Everyone in the emulation scene can breathe a sigh of relief.
Fuck Nintendo. Get those repos duplicated.
Why is this a sigh of relief? Nintendo has bullied an emulator’s dev team and got $2.4 millions out of it. If I was an emu dev, I certainly would not be happy with this news.
Nintendo went after a emu dev team that was actively (and demonstratively) enabling piracy for something they are currently selling. On top of that, the dev team is making significant money off of that work, to the tune of 30k/mo. Every other dev is probably thinking “finally, the other shoe drops on this obvious outcome”, most avoid making money off it, and also avoid current systems, both for just this reason. The relieving part is Nintendo’s argument isn’t about the emulator specifically,
there’s nothing in the injunction stopping yuzu from continuing, and a settlement means no legal precedent.Edit: Read more, the settlement includes stopping development.
got $2.4 millions out of it
Did they really? I doubt their LLC had that much money. But honestly I don’t even know what or how much money they would have there, I guess it was used for the webpage and similar, maybe pay themselves from the Patreon… but I guess that would be gone monthly… Idk… Maybe they rented some office space??? Idk…
They will declare it bankrupt and that’s the end of it…and unless they owned something with it which I doubt there isn’t much assets if any to give Nintendo or sell.
The main link is to the motion paper. This is the link to the actual agreed-upon final judgment and injunction:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.rid.56980/gov.uscourts.rid.56980.10.1.pdf
In short, Yuzu agreed to stop developing and distributing the emulator, cannot distribute source code, assign it to a new entity, encourage any IP violations, and must surrender their domain.
The findings also include admissions that the purpose of the Yuzu software was “primarily” designed to circumvent technical measures in violation of the DMCA.
So it appears Yuzu didn’t “win” in any real sense. Nintendo got a chilling amount of damages, effectively their full injunction, and also some agreed-upon “findings of fact” that may serve Nintendo in future litigation to justify claims that emulators are “primarily” designed to circumvent technical measures and circumvent the DMCA.
Someone mentioned this on Reddit, but I wonder how poorly discovery would have gone for Yuzu if the lawsuit had continued.
I can’t imagine they were super careful about not bringing up the piracy side of things in various internal and even external communications. I can’t help but wonder if they basically talked about or even bragged about how much money they get from adding support for games like TotK.
It’s a good point. Honestly, unless everyone in a company is extremely careful, non-lawyers will say very incriminating crap at some point. I think Grokster (the vicarious infringement case Nintendo was probably going to rely on) had quite a bit of that.
This is bad.
Interesting. Wonder what that means in terms of github. Yuzu isn’t technically distributing the source, is Nintendo taking ownership of it? What stops someone from forking the repo? Who is “yuzu” that’s paying this bill?
Presumably forks remain public on Github at their own risk, but Nintendo may shift to a DMCA removal policy now that are about to have a judgment.
The judgment has two sections, one for people who have “privity” and more direct relationships with Tropic Haze, and another for “all third parties acting in active concert and participation with” Tropic Haze. The latter enjoins only sharing code and decryption keys. So it certainly sounds like this was drafted to capture, in the Court’s order, people who don’t have a relationship but are code-forking.
Nintendo doesn’t have nearly as clean legal leverage for randos and individuals that don’t have a company built around this emulator, but I actually predict they’ll do GitHub DMCA removals on forks based on a broad reading of the injunction.
There is no judgement in a settlement, and settlements are not case-law. The court has little to do with the settlement as it is simply a binding agreement between the parties to resolve the dispute outside of the court. The judge must also agree and sign off but the settlement is only binding to the parties to the suit and does not create any precedent.
If Nintendo wishes to go after anyone else, it will require an entirely new suit. A quick google on the differences between judgements, verdicts, and settlements will explain a lot better.
Yes, if you were to argue it later in court, you would argue that technically it was a judgment to enter the stipulation and dismiss. And the court may strike the “Judgment” wording in the proposed order. But Nintendo presumably wrote it as a “Judgment” knowing the value that such a designation has.
Further, most stipulated settlements don’t include substantive findings of fact, and again, Nintendo drafted that section explicitly to blur the line between a court’s finding of facts and mere approved stipulated findings of fact. With this order on the books, it will be up to the next case’s defendant to later argue that it wasn’t equivalent to any other trial findings of fact and order.
Yes, it doesn’t technically create precedent as a trial-tested findings of fact by the Court, but a competent litigation attorney would argue that it is probative of the factual issue and fudge the wording in a brief well enough to argue effectively the same.
Removed by mod
Given that it’s GPL software, though, I expect someone else will pick it up before too long.
But I can think of 2.4 million reasons why it won’t be. So sad.
Will Citra be affected?
Already gone.
Yes.
