Source: https://x.com/NintendoCoLtd/status/1853972163033968794
This is Furukawa. At today’s Corporate Management Policy Briefing, we announced that Nintendo Switch software will also be playable on the successor to Nintendo Switch. Nintendo Switch Online will be available on the successor to Nintendo Switch as well. Further information about the successor to Nintendo Switch, including its compatibility with Nintendo Switch, will be announced at a later date.
Also, what a day to be casually posting this haha
Because it’s a shit company which seems to employ more lawyers than devs. Their lawyers routinely go after emulators, which hurts game preservation. They also go after fan projects a lot, which hurts the community.
as a major fan of classic video game emulation, I understand the conversation surrounding game preservation… but I draw the line at emulation of current gen games that are still actively being sold with hardware that you’re still easily able to purchase.
I can understand why nintendo may want to destroy and threaten anything that hosts software through unauthorized channels as well, as the biggest source of their income is gaming hardware and software. anything that threatens their main source of income will have the book thrown at them, wouldnt you do the same?
Check this quote out. if you were running a business, do you not see where they are coming from? I feel like their hands are tied:
You Can Lose Your IP Rights if Not Enforced If you don’t take adequate or sufficient, reasonable means to protect and enforce your IP, then you run the risk of losing your IP rights. What is sufficient and reasonable action is not always clear; it depends on the situation. But, suffice it to say, if you know someone is using your IP without your authorization, you should promptly look into it to determine what, if anything, should and needs to be done so that you don’t lose one of your most important business assets – your valuable intellectual property.
what you’re against is piracy.
piracy of current gen games is what you’re against. As a consumer I should have the right to purchase a game (software) and do whatever the fuck I want with it, if I want to emulate Tears of the Kingdom because it runs and looks better on my computer than on my switch I should be allowed to do so. I purchased the console and the game, they’ve received my business, they should no longer have a say with what I do with my stuff.
Nintendo themselves use emulators for their products, there is nothing inherently wrong with emulation.
As a consumer I should have the right to purchase a game (software) and do whatever the fuck I want with it, if I want to emulate Tears of the Kingdom because it runs and looks better on my computer than on my switch I should be allowed to do so
you should, but you dont. you fail to realize nintendo games are licensed to us. You do not own any software you puchase through nintendo. Take a look at the last two sections of this page:
Can I Download a ROM If I Own the Original Game? No, downloading ROMs from direct download sites, linking sites or other illegal sources, even when you own a copy of the video game, is not allowable under the Copyright Act.
But can’t I make a backup copy if I own the video game? You may be thinking of the backup/archival exception under the U.S. Copyright Act. There is some misinformation on the Internet regarding this backup/archival exception. This is a very narrow limitation that extends to computer software. Video games are comprised of numerous types of copyrighted works and should not be categorized as software only. Therefore, provisions that pertain to backup copies would not apply to copyrighted video game works and specifically ROM downloads, that are typically unauthorized and infringing.
so no, you cant just run it on whatever you want to, legally speaking. I think you should be able to do whatever you want with software, but its never been this way.
But can’t I make a backup copy if I own the video game? You may be thinking of the backup/archival exception under the U.S. Copyright Act. There is some misinformation on the Internet regarding this backup/archival exception. This is a very narrow limitation that extends to computer software. Video games are comprised of numerous types of copyrighted works and should not be categorized as software only. Therefore, provisions that pertain to backup copies would not apply to copyrighted video game works and specifically ROM downloads, that are typically unauthorized and infringing.
This statement is misleading and a lie. Computer software encompass video games as part of the legal definition outlined in Galoob v. Nintendo in 1992, which Nintendo lost in court. They do not have a legal leg to stand on. If someone wants to make an archival copy of a game they own physically, they can legally. The terms backup and archival are not interchangeable from a legal stance and Nintendo intentionally uses misleading language when answering the question.
Since we are going to take a deep dive on this, I attempted to read a Wikipedia article on this court case. I stopped reading after the second sentence since the top of the wikipedia article does not support your claim, at all.
The court determined that Galoob’s Game Genie did not violate Nintendo’s exclusive right to make derivative works of their games, because the Game Genie did not create a new permanent work.
the game genie did not create a new copy of a video game, an important distinction. what is a ROM if its not a new, permanent file and what does this court case have to do with my previous statement?
I was responding to the statement found currently on Nintendo’s website, the question Nintendo states, “But can’t I make a backup copy if I own the video game?” which you posted.
Nintendo makes the claim that making an archival copy of a physical game you own is not legal because video games do not fall under computer software,
“There is some misinformation on the Internet regarding this backup/archival exception. This is a very narrow limitation that extends to computer software.”
According to the court case I referenced, it in fact does just that. This court case clearly spells out that video games do fall under computer software and that they are subject to all of legal rights that go with it, your right to archive your physical copy of your game just like any other computer software, but this does not extend to making “backups” which Nintendo uses interchangeably with the term archive.
In legal terms backups are intended for short term storage and readily usable. An archive is intended with the purpose of long term storage and preservation of the software. Nintendo conflates the two and claims both are illegal, this is the problem. Not the subject of the court case mentioned, the court case I referenced is only to reinforce that the court recognized that video games fall under computer software and that § 117 of The Copyright Act of 1980 do give you that right. Here is a link to that section of the law.
gotcha, thanks for clearing that up
