“Enable piracy” in the same way someone selling music cassettes back in the 90s was “enabling piracy”.

commandersaki a day ago | parent | next [-]

Cassettes don't circumvent protection measures.

The MIG Switch isn’t circumventing anything either. It’s presenting the copied cartridge to the Switch exactly like the original. The Switch doesn’t have to be modified at all, so there can’t be any form of circumvention.

▲

commandersaki a day ago | parent [-]

Then why not use the cartridge directly? Hm let see:

https://regmedia.co.uk/2024/07/02/modded_hardware_complaint....

28c)

In order to achieve this, a MIG Switch circumvents Nintendo’s TPMs by tricking the Nintendo Switch console into treating unauthorized, pirated copies of Nintendo Switch games as authorized, official Nintendo Switch game cartridges.

▲

mbirth a day ago | parent [-]

That gibberish is - again - just talking about "unauthorized, pirated copies". I.e. a copy Nintendo doesn't want you to be able to make. The MIG Switch is not circumventing anything. It's just presenting an exact copy of a cartridge to the Switch. There's no "trick" involved.

▲

commandersaki 21 hours ago | parent [-]

In essence, Nintendo game cartridges are designed to be non fungible, this is because they are bestowed with a unique digital certificate which the Switch uses to authenticate that it is playing an official game cartridge. The provenance of the certificate is in the game cartridge. These certificates aren't just a simple serial number either, they are sophisticated in the sense that Nintendo uses it to detect multiple use of a game across many of its consoles, so it is a valid technology protection measure. This also prevents a counterfeit market. Just because you present the same exact bits of a game cartridge to a console in a different form factor doesn't mean the TPM isn't being violated.

I'm sure we could get into the weeds with technicalities and ifs and buts, but it isn't really about being technical or clever, it is about the spirit of the law and what the DMCA Section 1201 is about.

But having said that, DMCA 1201 (2) (a) and (b) is what you want.

▲

mbirth 20 hours ago | parent [-]

The technical details don't matter in this case. You're doing a 1:1 copy/clone. You're not manipulating anything and thus you're not circumventing anything. No special care is taken about the certificate or anything else.

Just because the Switch can't tell the difference between an original cartridge and a cloned one doesn't make it illegal per se. (What's the protection measure that was circumvented there?) It's just that the law is "broken" as it was made by those people making money from it.

	▲	commandersaki 18 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The technical protection measure is the digital certificate and possibly even the proprietary game cartridge form factor. (2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that— (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; (B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or In my opinion (A) is violated because the non fungibility of the game cartridge is violated by copying the certificate to present an inauthentic cartridge as genuine. (B) is pretty straightforward. But I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, maybe Nintendo lawyers are wrong, and this guy could've fought this specific charge over a technicality. Reminds me of how Sov Cits always get out of traffic infringements because they're "traveling".

▲

like_any_other a day ago | parent | prev [-]

If I put a fence around property that isn't mine, climbing over that fence isn't illegal. Resisting unjust restraint isn't illegal.

Hilariously, the same cannot be said for digital protection measures.

▲

smt88 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Eh not quite the same. This guy was getting paid to specifically make it possible to play pirated media, and he ignored a cease and desist.

If you scaled this up to a large percentage of Switch consoles, no one would want to make Switch games anymore.

Nintendo is an evil, shitty company that weaponizes the courts, but I love good games/movies/etc. and want creators to be able to profit from them.

▲

mbirth a day ago | parent | next [-]

From the article:

> Daly, who sold devices like the MIG Switch and MIG Dumper

So, he just sold the devices that allowed you to make copies of Switch cartridges. Similar to someone selling cassette tapes or CD-/DVD-Rs and CD/DVD burners. He didn't sell illegally copied games or anything that tampers with Nintendo's IP. But as we all know, in front of US courts it's not about who's right but who has more money. And Nintendo has plenty of that.

	▲	commandersaki a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		What he sold circumvented the technology protection measures which is covered under the DMCA. This is substantially different to reading and writing generic media. See 28 in the original complaint: https://regmedia.co.uk/2024/07/02/modded_hardware_complaint.... Also 29c: In order to achieve this, a MIG Switch circumvents Nintendo’s TPMs by tricking the Nintendo Switch console into treating unauthorized, pirated copies of Nintendo Switch games as authorized, official Nintendo Switch game cartridges. The idiotic thing is he kept doing this even after a cease and desist.
	▲	cazum a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It's not even just the US, that just happens to be where most of these companies register their copyrights, and therefore, where the "infringement" occurs. Many Western countries subscribe to some form of "contributory infringement" law, where someone can be fined tens of thousands per-work-infringed for simply developing or distributing a tool that can be used by someone else to infringe copyright. It's absurd.

▲

AuthAuth a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nothing wrong with that. The problem is with people playing pirated media but its not feasible to go after everysingle person for the cost of a game so they had to trample over consumer rights. This is another case of rights being trampled to protect businesses where they dont need protection.

▲

lp0_on_fire a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Ok. He was getting paid to modify the device owned by someone else. A device NOT OWNED by Nintendo.