• otp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    Emulation is not a crime.

    Yes.

    Refusing to re-release existing games should be.

    …what?? Lol

    • Nik282000
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Nintendo has hundred of games that people are willing to pay massively inflated prices to play, but Nintendo would rather sue emulation projects.

        • Nik282000
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Nintendo shouldn’t be allowed to litigate against people they accuse of cutting into sales of not-for-sale games. They know there is a demand for their old catalog but do not release it for sale, forcing a market for piracy.

            • Nik282000
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              It’s the combination of suing for sales that do not exist because they choose not to make those sales. I can’t type it any slower, man.

              • otp@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                I don’t like that Nintendo can sue people for something I don’t think should be illegal. So what THEY do should be illegal instead!

                Is that what you’re getting at? Lol

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Refusing to re-release existing games should be.

      …what?? Lol

      I agree, saying that not continuing to make a copyrighted work available should be a crime is ludicrous.

      What failing to keep such works available actually should do is simply immediately cause the copyright to expire and for them to become Public Domain.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        I agree to an extent. There should be a reasonable time period from which availability of software and hardware ends and the work becomes available.

        It should also only apply to that particular work, and not to any of its contents (so Mario or even his depiction in Super Mario Odyssey shouldn’t become public domain just because they stopped selling the game for a few years).

        I don’t think I want it to be legal for people to sell ROMs, either. I think making them public domain would do that. I know there are already people doing that, but I think the complete removal of legal repercussions would increase that.

        Overall, I agree with your sentiment, but I don’t know enough about copyright law and public domain to know if I agree on the specifics.