Yuzu to pay $2.4 Million Dollars in Damage to Nintendo. Citra also affected. Asks Judge to set Legal Precedent against other Emulators.

[Mark Kaine]

19 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

System software is not really the same as the BIOS. System software may come bundled with BIOS updates, and the software itself may be considered 'firmware', but does it impact the board level firmware? I'm not an expert here, so if I'm wrong, hit me with the information. But it seems they are NOT the same thing. The PS3 System Software is literally the operating system, and an advanced one at that, and seems far too advanced to be considered a 'BIOS'. 

well... no, it (the "firmware") contains the "bios", like rpcs3 cant function without the "bios" (they call it that too) and its not provided by rpcs3 because that would be actually illegal. 

 

hence you either get it from your ps3 or just download it from official Sony site.  thats how it always worked... as said even ps4 is that way. (but there are no ps4 emulators at the moment afaik)

 

 

ps: idk how or where its actually done on the console,  but i do know that firmware updates will overwrite everything on that part of the console,  and that does indeed include the "bios"... thats why that works to this day.

 

(basically its literally like a bios update,  you cant do partial bios updates on pc either... afaik?) 

[Godlygamer23]

29 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

well... no, it (the "firmware") contains the "bios", like rpcs3 cant function without the "bios" (they call it that too) and its not provided by rpcs3 because that would be actually illegal. 

 

hence you either get it from your ps3 or just download it from official Sony site.  thats how it always worked... as said even ps4 is that way. (but there are no ps4 emulators at the moment afaik)

 

 

ps: idk how or where its actually done on the console,  but i do know that firmware updates will overwrite everything on that part of the console,  and that does indeed include the "bios"... thats why that works to this day.

 

(basically its literally like a bios update,  you cant do partial bios updates on pc either... afaik?) 

The PS3 stores the operating system onto integrated flash storage. However, BIOS might be a convenient term that's used, just like with modern motherboards - UEFI replaced the BIOS years ago, but the term "BIOS", or even "UEFI BIOS" are used to retain some level of familiarity with users. 

 

But I digress. It is one file and may contain both as necessary.

[wanderingfool2]

4 hours ago, rcmaehl said:

the legal precedent this may set will likely make it illegal

This was a settlement, not a legal precedent.

 

For legal precedent see Sony V Connectix; where Connectix effectively won the right to reverse engineer the bios.  While not entirely related, it's still relatively related to this.

 

The biggest thing though is that Nintendo went after them with the anti-circumvention measure, which in my opinion is one of the worst thought out portions of the DMCA.

 

That's why lots of emulators work in clean room kind of concepts, and don't talk about where/how to extract bioses.  All they need to know is that you provided a valid bios.

[jagdtigger]

4 hours ago, rcmaehl said:

Playstations

Actually you can download the fw from sony (at least for the ps3.

 

/on

Repo probably cloned at least a gazillion times so little tantruming n can have fun playing whack-a-mole......

[williamcll]

They probably profited off from this and they'll do it again

[Mark Kaine]

5 hours ago, williamcll said:

They probably profited off from this and they'll do it again

ngl i was thinking something along those lines, there's at least one of those that's "for profit" but I kinda think its the other one? (not sure) 

but you gotta wonder why them? 

 

and they agreed to 2.4? ok. where does that come from?

[LAwLz]

Two things I have seen other people report on, that makes this case different from other cases are:

1) Yuzu released a TOTK-optimized version of their emulator just a few hours after the official release, and they put that version behind a paywall.

2) Yuzu developers and moderators have encouraged and helped with piracy on their Discord.

 

I think it is a bit hard to take the stance of "we are just doing this to make people be able to play games on more powerful hardware" when you are doing those two things.

I think it is very sad that Yuzu is going away because I do see legitimate use cases for it, and reverse engineering shouldn't be illegal IMO. But the profit motivation, encouraging piracy, and possibly developing the emulator used leaked and pirated software makes it a lot harder to defend. Assuming those things are true of course.

[Mark Kaine]

59 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

) Yuzu released a TOTK-optimized version of their emulator just a few hours after the official release, and they put that version behind a paywall.

2) Yuzu developers and moderators have encouraged and helped with piracy on their Discord.

so it *was* yuzu... 

[Lunar River]

kind of surprised that the Yuzu devs had $2.4mil just sitting around to be able to settle so quickly

[Dracarris]

Well first of all, fuck you Nintendo. Fuck you into oblivion for everything you do.

 

Then, all things considered this whole story smells a bit fishy to me.

 

Next, I hope someone rents a server in some Micronesian island or some other remote location that is legally hard to come by and sets up a private gitlab or github and enables future development of these emulators.

[Sharkyx1]

2 hours ago, Lunar River said:

kind of surprised that the Yuzu devs had $2.4mil just sitting around to be able to settle so quickly

Probably not but there is probably some way to get a loan for legal settlement with a long term 

[MarkPol88]

2 hours ago, Lunar River said:

kind of surprised that the Yuzu devs had $2.4mil just sitting around to be able to settle so quickly

26 minutes ago, Sharkyx1 said:

Probably not but there is probably some way to get a loan for legal settlement with a long term 

 

Probably they will file for bankruptcy? Or do you think they really sit on 2.4 mil?

[Kisai]

3 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

so it *was* yuzu... 

This is the cornerstone of a lot of legal emulation. The people selling the hardware or software, legally, can not allow it to run commercial software without having the physical media.

 

Now, I know this sounds stupid, but bear with me. There was never anything stopping you from plugging your Nintendo Switch, 3DS, DS, or GBA/GB cart into your PC other than some kind of hardware dongle that someone has to make. They exist for the unencrypted carts (Eg NES/SNES/GB) where the console has no "BIOS" to speak of. You plug it into your PC, and the emulator sees a "rom" flash disk. Very awkward to do, but they exist. If Yuzu wanted to claim legitimacy, they should have released an open source Switch cart "USB drive" adapter, and the emulator would access it exactly how the Switch does, and thus the interoperability provision kicks in.  

 

I am over simplifying it, but that is what needs to happen with software emulators. There must be a way to play the physical hardware on the device to call it legit (Which is why the Optical media based console emulators can easily claim this.) I don't know of anyone who legitimately wants to play PS3/4/5 Xbox360 games on their PC when they still have a working console, but once that console dies (*cough*RROD*cough) you want to be able to play the stuff you paid for, and unfortunately, Microsoft in it's infinite wisdom has not yet released a Xbox/Xbox360 emulator for Windows to play the stuff you digitally paid for but the console kicked the bucket years ago.

 

And I mean this, even as someone who knows Flash carts are only ever used for piracy and zero homebrew games exist that people would actually justify owning one for. If the Console manufacturer is Unwilling to provide their own emulator on their current generation console to play the games the player ALREADY owns, then they should just butt out of interfering with emulator development unless they are going to release their own. And they should release their own instead of leaving it up to the pirates.

 

You can't honestly believe that emulator developers don't have access to dumps of every game released to test against. There's maybe 6 people on the planet that are that obsessive of a collector.

[BachChain]

3 hours ago, Lunar River said:

kind of surprised that the Yuzu devs had $2.4mil just sitting around to be able to settle so quickly

They don't. That number is probably Nintendo's estimate of all of the revenue from that project plus a whole lot of punitives. They agreed because they didn't have a choice

[Stahlmann]

The fact that they were monetising it probably put them at the top of the hit list, which is understandable from Nintendo's point of view. If they could have reasonably denied that they were involved in promoting piracy, they could probably have fought it out in court. The only situation in which such a settlement makes sense is after legal advice and the realisation that they are legally screwed. So they decide to cut their losses to "only" 2.4 million instead of spending a lot more on legal fees.

 

Would you really just give up when so much is at stake? Obviously not, if you had the chance to get out of it.

[Poinkachu]

3 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

So they decide to cut their losses to "only" 2.4 million instead of spending a lot more on legal fees.

Not to mention all the hassle & trouble of a dragged-on legal procedure.

[Holmes108]

2 hours ago, MarkPol88 said:

 

Probably they will file for bankruptcy? Or do you think they really sit on 2.4 mil?

 

No idea about their financials or cash on hand, of course, but one article I saw said they were making something like $30K a month on Patreon. There could be other donation streams too, so they could have it.

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, Stahlmann said:

The fact that they were monetising it probably put them at the top of the hit list, which is understandable from Nintendo's point of view. If they could have reasonably denied that they were involved in promoting piracy, they could probably have fought it out in court. The only situation in which such a settlement makes sense is after legal advice and the realisation that they are legally screwed. So they decide to cut their losses to "only" 2.4 million instead of spending a lot more on legal fees.

 

Would you really just give up when so much is at stake? Obviously not, if you had the chance to get out of it.

calling a patron monetization that doesn't come close to covering costs feels disingenuous. The devs are still essentially donating their time, they just are not paying as much out of pocket for the website. No one makes money in this scene they just gain experience. 

But if the rumors are true of them patron walling a patch for the new zelda game, that's where yuzu fucked up. 

[Mark Kaine]

7 minutes ago, starsmine said:

But if the rumors of them patron walling a patch for the new zelda game, that's where yuzu fucked up. 

that's the problem,  they've been doing that all the time apparently, so "monetization" accusations are well deserved (imho)

 

nintendo unintentionally the good guy?

[Sharkyx1]

3 hours ago, MarkPol88 said:

 

Probably they will file for bankruptcy? Or do you think they really sit on 2.4 mil?

I don't know how bankruptcy plays here but if I was to guess these people would have to take out massive long term loans, like remortgaging the house(if they own one)

[Sharkyx1]

1 minute ago, Mark Kaine said:

that's the problem,  they've doing all the time apparently, so "monetization" accusations are well deserved (imho)

 

nintendo unintentionally the good guy?

I don't think monetization is the issue here. I don't think that really plays into it 

[starsmine]

6 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

nintendo unintentionally the good guy?

good guy? no. 

because the patch came out AFTER the game launched according to rumors. so to say that encouraged piracy the way the lawsuit explicitly claims it did is not valid. There are a lot of people that instantly copy their physical media (movies is common) to play it. Like you would for the Zelda game because yuzu gives you a unquestionably a better experience.

[Poinkachu]

7 minutes ago, starsmine said:

good guy? no. 
because the patch came out AFTER the game launched according to rumors. so to say that encouraged piracy the way the lawsuit explicitly claims it did is not valid. There are a lot of people that instantly copy their physical media (movies is common) to play it. Like you would for the Zelda game because yuzu gives you a unquestionably a better experience.

 

IIRC my friend encountered a pirated link of TOTK with Yuzu Early Access dating to like 4th May 2023.

I can ask him to look at his browser history, but then again posting the link here would break rule

[Mihle]

12 minutes ago, Sharkyx1 said:

I don't know how bankruptcy plays here but if I was to guess these people would have to take out massive long term loans, like remortgaging the house(if they own one)

Are the individual people liable for it or just yuzu as a company? Are they even a true company?

[starsmine]

3 minutes ago, Poinkachu said:

IIRC my friend encountered a pirated link of TOTK with Yuzu Early Access dating to like 4th May 2023.

I can ask him to look at his browser history, but then again posting the link here would break rule

the emulator probably worked just fine pre launch on the game, the patch for it would have just been a performance patch, not a patch needed to run it. 

A good emulator being able to run games that have not come out yet is... expected behavior. But yea if the patch was required to run the leaked pre launch of TOTK, that is a different time line of events.