Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Nintendo issues CnD to tournament organizers for using "project slippi" an emulation mod allowing a 20 yr old game to be played online

On 11/23/2020 at 6:06 PM, wanderingfool2 said:

Should it be, no...is it, maybe.

Using a personal backup is legal (In the US) as precedented by Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc.

It is a perfect case of someone making a legal backup in a different medium (Live broadcast -> VHS) for personal use at a time of convenience for that person.

This argument failed in A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., and MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. because those involved distribution of those backups, which Bitter's example does not include.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wanderingfool2 said:

No, because again if the host is in a place where copyright laws aren't held (i.e. the actor isn't in violation of local law) downloading it is still illegal.  You are also focusing on a singular point and missing the entire argument that backup's are only allowed to be used as backups (otherwise it does constitute as copyright infringement).

 

Anyways, here is the Canadian law in regards to backup copies (US and I'm assuming Australia have similar terminology)

All 4 statements must hold true and statement a clearly states that you are wrong that you are allowed doing whatever you want with the backup.

There's more about making copies of computer programs a little later in the Canadian copyright act. It does say that people may backup their computer programs and also modify them (which bypassing DRM would be a case of) as necessary in order to use them:

 

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-42/page-13.html#docCont

Computer Programs

Marginal note:Permitted acts

30.6 It is not an infringement of copyright in a computer program for a person who owns a copy of the computer program that is authorized by the owner of the copyright, or has a licence to use a copy of the computer program, to

  • (a) reproduce the copy by adapting, modifying or converting it, or translating it into another computer language, if the person proves that the reproduced copy

    • (i) is essential for the compatibility of the computer program with a particular computer,

    • (ii) is solely for the person’s own use, and

    • (iii) was destroyed immediately after the person ceased to be the owner of the copy of the computer program or to have a licence to use it; or

  • (b) reproduce for backup purposes the copy or a reproduced copy referred to in paragraph (a) if the person proves that the reproduction for backup purposes was destroyed immediately after the person ceased to be the owner of the copy of the computer program or to have a licence to use it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

There's more about making copies of computer programs a little later in the Canadian copyright act. It does say that people may backup their computer programs and also modify them (which bypassing DRM would be a case of) as necessary in order to use them:

 

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-42/page-13.html#docCont

Computer Programs

Marginal note:Permitted acts

30.6 It is not an infringement of copyright in a computer program for a person who owns a copy of the computer program that is authorized by the owner of the copyright, or has a licence to use a copy of the computer program, to

  • (a) reproduce the copy by adapting, modifying or converting it, or translating it into another computer language, if the person proves that the reproduced copy

    • (i) is essential for the compatibility of the computer program with a particular computer,

    • (ii) is solely for the person’s own use, and

    • (iii) was destroyed immediately after the person ceased to be the owner of the copy of the computer program or to have a licence to use it; or

  • (b) reproduce for backup purposes the copy or a reproduced copy referred to in paragraph (a) if the person proves that the reproduction for backup purposes was destroyed immediately after the person ceased to be the owner of the copy of the computer program or to have a licence to use it.

Note that you can only modify the copy you make, you can't go sharing it. This provision is explicitly for those cases which are largely covered by virtualization/emulation of a legacy system, that otherwise would be considered copyright infringement.

 

Eg, you can move your virtualized Windows XP install from a physical machine to a virtual machine and run your legacy activeX accounting application on it. You still need to retain the license to use it.

 

 

Going back to the subject at hand the only way this tournament could have taken place is if the (remote) players were playing a console that had it's I/O virtualized over the internet. Which is obviously something that emulators have been doing because they can modify the data in the emulator to keep state in sync. If everyone owned at least a gamecube controller with a USB adapter, emulating the other side of the input becomes trivial, but the latency wouldn't work for fighting games (see Stadia.)

 

That's also why stadia controllers are controllers. Someone could rig up cheats if the i/o goes through the PC.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leonard French (actual copyright lawyer) has some words on this.

 

 

A lot of stuff mentioned here is stuff I already mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2020 at 3:27 PM, Delicieuxz said:

is solely for the person’s own use, and

Just to add as well, tournament use isn't for the person's own use really

3735928559 - Beware of the dead beef

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kisai said:

Leonard French (actual copyright lawyer) has some words on this.

 

 

A lot of stuff mentioned here is stuff I already mentioned.

 

Is there anything of substance here or is it just an expert offering his opinion? Only got to around halfway but so far he hasn't reference specific laws or past precedents or done anything other than "I say this". on top of that he hasn't touched on the different nationalities and the complications of that that are involved and he's repeatedly referenced the EULA. Even in the US those are dodgy legally speaking, outside the US it gets even worse.

 

I also don;t buy that the whole ROM thing is the issue personally, there are too many high profile groups out there, (including games done quick events), that have done similar things, (Crowd control has been run for example). If this was about ROMS i can name several individuals as well as several events that should have been C&D'd long since.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Newegg

×