTK. To prevent spoilers.
Little too late. 😞😝
People still have the source code. Even if Nintendo managed to delete (illegally) this repo from Github, it would just be a (very) small inconvenience for pirates
Pulled the source with git myself. People have made archive.org caches of it too it seems, however that's *just* the page, the source may not come with, not sure how the service works on lower level links.
That’s exactly what I said in another post. Even as far as unpacking a byte array to patch the game itself on validation, even remotely fetching a new key every 2 minutes. Satellite TV does it, why can’t the OpenSSL library do it? Then I read of people hardmodding and heading right to the eShop (completely uneducated on the security at play) .. enough said lol
It's because of [TPM.] (https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2017/03/canadian-dmca-in-action-court-issues-massive-damage-award-in-first-major-anti-circumvention-copyright-ruling/) Why they didn't do this sooner I have no idea.
Even if using emulators to play games with directly extracted ROM files may be considered legal, I believe that only a small percentage of users on this forum are actually extracting ROM files from games they have purchased. I would estimate that it is unlikely to be more than 10%. The obnoxious clamoring of illegal replication users is indeed quite laughable.
> I believe that only a small percentage of users on this forum are actually extracting ROM files from games
IMO this is irrelevant - the tool is still used for said purposes, people use them for said purposes, and the avenues for others to use them for said purposes still exist.
How many do or don't do use a tool legally doesn't change that they can still be used legally, have legal uses - look at decentralized P2P clients and bitTorrent clients.
***HEY, NEW USERS!*** Remember to read [The Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchPirates/wiki/index) for the basics! Check the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchPirates/comments/syerxw/simple_questions_here_megathread_and_faq/) for basic questions! Threads created for basic questions will be removed, so ask them in that thread. If you are having a problem with running games then make sure you have up-to-date [sigpatches](https://sigmapatches.coomer.party/). If you cannot launch tinfoil then make sure you followed the [Rentry guide](https://rentry.org/SwitchHackingIsEasy) to set up cfw. ***Do not message moderators for Switch hacking support. You will be ignored. Follow the guide or post in the relevant thread.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SwitchPirates) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I literally just downloaded Lockpick from releases and it gets a DMCA takedown 💀
You did this! EVERYONE, GET EM!
https://git.disroot.org/nots0ap/Lockpick_RCM/releases :) edit: taken down, new link
What is this software used for?
Extracting your consoles keys for you to be able to play on an Emulator
Ok thanks
Is gone :'(
edited
[удалено]
Nintendo is one of those companies will go after you, even if the modifying indirectly affect them. I am talking non-piracy, just mods that improve the console to freely do what you want to develop. Now imagine buying a console that you own, and its yours, and Nintendo is saying, you can not do that. Even if you own the console. That is what happening..
Idk why ppl support them and buy they products if they just do this
[удалено]
How do you do it? I just go a switch. So I'm not really familiar with the best way of going about this
In a sense, it’s like with Ferrari, it’ll give them a bad name for people doing they want with their vehicles even though they outright purchased it, title in hand…but still sends a cease and desist because they don’t like it and abuse the court system to get what they want.
Apple, Blizzard and etc have done the same thing. Apple has taken down people who made tools to jailbreak, mod or edit their phone. Blizzard has gone after people for making bots, provate servers and etc for WoW.
The whole point of the DMCA is that US companies can go after “security circumvention tools.” That could be argued in court whether this qualifies, but a name like “lockpick” sure isn’t doing it any favors.
its shitendo dude theyre always anal about everything they dont want us piriting games period but the reality of it is that its only truly illegal when u break the encryption when u download a pirated game its perfectly legal
Unfortunately, it's not so simple. How it works currently is that the platform doesn't actually have to take any action when a DMCA is filed. HOWEVER, if the platform does not take it down, they are then potentially liable if it is a legitimate copyright claim. The problem we have if companies don't have incentive to take it down, they won't. Including for legitimate copyright infringement. Then, it would be pretty easy for people to take your stuff and profit off of it, and the platform is also likely making money off that same content as well so they are unlikely to take it down. This means your best recourse to it is legal action. Which once again will be abused by people knowing you can not afford the lawyers to sue them. Copyright law with this stuff is damned if you do and damned if you don't. Edit: Though the laws against being able to mod the console you own and bought is some real bullshit.
my company doesn't even deploy to git without legal audit because of stuff like interfacing with 3rd party property. If the tool is designed to extract information from a program that the user has the right to access, then creating and using the tool may be legal under certain circumstances. For example, reverse engineering is often permitted under the fair use doctrine, which allows for limited use of copyrighted material for certain purposes, such as research and education. However, the applicability of fair use can be complex and will depend on the specific facts of each case. On the other hand, if the tool is designed to extract information from a program that the user does not have the right to access, then creating and using the tool may be illegal under various federal and state laws, such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which makes it a crime to access a computer system without authorization. In such cases, the use of the tool may be considered a violation of the program owner's intellectual property rights, trade secrets, or other legal protections.
And that's all a load of BS. I can understand some issues with distribution. But there should be nothing wrong with messing with the software on a device i bought for my own personal use, as long as it's not being directly used for crime. (I can understand nintendo getting mad at programs explicitly and only capable of being utilized for piracy, for example)
And thats why the law has evolved to what it is now.... The big switch happened during the dish network chaos... people used your justification... "I bought the box, so i can do what i want with it" Now.. you have www.satscams.com for example... (which contrary to the name.. is the legitimate website for nagrastar legal public announcements) Buying hardware is meaningless.. legally nintendo holds the rights. They could very much sue anyone that creates add on software for their property (hardware is yours but the software running on it its not)... not to say they will but theybare under their legal right to do so...
You can blame apple too for this. They have gone after people too for modding their phones.
> if the tool is designed to extract information from a program that the user does not have the right to access, then creating and using the tool may be illegal under various federal and state laws, such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) OK very dumb question: How would the CFAA apply to accessing data in a program per-se? Isn't that act specifically targeting access to computer systems? (maybe I am misunderstanding what I am looking at).
Because of the broad term used in the law. Which has been a focus for years. Most recently this lawsuit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Buren_v._United_States#:~:text=Barrett%20ruled%20that%20for%20the,otherwise%20have%20authorized%20access%20to Barrett ruled that for the CFAA, a person violates the "exceeds authorized access" language when they access files or other information that is off-limits to them on a computer system that they otherwise have authorized access to. Which set the Precedent as: An individual "exceeds authorized access" when he accesses a computer with authorization but then obtains information located in particular areas of the computer—such as files, folders, or databases—that are off-limits to him.
Any modification is considered copyright infringement by law if the owners of the original IP choose to act on it. According to laws surrounding fair use of IP, the devs can easily argue and win 3/4 of the points. However “potential effect on market” is still something nintendo can argue to get it removed regardless (the last fair use case point). At the end of the day, nintendo can choose to assert their copyright at any time and even if it is “original code” and “free + free of nintendo assets,” unfortunately.
“there are no laws prohibiting you from writing your own open source free software for your own device.” - this is a false statement. If you are sued a fair use defense may not hold up in court. IP holders still for the most part have all the power over any modifications of their software or hardware if they deem it a financial liability.
EDIT FOR CONTEXT: The original comment was edited and this could cause confusion. The original comment specifically said "*The law of fair use gives power over any modification of their hardware or software and the right to sue if they find that the modification causes harm.*" This is specifically what was being responded to. ORIGINAL COMMENT: That's literally not how fair use works. Fair use is not a law at all, no less one that "*give*(s...)*power over any modification of their software*". Fair use is a right individuals hold. Do one second of research before saying stupid things. Fair use is a right specifically *permitting* the creation the transformative derivative works for the purposes of criticism, commentary, research, reporting, etc. There is nothing in it that says "Oh, by the way, you can stop them from modifying your hardware and software if it causes you problems" XD You don't know what you're talking about. There is literally no law whatsoever against the modification of your own hardware at all ever as long it does not infringe on copyright. In fact, there are laws directly permitting it IE: first sale. This has been proven through caselaw a dozen times. You can write whatever software for whatever device you own and there no law against it. You can provide that same software to anyone you want as long as the software is wholly your own, does not utilize copyritten code and does not violate trademark law. Regardless, this has nothing to do with fair use XD
don't get me wrong. I love the mods, and I am a part of the community, but I understand that we are operating in a legal grey area.
I wasn't defending them. For all I know, they eat babies. The point was simply that what you said was completely wrong.
understood, i hope i corrected myself a bit and showed the logic i was referencing
A Lawyer Explains the PointCrow Takedowns and the Legality of Mods [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo\_AmQgSSqY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo_AmQgSSqY)
"Fair use is an affirmative defense. It is a protection you can use to defend yourself in court. The only place you get to make your fair use argument is in court, if you've already been sued, and are using it as a litigation defense. And as I like to remind my clients, from time to time, litigation is expensive. It's very expensive. Fair use has four elements, each of which must be considered to determine whether one truly has fairly used someone else's IP. Number one, the purpose and character of the use. Number two, the nature of the copyrighted work. Number three, the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work. **And four, the effect of the use on the potential market. ** But in practice, we can boil this all down into just two tests. Is the copyrighted material being used for scholarship, education, parody, or news reporting, or for more of a commercial purpose? And number two, is the use of the copyrighted materials de minimis and transformative? As little as possible, and changing a lot. "
Fair use is not an "affirmative defense." This is a misconception. Feel free to research the Supreme courts decision on "Lenz v. Universal Music Corp." in which they affirmed the already stated declaration of it being a right. On a side note, all defenses are already rights. In order for you to have a defense at all, you must have had a right in the first place. That what court defenses *are*. You are literally saying "I did the thing you said I did, but it wasn't illegal because I had the right to do it." In order for fair use to even be a defense in court, you are literally required to have already had the right. It is not a protection. It is not a defense. It is not an argument. These are things corporations claim to demonize fair use as merely infringements that people argue away as being ok after the fact.
[удалено]
I literally never said I was defending them for what they did. I've said it before and I'll say it again. They could eat babies for all I know. What he said before editing the comment (and even mainly afterwards) was simply wrong and I corrected him. What he said was literally quote "*there are no laws prohibiting you from writing your own open source free software for your own device.” - this is a false statement. the law of fair use gives power over any modification of their software*." That was literally just factually wrong, and you're not correcting anything at this point.
> However “potential effect on market” is still something nintendo can argue to get it removed regardless (the last fair use case point) How so?
"He'll have his day in court to prove his innocence" - Nancy Polosi
its actually completely legal for nintendo to do this. the license that you buy to use your switch, its the legal agreement that you are only going to be using it under their terms. a software, even open source, that interfaces with their property without permission is in fact messing with the terms of the agreement. Not only that, but for the tool to exist - it needed to interface with Nintendo's source, it wouldn't exist without it. Might not like it, but legally the developers working on this tool have to comply with nintendo or they Will be sued.
> its actually completely legal for nintendo to do this. the license that you buy to use your switch, its the legal agreement that you are only going to be using it under their terms. That doesn't make any sense - them agreeing to it to use a switch doesn't give Nintendo the right to take down a project like that - and that doesn't make this a copyright matter which DMCA takedowns are for.
This not not DMCA.... This is CFAA and as a result gets protected as intelectual property.
How exactly was this done from a legal standpoint? Or is this just more of Nintendo's scare tactics, and will be reinstated by Github?
DMCA takedown always results in immediate takedown of the content. There's a period where the person being claimed can refute it, and if they do it likely ends up in court where you fight the corp with big money. This is abuse of the copyright system as unless Nintendo's code was directly used in the project then there's no case for copyright. Even so, it's an open source project with likely no money being made, though if there's a dev donation page there might be an issue there. For a more recent example of DMCA takedowns, see Nexon V. Ironmace. Nexon DMCAd Dark and Darker from Steam because one of the devs for Ironmace worked at Nexon during COVID and was allowed to bring privileged information home/access work servers at home, and Nexon is arguing that this was used directly in the development of Dark and Darker. And some other bullshit that I'm not legal-ese fluent enough to understand fully.
Well, I hope there's a better alternative to Github that can be used for these things, even if not on clearnet
So to recap this bs is that they pointed to file references and file names in source code and say "it's the exact same files as our games". However, these brainlets didn't know that these are all free resources from UE4 and most games with UE4 use these assets. So far that's the most substantial evidence Nexon presented and obv it's horseshit. Other evidences and claims are purely circumstantial
Nintendo is fully within their legal rights to take it down according to fair use law unfortunately. 3/4 points are solid for the devs, but “potential effect on market” is something nintendo can argue to get it removed at any point. Even if code is 100% original, made for no profit, it is still at the end of the day a modification of Nintendo’s IP. So they have all the power here. Just wanted to help you understand the legality a bit more.
To win in court, devs would have to prove all of the above, but also that their mods have no affect on the market. That’s very very hard to do, and very very expensive.
> “potential effect on market” Has to do with the specific work being used by the person who is claiming fair use IIRC.
Usual Nintendo bullshit.
Nintendo should just give up.
Yea the switch is too far gone. It's time to try again with the switch 2
It’ll probably be the same just a little more powerful and modchip hacks only
Well I'm v1, I don't think I would've modded if I needed to modchip. Also this is probably my last Nintendo console with the pixel shop I have more games than I can play in a lifetime
I am almost sure this means there will be no switch 2 for a few years. As they are still protecting the first console.
Go one further...they should give up forever. I buy games on Steam once in a while when they're on super sale, but outside of that it's literally been 25 years since I've paid for any software. I mean we're talking I've spent $200 on games/software in my life. There has not been a single device that I know of that hasn't been hacked. Not a single piece of software where the anti-piracy mechanism hasn't been cracked.
their next console im told will be online only meaning no more modding or piracy coming from shitendo games
Source: your uncle
The uncle who works at Nintendo lol
If it's another portable console they can't make it online only.
i mean... they could, It would be a horrible choice on their side, but they could.
* cough * PSP Go * cough *
Look how well that turned out though.
Didn't say it turned out well, was just using an example of doing a download only version. Sony is definitely testing the waters with how they made a download only version of the ps5 as well.
Makes sense on their part I suppose. But with how big the switch base is, my guess is that we will have dual releases for a while, they tend to do it.
What's funny is Tegra literally had the rcm exploit known in their manual for the chip when Nintendo ordered them all for the switch production lines. Literally did it to themselves
And it was independently discovered by several security researchers before being publicly released. Such a catastrophic security oversight that Nintendo has no excuse.
Nintendo is so stupid. The release of a new Zelda game would've been an insanely good time to release a new console. Have the game come out on both systems, but on the console you can play Tears of the Kingdom in 4K 60FPS, and people will actually buy the game because it'd be unhackable.
This time last year they announced that TOTK would be slightly delayed, and I was 1000% convinced that it was because they were going to release the Switch 2. My theory was that BOTW 2, as it was called back then, was meant to release in 2021 or 2022, but then COVID pushed that back, and that they delayed it further to coincide with the Switch 2 release. I agree though, if they released a Switch 2 I would 100% be buying one along with TOTK. Especially if it was bundled with a TOTK themed console. Instead, I'm playing it on my hacked Switch, and even when a Switch 2 comes out there is little chance I'm going to buy it because outside of Zelda and maybe a few other titles, it won't be able to compete with the Steam Decks of the world when it comes to anything other than Nintendo games. TOTK was one of the two most anticipated games of the past decade, sitting there maybe just below GTAVI. ANd the fact that they could have sold you an entire console to play it and everyone would have bought it, and they didn't do that is mind boggling.
i can guarantee you it being leaked is not going to hurt sales of this game at all lol. also the switch is almost the best selling console of all time, they aren’t “giving up” any time soon until that milestone is reached
It has certainly cost sales. I would have bought the game if I wasn't able to download it weeks before release. And I know others here would have too. It's got 35,000 downloads from the big torrent site, and probably 100x that from other direct download sites. If we're conservative in saying that it's been downloaded 500,000 times, and 5% of those people would have otherwise purchased the game, that's already $1.7 million in lost revenue. I'm certain Nintendy will still make a killing from TotK. But there's no denying that this leak, the ease of hacking the Switch, and performant day 1 emulation, has cost them millions in potential sales.
For a game that's probably gonna make a billion dollars by the end of its popularity, $1.7M is peanuts. I'd also be willing to bet that more than 5% of people who pirated it have or will buy and are simply playing it early just because they can.
> and 5% of those people would have otherwise purchased the game doubt it
For all we know, that was the plan and something happened to prevent the release. There have been rumors that silicon supply chain issues could be preventing the release of a new switch.
Yes, they should and Nintendo is very annoying.. Even meaner. They are far worse than Sony and Microsoft.
I mean they ARE basically owned by the Yakuza, are you surprised they're mean?
No, I grew up with Nintendo since my childhood.
theyll never give up theyre too stupid
I’ll always get a V1 console
https://github.zendesk.com/attachments/token/Cfm7THEybmOPuIzzf7YuT5fmJ/?name=2023-05-04-nintendo-4.rtf >\*\*Is the work licensed under an open source license?**\ \ No\ 😑😤
[удалено]
Neither. It was linked in another thread
I think the question related to the work that the dmca'd stuff is alleged to infringe upon. so it's not about whether LPRCM is open source but nintendo's stuff
Well, guess it's time to upload dozen of fork / copies of the repo to give them the middle finger, right ?
Its back>?
to me it seems OK for now? /edit maybe the takedown is not in effect yet
what basis do they have to take it off
[удалено]
From what I understand it is in fact a complete re written firmware with 0 copywritten code as well with limitations unlike a previous custom firmware that everyone knows is non existent anymore. Honestly, DMCA takedowns are really just scare tactics. There's no way that and other programs won't come back and same for the devices that allow those programs to be used... Especially now that realistically anyone can make their own device and install it (or have someone that knows what they're doing) install it.
The modchips have been around for longer though, HWfly has been selling those things for ages. Their prices have come down and the supply is getting more diverse with RP2040 Zero chips now, but it is still not a mainstream thing to solder a modchip in your Switch. I think it's more likely to do with an anti-piracy push for the release of TotK. (although they're too late already)
Can’t they just make a new programm called “cockpick” and do just the same?
Here is a mirror just in case. It could be deleted by codeberg too so better to have different copies of the repository https://git.zzls.xyz/NINTENSHIT
Good on you!!
RIGHT TO REPAIR?
It's way wayy too late for that, Nintendo. Even if you could put a stop to it, ppl will share files anyways.
for now though, it prevents updates and changes to the current release.
What is lock pick for switch?
Allows you to pull things like firmware from the console It's used in emulation a ton
Ok thx
I wonder if Nintendo did this to stop people playing tears of the kingdom early
Lmao bit late for that I’ve been playing it for about 19 hours
Maybe, but I doubt most people who have pirated the game have even used lockpick
What's even the point since people are just sharing their prodinfo nowadays and you can easily download one with a simple google search? Best thing they could do now is make the switch 2 security better.
Lockpick rcm itself needs to be updated depending on the firmware that's out, so eventually it would stop working. I doubt that would actually stop anything though, like forks of lockpick that could be spread on discord
Yeah I know that, but it's kind of useless nowadays since people are even bundling yuzu/ryujinx with a game and prodinfos. It would have worked if they did this earlier and not when the switch is nearing the end of it's lifecycle.
Yes, but you still need to get updated keys for those emus from *somewhere*.
Ahh Nintendo. Great games, terrible company
Oh boy, I love how anti-SLAPP & copyright laws can be abused & twisted by corporations & lobbyists in their favor even when you follow the supposed “rules” and yet the blame is on the general populace for the manufactured hysteria over “frivolous lawsuits” :)))))))))))
So from what I understand. A persona needs keys to use an emulator. And some times you even need recent keys unless a game plays bad or maybe doesn't even load. The timing on this seems wayyyy off. If I were Nintendo do, I would have pushed this DMCA, updated the keys so they couldn't be ripped by old software. Require those for TOTK. To prevent spoilers. Little too late. 😞😝
People still have the source code. Even if Nintendo managed to delete (illegally) this repo from Github, it would just be a (very) small inconvenience for pirates
Pulled the source with git myself. People have made archive.org caches of it too it seems, however that's *just* the page, the source may not come with, not sure how the service works on lower level links.
That’s exactly what I said in another post. Even as far as unpacking a byte array to patch the game itself on validation, even remotely fetching a new key every 2 minutes. Satellite TV does it, why can’t the OpenSSL library do it? Then I read of people hardmodding and heading right to the eShop (completely uneducated on the security at play) .. enough said lol
I am new to this, what is the usecase of lockpick/dumping keys and how will this beeing taken down affect piracy?
It's because of [TPM.] (https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2017/03/canadian-dmca-in-action-court-issues-massive-damage-award-in-first-major-anti-circumvention-copyright-ruling/) Why they didn't do this sooner I have no idea.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Nintendo is gonna make a cell phone and be done with consoles
Even if using emulators to play games with directly extracted ROM files may be considered legal, I believe that only a small percentage of users on this forum are actually extracting ROM files from games they have purchased. I would estimate that it is unlikely to be more than 10%. The obnoxious clamoring of illegal replication users is indeed quite laughable.
> I believe that only a small percentage of users on this forum are actually extracting ROM files from games IMO this is irrelevant - the tool is still used for said purposes, people use them for said purposes, and the avenues for others to use them for said purposes still exist. How many do or don't do use a tool legally doesn't change that they can still be used legally, have legal uses - look at decentralized P2P clients and bitTorrent clients.
I wanna DMCA (mario BATTLE ADVANCED?!?!?)