Second, the DMCA has nothing in it that explicitly targets emulators. Now what some hardware makers have done is include some kind of cryptography and called it an anti-circumvention method, but that is a later phenomenon and the earlier attempts at this didn’t amount to much in most cases.
Third, the Yuzu Devs brought the wrath of Nintendo of America down upon them through means other than merely writing an emulator, in particular they were likely engaged in actual piracy. They probably knew they were cooked and chose to settle rather than go to trial.
So again, FUD. There’s been a lot of it everywhere on this specific topic, so quit spreading it around like so much manure to nurture Nintendo of America’s basic stance towards emulation. They can have their opinion, but it doesn’t overrule judicial precedent.
First, no it wasn’t.
Second, the DMCA has nothing in it that explicitly targets emulators. Now what some hardware makers have done is include some kind of cryptography and called it an anti-circumvention method, but that is a later phenomenon and the earlier attempts at this didn’t amount to much in most cases.
Third, the Yuzu Devs brought the wrath of Nintendo of America down upon them through means other than merely writing an emulator, in particular they were likely engaged in actual piracy. They probably knew they were cooked and chose to settle rather than go to trial.
So again, FUD. There’s been a lot of it everywhere on this specific topic, so quit spreading it around like so much manure to nurture Nintendo of America’s basic stance towards emulation. They can have their opinion, but it doesn’t overrule judicial precedent.
You're right, I was confusing it with Sega v. Accolade.