Nintendo continues to demonstrate why my personal boycott continues. What a shitty company.
I guess “Fuck around and find out” doesn’t apply here.
Don’t forget to mention bootlicking in your replies, lemmys.
Oh, it really bothers you that you can’t stream games before they’ve been released? It’s Nintendo’s fault, for everything, all the time! So much entitlement.
Bait 🎣
What’s even more funny is that you’re downvoted into oblivion, while Iheartcheese @lemmy.world gets praise for the same stance.
Is this the dumbass thay was streaming the unreleased games that got leaked?
Not defending Nintendo one bit here, but like, you made your own bed with that one dickhead.
Not really, they’re asking for default without actually serving the person and that just isn’t how our justice system works.
Headline says he ignored a court summons. Do you even understand what it means to be served (a court summons)???
A summons still has to be served in civil court meaning actually made aware generally by a hand to hand transfer. There is no mention of that happening and court dates proceed regardless of actual service unless the court moves out preemptively or the other party motions to move it forward to affect service.
So the question is do you know the difference between service and summons and the interplay between them.
Loads of people seem to think that you can ignore a court summons by simply refuse to take it. Obviously that’s not how it works if you know that you have been served that’s enough. He would have to prove that he didn’t know he had been served which is pretty difficult.
Difficult, yes. Stupid, indeed. How the legal system works? Also true.
If he’s been served it will have been documented, the court won’t have proceeded with the case if they don’t think the person named in the case has been served, so the fact that he didn’t turn up to court means he must have been served otherwise they wouldn’t have had the trial yet.
the court won’t have proceeded with the case if they don’t think the person named in the case has been served,
Fun fact, the case did not proceed they’re specifically asking for it to.
so the fact that he didn’t turn up to court means he must have been served otherwise they wouldn’t have had the trial yet.
No, the date proceeds unless the court says otherwise even if it’s simply to show up and say they don’t have service yet.
Y’all really don’t have any civil court experience do you?
all my homies hate Nintendo.
Nintendo doesn’t care if you emulate old games on stream.
They do if it’s a live event which I don’t really get. Modded smash bros is just not okay at live events but hacked Mario World was at GDQ.
All that aside these games were not only new, but unreleased. He literally could have contributed to lost sales from potential buyers watching the games before they were released.
If they went after some SMW hacker emulating a three decade old game, sure. But they didn’t.
I don’t normally victim-blame, but streaming an unreleased game is really asking for it.
It’s one thing to pirate a game for yourself. That’s just called being poor or being someone who doesn’t believe in copyright. The only party who can argue they’re being harmed is the developer, who may or may not have received a sale otherwise.
It’s another thing to pirate an unreleased game and stream it for others. If you do that and receive ad revenue or donations, you’re profiting off of someone else’s work. Not only that, but you’re also harming the console modding community by incentivizing the publisher to go after homebrew developers and emulator developers. It wasn’t a coincidence that shortly after some asshat streamed an unreleased Zelda game being played on Yuzu, Nintendo decided to finally come down on the emulator with an iron fist.
In conclusion, between pirating a game to enjoy yourself and pirating a game to play on a for-profit streaming platform, one of those two things is morally gray and the other is someone being a selfish fuck.
Not only that, but you’re also harming the console modding community by incentivizing the publisher to go after homebrew developers and emulator developers. It wasn’t a coincidence that shortly after some asshat streamed an unreleased Zelda game being played on Yuzu, Nintendo decided to finally come down on the emulator with an iron fist.
There’s plenty of ways to stop piracy, Nintendo just doesn’t want you to play outside their walled garden. They could choose to facilitate emulation and let you buy their games from emulators and prevent piracy while not hindering emulation. They could choose to port their games to other platforms. But no, they crack down on emulation because it hurts their bottom line if people don’t have to buy a switch - or whatever to play their games. Fuck Nintendo.
Don’t get me wrong: Nintendo deserves no sympathy here. They could do many things to make their games more accessible, but they chose not to.
That’s not to say asshats like this deserves any either, though. The homebrew community and emulator developers step in to make Switch software interoperable, and they end up being the ones getting screwed over by both Nintendo and the people who provoked Nintendo.
the people who provoked Nintendo.
This is my problem with your argument, you’re saying that because of piracy they’re entitled to crack down on emulation. Piracy is just a pretext they’re using here. Emulation is legal and yet they’re doing everything in their power to stop it from happening, this has nothing to do with piracy.
Emulation is legal
Unfortunately, it’s not that straightforward anymore. Emulation of modern consoles exists in a legal gray area that may or may not be illegal under the DMCA.
With something like the Switch, the ROMs are encrypted in a way that they can only be unencrypted with keys that are derived from data baked into the console itself. Yuzu for example is still protected as an emulator for some hardware/software platform, but it wouldn’t be able to run retail games without being able to decrypt the ROMs.
And that’s kind of the problem. Creating tools for preservation and interoperability is permitted by the DMCA, but tools that are made in part or whole to bypass DRM measures is explicitly not. That conflict hasn’t been tested in court either, so the first ruling is going to be the one that sets the precedent.
This is my problem with your argument, you’re saying that because of piracy they’re entitled to crack down on emulation.
My argument isnt that they’re entitled to crack down on emulation because of piracy. My argument is that people blatantly and publicly using emulators to play pirated, unreleased games emboldens Nintendo.
I believe Nintendo isn’t willing to test that gray area in court without having something to support their anti-emulation position. What they want to do is bully devs into settling because it’s a low-risk way to kill development on the emulator without opening up that can of worms that could make Switch emulators unambiguously legal. But, the more evidence Nintendo gets to support their argument, the more confident they become in thinking they would end up winning if they don’t get that settlement.
Keep in mind that when they did finally go after Yuzu’s devs, they went after them for creating software to circumvent the Switch’s DRM (that gray area I mentioned) and not for creating an emulator. If they were actually confident in thinking the legal answer to “is an emulator that decrypts ROMs illegal” was “yes,” they would’ve just went after Yuzu a long time ago instead of waiting 7 years into the console lifestyle.
He literally could have contributed to lost sales from potential buyers watching the games before they were released.
By allowing consumers to be better informed of what they might have otherwise purchased?
Well yeah, that will be their argument and legally it’s a good argument.
By broadcasting spoilers and making playing the game pointless.
Broadcasting spoilers to an audience tuned in to an unscripted live stream play of an unreleased game on the Internet. I don’t get the impression spoilers were much of a concern in the first place.
There’s never a point in playing a game if you can’t beat it the same day it is released, by that stupid argument.
When you play a game on release date that wasn’t leaked, spoilers and stuff surface on the internet at an average pace. Players who wait a long time to play the game will have this similar experience.
Leaked content spreads like wildfire as the posters know it’ll most likely be taken down, and well, streisand effect. All communities for the game will be flooded with untagged spoilers before the game is even out. I bet that streamer was basically speedrunning the games to leak as much as possible, which most players who just enjoy the game won’t do.
Either way, the money asked for is a lot, yes, however pirating and broadcasting unreleased games is a very stupid crime.
You can avoid these kind of spoilers without much difficulty.
I still don’t even know what game he was playing when he got caught.
This argument is nonsense. Why don’t they go after regular review channels and streamers? What difference does it make that the game is streamed before release vs after?
Nintendo isn’t your friend. Every minute you waste defending their honor online can instead be spent finding real friends IRL
Before release is before everyone gets a chance at playing it themselves. This person also isn’t a professional reviewer or journalist so their content isn’t beneficial to the consumer either. Before also releases spoilers that will be near impossible to avoid once they’re out. And what’s the point of playing the hot new game if you already know the story?
I call Nintendo my angel of salvation and the mother I never had, but I’m just being realistic. Streaming (actually) pirated new games actually does cause damage. Most likely not as much as Nintendo is suing for, but damages nonetheless.
If they were suing for streaming Super Mario World romhacks, especially in 2025 where SMW is old enough to be a dad or the United States President, and is NOT being actively sold, then yeah, I’d disagree. Even if one were to pull “but it’s on Switch Online” or some silly nonsense.
I call Nintendo my angel of salvation and the mother I never had, but I’m just being realistic.
Upvoting just for this.
Nintendo actually saved my life, not joking or exaggerating.
You’re actually unwell then. Seek professional help because Nintendo is not your friend. This is going to blow up in your face some day, and it is going to end poorly for you.
Mental health issues are complicated and suicide is awful, and idk you or your situation. Whatever happened, it’s good that you’re still here, but this religious devotion to a corporation is fucking disgusting. When you find out that Nintendo employees laugh at people like you during their lunch breaks, will you still feel like they’re your angels? How much labor have you given to them, both in the form of money you earned to buy their products, and online activity to defend their honor?
Don’t give yourself to a corporation like this. If you were saved, Nintendo weren’t the ones who did it.
However, as Keighin did not show up to court,
bro quite literally played the “sorry mario, the princess in another castle” card at them.
Did they spring for Dolby vision/atmos this time or cheaped out again?
What if you own the copy but also have a copy
He was streaming an unreleased copy. Good luck owning that.
What if he had preordered the game?
With the price they expect for games now, it’s going to get a lot worse for them.
Why is everyone pretending like they have a right to play Nintendo games? Nintendo says they want $X, you say their game isn’t worth $X, so you get something different instead. What’s the problem?
If you’re at a flea market and can’t reach an agreement on the price, do you just throw a tantrum at the vendor and take their stuff anyway?
It’s not a flea market. It’s a company that targets kids. Their prices are ludicrous, and will end up in another 3DS moment.
I rather hope for a PS Vita moment.
It’s a company that targets kids. Their prices are ludicrous
How does any of this make a difference?
Also for a company targeting kids there sure are a lot of whiny adults in these conversations.
You are comparing removing a physical object from a person to copying some data onto a flash drive.
Do you want to be the kind of guy that gets a portrait commissioned of yourself, get a watermarked preview version, then balks at the price the artist asks for, reject the work, refuse to pay the artist, AND THEN use the watermarked preview version for your profile picture anyway?
A better analogy would be if I printed out a copy of a painting I like.
I don’t control which games Nintendo makes. If I did, we’d have a sequel to Majora’s Mask and Mario Galaxy 3.
Are you saying that the data has no value just because you can’t touch it?
If it had no value then no one would want it.
all these n-letter company dramas streisand-effect’ed me into being interested in legal switch emulation - I never knew you can even play switch online perfectly legal on PC if there’s enough gamers backing up a justified defence against lawsuit-bully attempts by those suits
but yeah this guy here not the brighest light, is he
Dipshit was streaming games that hadn’t even been released yet.
Good, that’s exactly what Shitendo deserves
Well he sure showed them, didn’t he?
Well sadly he got caught.
what a sad life it must be to be the legal bully for a toy company, imagine wasting your life like that
deleted by creator
Yeah, broadcasting to the world that you’re playing a game that hasn’t been released yet isn’t a great idea. Particularly when it’s Nintendo. It’s pretty common knowledge how petty they are even with stuff that’s less flagrant
deleted by creator
why did you reply at me with a boot hanging out of your mouth
Yeah man we get it, piracy good, laws bad, yar har and all that shit. This guy’s still an idiot, and so is anybody defending him.
deleted by creator
