This also includes ceasing development and destroying their copies of the code.

The GitHub repo page for Yuzu now returns a 404, as well. In addition, the repo for the Citra 3DS emulator was also taken down.

As of at least 23:30 UTC, Yuzu’s website and Citra’s website have been replaced with a statement about their discontinuation.


Other sources found by @[email protected]:


There is also an active Reddit thread about this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/1b6gtb5/

  • null@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Is it piracy to play my legally purchased and backed up games on an emulator?

    Edit: a lot of people responding to this are accidentally answering the question above. Yes, those are the things they would have fought if they had the money to go up against Nintendo.

    To those saying that it is indeed piracy – pretty sure the law has disagreed up to this point. Note that Nintendo didn’t win this suit, Yuzu settled. No legal precedent set (yet).

    • echo64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      If you circumvent the copyright protection systems to do so, then under American law yes. If you don’t like this, you have to campaign for change.

      • tabular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Do you believe there is a chance of success for campaigning for change?

        • echo64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          Every few years, more things are added as exceptions to the DMCAs circumvention clause. There’s a whole host of exceptions, and they are all exceptions in favor of people over companies. Those exceptions came about because people who care fought for them.

          • tabular@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Do you have any specific examples and how long it took, or how much it cost? It seems farfetched to think it is feasible to counter the “anti circumvention technology” aspect of the DMCA.

            • pivot_root@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              9 months ago

              Wikipedia has an entire list of anti-circumvention exceptions under the page for the DMCA. I have no idea how those exceptions came to be or how much money and time was involved to make it happen, but it does seem to be changing in our benefit over time.

            • echo64@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              How is it far fetched when there’s a literal bunch of examples you can go find right now? You’re basing your estimation on zero evidence and doomerism.

              Try, apply yourself. Don’t just assume.

              • tabular@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                If I’m as successful changing law as I am changing minds on the internet then doomerism is an understatement.

    • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Does it matter? I suspect that if that’s what you did, you were one of very few people doing so, and the law doesn’t require the absence of any possible legitimate use. In this case, something is illegal if it

      is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;

      has only limited commercially significant purpose or use

      • null@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        You asked if there was a significant use-case. That’s what it is, and why emulators have remained legal up to this point.

        How many people take advantage of that use-case over piracy is a different point.

        Also the law has not decided anything here, yet. As far as the law is concerned, emulators are still legal.

        • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          It’s a use case, but I would argue that it’s not a significant use case.

          Emulators are still legal in theory, but I doubt that it is in practice possible to make an emulator for a modern video game system without violating some other part of the law.

          • null@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            9 months ago

            It’s a use case, but I would argue that it’s not a significant use case.

            And that’s the answer to your question about what Yuzu would have fought if they had the money to take on Nintendo.

            Emulators are still legal in theory, but I doubt that it is in practice possible to make an emulator for a modern video game system without violating some other part of the law.

            That’s exactly what hasn’t been determined, since Yuzu settled and it didn’t go to court.