Homebrew So that tiicu thread has been deleted?

TrumpBurgah · Feb 23, 2026

mnk3_ said:
Again, this has NOTHING to do with piracy. That's a textbook fallacy, trying to discredit an argument by attacking the person making it rather than addressing the point itself. It doesn't work here. The homebrew community isn't about piracy. If it were, this forum would already be shut down. The issue is simple: someone took a GPL-licensed emulator, ported it, and didn't publish the source. That's a license violation, full stop. It's not credit what the license means, it's the modified source code published.

Look at the license from the repo: https://github.com/devmiyax/yabause?tab=GPL-2.0-1-ov-file#readme

So if someone distributes a GPLv2 emulator binary/port for Switch without either shipping the modified source or a proper written source offer, they are not complying with Section 3 and are in violation of the license.

If the dev wanted to build an emulator from scratch, not based on any GPL code, and keep it closed source, sure, no problem. But since it's not the case, he accepted those terms when he modified the original code and distributed it. Can't just pretend they don't exist.

Keep crying "BuT pEoPlE aRe PiRaTiNg11!1!!" while forgetting that without free software like this GPL emulator, you wouldn't have Saturn emulation at all. The best ones (Yaba Sanshiro 2, Kronos (both forked from Yabause), Ymir, Mednafen) are all GPL-licensed. Forget that small thing and the entire scene you love and want on your Switch crumbles.

Also, to the mods: I think we should close any thread discussing Tico. It always devolves into silly flamewars like this, and it doesn't make sense to discuss with people dodging the actual issue. I even saw empty messages from the dev a few posts above (guessing multi-account caught in the act, and I bet these people came from the Discord where they talk about Tico). When he releases the modified source as GPLv2 requires, obviously he'll be welcomed back to discuss anything.

So with that in mind i redact my earlier statement, they definitely would be violating the gpl, but i think people should let it get sorted out rather than shit on the program and attack the dev. The only thing i don't like about the project is the absence of source code. But the program itself is excellent. And i'm also confused by the piracy insults or arguments since that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

mnk3_ · Feb 23, 2026

Thorhax said:
Hurray for censorship?

GPL violation, downloading games/music/movies you didn't pay for.
It's all in the same world of Piracy(stealing someone else's work).

Well, you’re the one asking for "censorship" here. Piracy isn’t even allowed to be discussed or facilitated on this forum, so that is already off the table.

If you're so convinced this is fine because "people pirate stuff" and licenses don't matter (because correlation totally equals causation), then logically you'd want this thread shut down too, since Tico itself would be "piracy," right?

But AGAIN (come on guys, humans can read and comprehend, use your superpowers!) this is a license compliance issue, not piracy. Section 3 it's pretty clear. It demands source with distributed binaries.

lordelan · Feb 23, 2026

Well, well, well...
This escalated quickly. I thought this thread was dead. Then over the weekend it went from page 1 to 4 lol.

mathew77 said:
Better than nothing though.

I would disagree. At least in some cases. If the DBI dev included brick code for example, that wouldn't be "better than nothing".

dantiicu · Feb 23, 2026

mnk3_ said:
Well, you’re the one asking for "censorship" here. Piracy isn’t even allowed to be discussed or facilitated on this forum, so that is already off the table.

If you're so convinced this is fine because "people pirate stuff" and licenses don't matter (because correlation totally equals causation), then logically you'd want this thread shut down too, since Tico itself would be "piracy," right?

But AGAIN (come on guys, humans can read and comprehend, use your superpowers!) this is a license compliance issue, not piracy. Section 3 it's pretty clear. It demands source with distributed binaries.

You don't need to worry about the continuity or maintenance of the core. Since your community was never able to make it run in the first place, just assume it doesn't exist — don't use it, don't count on it. Without the binaries, the license concern is also moot: I am not distributing anything here, I have not distributed anything to anyone, and I even requested the removal of the original post.

As your own community members were quick to point out, I didn't write anything — I "just stole third-party code and compiled it." Fine. Then the solution is simple: clone the repository and compile it yourselves. It's right there.

Since Tico's post, despite my repeated clarifications about being new to homebrew development, I have received nothing but intimidation, accusations, and mockery. If this community couldn't extend basic courtesy to someone just starting out, I have absolutely no obligation to give anything back to it. Perhaps when the next new developer shows up, you'll have learned what it actually means to be a community — and how to treat people with respect.

To be clear: I never said I wouldn't release the source code. I said I would release it on my own time, for reasons I owe no one an explanation for. But wait — according to this very community, I didn't write anything at all. I "just stole third-party code and compiled it," remember? So there's nothing to release. Just clone the repository yourselves. The source is already there — I apparently didn't change a thing. Problem solved.

For those citing the GPL as leverage — you should know that the license does not impose any deadline for releasing source code. The GPL only requires that source be made available to those who received the binaries. Since no binaries were distributed here, the obligation simply does not apply. Even in cases where it does, there is no legal timeframe forcing an immediate release. So yes — I can take as long as I want, and there is nothing in the GPL that says otherwise.

What I witnessed here was nothing but envy and bad faith — people operating through multiple accounts, liking their own posts to manufacture consensus and amplify hate, individuals who have never genuinely contributed anything meaningful to this scene. The same people leading the charge against me are the ones whose entire body of work amounts to a text-based guessing game and a wrapper that does little more than make API calls through libnx behind a mediocre interface.

Regarding locking this thread — I agree. And if there's a way to block mentions from Tico or similar, I'd appreciate that as well. I have no interest in remaining part of a place like this.

P.S. — M4xW locks his cores behind a Patreon paywall and has never released the source code — despite Citra being GPL-licensed, which legally requires it. Yet no one here seems bothered by that. The hate is clearly selective. And the irony? All of this started because Tico brought a PPSSPP port that didn't depend on anyone's paywall.

Psi-hate · Feb 23, 2026

Returning from my slumber to say, try not to trip on your way out.

mnk3_ · Feb 23, 2026

dantiicu said:
You don't need to worry about the continuity or maintenance of the core. Since your community was never able to make it run in the first place, just assume it doesn't exist — don't use it, don't count on it. Without the binaries, the license concern is also moot: I am not distributing anything here, I have not distributed anything to anyone, and I even requested the removal of the original post.

As your own community members were quick to point out, I didn't write anything — I "just stole third-party code and compiled it." Fine. Then the solution is simple: clone the repository and compile it yourselves. It's right there.

Since Tico's post, despite my repeated clarifications about being new to homebrew development, I have received nothing but intimidation, accusations, and mockery. If this community couldn't extend basic courtesy to someone just starting out, I have absolutely no obligation to give anything back to it. Perhaps when the next new developer shows up, you'll have learned what it actually means to be a community — and how to treat people with respect.

To be clear: I never said I wouldn't release the source code. I said I would release it on my own time, for reasons I owe no one an explanation for. But wait — according to this very community, I didn't write anything at all. I "just stole third-party code and compiled it," remember? So there's nothing to release. Just clone the repository yourselves. The source is already there — I apparently didn't change a thing. Problem solved.

For those citing the GPL as leverage — you should know that the license does not impose any deadline for releasing source code. The GPL only requires that source be made available to those who received the binaries. Since no binaries were distributed here, the obligation simply does not apply. Even in cases where it does, there is no legal timeframe forcing an immediate release. So yes — I can take as long as I want, and there is nothing in the GPL that says otherwise.

What I witnessed here was nothing but envy and bad faith — people operating through multiple accounts, liking their own posts to manufacture consensus and amplify hate, individuals who have never genuinely contributed anything meaningful to this scene. The same people leading the charge against me are the ones whose entire body of work amounts to a text-based guessing game and a wrapper that does little more than make API calls through libnx behind a mediocre interface.

Regarding locking this thread — I agree. And if there's a way to block mentions from Tico or similar, I'd appreciate that as well. I have no interest in remaining part of a place like this.

P.S. — M4xW locks his cores behind a Patreon paywall and has never released the source code — despite Citra being GPL-licensed, which legally requires it. Yet no one here seems bothered by that. The hate is clearly selective. And the irony? All of this started because Tico brought a PPSSPP port that didn't depend on anyone's paywall.

Thanks for writing. There's no "your community" vs. "ours", it's one homebrew scene built on mutual respect for licenses like GPL.

I do worry about continuity. That's why GPL share-alike exists, to prevent silos. Dismissing it as "moot" ignores why open source blossom.

You distributed binaries: The yabasanshiro.nro is a binary executable. From the moment it's shared/downloaded anywhere (currently available from GitHub, and even if you request removal) GPLv2 applies.

No envy here, kudos for the port! Devs pour their free time into open-source projects like Yabause under GPL precisely so the community can build on it and give back via share-alike. When someone ports it without sharing mods, it breaks that trust, original authors see their labor forked into dead-end silos, killing collaboration and motivation. That's why the community gets pissed. It's not personal, it's protecting the ecosystem that makes ports like yours possible in the first place.

As I said, if you don't believe in the community or GPL reciprocity, build a proprietary emulator from scratch, no problem. But you can't take GPL code like Yabause, port it, distribute binaries, and withhold your modifications. That's exactly what the license forbids to protect the collaborative ecosystem that you are relying on.

GPLv2 predates GitHub (we are talking 1991, people would mail asking for source code), so there is no "instant release" clause but source must be available to binary recipients reasonably promptly, not "my own time" indefinitely.

Never heard of M4xW's paywall either, but if it's a GPL violation (Citra derivatives need source), I condemn it too, obviously. Selective outrage? Nah, this is about every GPL compliance.

kidkat210 · Feb 23, 2026

The case of mx4w is he has his source up on github but the actual nro files that are compiled lock behind a "paywall" ($1 donation to their patreon). You can still compile it yourself. This is all the info I've gathered. There's probably details I've missed

dantiicu · Feb 23, 2026

mnk3_ said:
Thanks for writing. There's no "your community" vs. "ours", it's one homebrew scene built on mutual respect for licenses like GPL.

I do worry about continuity. That's why GPL share-alike exists, to prevent silos. Dismissing it as "moot" ignores why open source blossom.

You distributed binaries: The yabasanshiro.nro is a binary executable. From the moment it's shared/downloaded anywhere (currently available from GitHub, and even if you request removal) GPLv2 applies.

No envy here, kudos for the port! Devs pour their free time into open-source projects like Yabause under GPL precisely so the community can build on it and give back via share-alike. When someone ports it without sharing mods, it breaks that trust, original authors see their labor forked into dead-end silos, killing collaboration and motivation. That's why the community gets pissed. It's not personal, it's protecting the ecosystem that makes ports like yours possible in the first place.

As I said, if you don't believe in the community or GPL reciprocity, build a proprietary emulator from scratch, no problem. But you can't take GPL code like Yabause, port it, distribute binaries, and withhold your modifications. That's exactly what the license forbids to protect the collaborative ecosystem that you are relying on.

GPLv2 predates GitHub (we are talking 1991, people would mail asking for source code), so there is no "instant release" clause but source must be available to binary recipients reasonably promptly, not "my own time" indefinitely.

Never heard of M4xW's paywall either, but if it's a GPL violation (Citra derivatives need source), I condemn it too, obviously. Selective outrage? Nah, this is about every GPL compliance.

I'll acknowledge the fair points raised — I'm not disputing the license itself. What I take issue with is how this situation was handled. There's a meaningful difference between raising a legitimate GPL concern respectfully and weaponizing it against someone who is still finding their footing — intimidation, false accusations, and mockery are not how you build a healthy community.

On the legal substance: "reasonably promptly" is your phrasing, not the license's. GPLv2 defines no specific timeframe.

As for the project — I can simply stop. Delete the repository, abandon it, move on. GPL or not, the work is mine, the effort was mine, and it can cease to exist just as easily as it began. "That's why the community gets pissed" is not leverage. It is not my responsibility to sustain anything for people who treated me this way.

The anxiety over whether I'll release the source is your problem, not mine. Perhaps the community would benefit from reflecting on how it welcomes newcomers.

My preference is simple: pretend Tico never existed. Don't use it.

Post automatically merged: Feb 23, 2026

kidkat210 said:
The case of mx4w is he has his source up on github but the actual nro files that are compiled lock behind a "paywall" ($1 donation to their patreon). You can still compile it yourself. This is all the info I've gathered. There's probably details I've missed

Worth noting: mx4w's last repository update was August 16, 2023, yet compiled NRO files have been distributed through Patreon and private Discord channels as recently as January 2026. Under GPLv2, the source must match what you actually distribute.

I may have missed details, but from what I gathered — interesting timing for a GPL concern.

I'm not here to judge anyone's conduct. I've said what I had to say. Don't use Tico if you don't agree with the current state of distribution.

hippy dave · Feb 23, 2026

mnk3_ said:
Piracy isn’t even allowed to be discussed or facilitated on this forum,

Yes it is. I don't really understand when people say this, have you not read any of the other threads? There's constant daily discussion about getting pirated games running via the correct sig patching etc, and it's fully allowed by the rules. What's not allowed is linking to copyrighted material for illegal download (or near hints like site names).

mnk3_ · Feb 23, 2026

dantiicu said:
I'll acknowledge the fair points raised — I'm not disputing the license itself. What I take issue with is how this situation was handled. There's a meaningful difference between raising a legitimate GPL concern respectfully and weaponizing it against someone who is still finding their footing — intimidation, false accusations, and mockery are not how you build a healthy community.

On the legal substance: "reasonably promptly" is your phrasing, not the license's. GPLv2 defines no specific timeframe.

As for the project — I can simply stop. Delete the repository, abandon it, move on. GPL or not, the work is mine, the effort was mine, and it can cease to exist just as easily as it began. "That's why the community gets pissed" is not leverage. It is not my responsibility to sustain anything for people who treated me this way.

The anxiety over whether I'll release the source is your problem, not mine. Perhaps the community would benefit from reflecting on how it welcomes newcomers.

My preference is simple: pretend Tico never existed. Don't use it.

I don't think hostile tone has anything to do with the license, one doesn't cancel the other.

You're right, those exact words aren't in GPLv2. But Section 3(b) requires a written offer "valid for at least three years" (that number comes, like I said from 1991), that also implies the obligation begins at distribution, not whenever you feel ready. The FSF's own interpretation has consistently held that source must be available to those who received binaries.

Also, on the FAQ: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.en.html#ModifiedJustBinary

Since it's so easy to share binaries and source code 35 years later, one could say you're trying to dodge a bullet with a mischievous interpretation of the license, leaning on "no explicit deadline" to justify indefinite non-compliance, while conveniently ignoring that the obligation begins at the moment of distribution. Not a loophole, that's the obligation.

If the community owes newcomers better manners, newcomers owe the ecosystem license respect. Both things can be true. And I'm sure that if you release the source code, most devs will look at you very differently.

The author of the fork you based this on openly talks about using AI in development, and no one cares about that: https://www.yabasanshiro.com/blog/2026-02-05_aicording. No one is against you but the way you handled things, I think.

And trust me, publishing your code is actually fun when you genuinely built something for yourself and not just for approval. You get real feedback from people who care. The Yabause devs spent countless hours on that codebase; they might look at your port and give you insights you'd never get otherwise. That's invaluable, and no Discord silo replaces it.

hippy dave said:
Yes it is. I don't really understand when people say this, have you not read any of the other threads? There's constant daily discussion about getting pirated games running via the correct sig patching etc, and it's fully allowed by the rules. What's not allowed is linking to copyrighted material for illegal download (or near hints like site names).

I didn't know that installing NSP dumps of my own games was piracy, really shocking to hear that from someone who pays to support this website. GBAtemp literally used to host ROMs and got shut down so many times the name reflects it. I think after 20 years we're all mature enough to know what piracy actually is, and what kind of stuff we can discuss. Guess I will go to jail on my country because I want to play the obscure G-Mode translations published here.

dantiicu · Feb 23, 2026

mnk3_ said:
I don't think hostile tone has anything to do with the license, one doesn't cancel the other.

You're right, those exact words aren't in GPLv2. But Section 3(b) requires a written offer "valid for at least three years" (that number comes, like I said from 1991), that also implies the obligation begins at distribution, not whenever you feel ready. The FSF's own interpretation has consistently held that source must be available to those who received binaries.

Also, on the FAQ: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.en.html#ModifiedJustBinary

Since it's so easy to share binaries and source code 35 years later, one could say you're trying to dodge a bullet with a mischievous interpretation of the license, leaning on "no explicit deadline" to justify indefinite non-compliance, while conveniently ignoring that the obligation begins at the moment of distribution. Not a loophole, that's the obligation.

If the community owes newcomers better manners, newcomers owe the ecosystem license respect. Both things can be true. And I'm sure that if you release the source code, most devs will look at you very differently.

The author of the fork you based this on openly talks about using AI in development, and no one cares about that: https://www.yabasanshiro.com/blog/2026-02-05_aicording. No one is against you but the way you handled things, I think.

And trust me, publishing your code is actually fun when you genuinely built something for yourself and not just for approval. You get real feedback from people who care. The Yabause devs spent countless hours on that codebase; they might look at your port and give you insights you'd never get otherwise. That's invaluable, and no Discord silo replaces it.

I didn't know that installing NSP dumps of my own games was piracy, really shocking to hear that from someone who pays to support this website. GBAtemp literally used to host ROMs and got shut down so many times the name reflects it. I think after 20 years we're all mature enough to know what piracy actually is, and what kind of stuff we can discuss. Guess I will go to jail on my country because I want to play the obscure G-Mode translations published here.

You're right that tone and license are separate issues — I never said otherwise. I said the tone was unacceptable; that doesn't exempt me from obligations, and I didn't claim it did.

On the legal substance: I understand the FSF's interpretation, and I'm not arguing the obligation doesn't exist at distribution. My point was narrower — "reasonably promptly" was presented as if it were the license's language, and it isn't.

As for releasing the source — the decision will be mine, made on my own terms, not yours or anyone else's.

Regarding NSP installs — I'm sure you only install your own legally dumped backups. I would never question that. Voiding warranties, patching firmware, all strictly to play games you personally own. Most upstanding person in the room, no doubt.

You're not even part of the original context here — and I'm not particularly concerned with providing you anything. I'm not here to please anyone in this community also, not anymore. Don't wait for more responses.

Have a great day!

mnk3_ · Feb 23, 2026

dantiicu said:
You're right that tone and license are separate issues — I never said otherwise. I said the tone was unacceptable; that doesn't exempt me from obligations, and I didn't claim it did.

On the legal substance: I understand the FSF's interpretation, and I'm not arguing the obligation doesn't exist at distribution. My point was narrower — "reasonably promptly" was presented as if it were the license's language, and it isn't.

As for releasing the source — the decision will be mine, made on my own terms, not yours or anyone else's.

Regarding NSP installs — I'm sure you only install your own legally dumped backups. I would never question that. Voiding warranties, patching firmware, all strictly to play games you personally own. Most upstanding person in the room, no doubt.

You're not even part of the original context here — and I'm not particularly concerned with providing you anything. I'm not here to please anyone in this community also, not anymore. Don't wait for more responses.

Have a great day!

Great, the decision is yours, and the obligation remains yours too.

The sarcasm about NSP installs is cute, but it's the same deflection we've been calling out this whole thread. It still doesn't touch the license point, it wasn't even directed to you.

Anyways, the source will speak for itself whenever it appears. Or won't, and we'll know what that means.

hippy dave · Feb 23, 2026

Um what read the rules idk what to tell you

AndorfRequissa · Feb 23, 2026

just alot of angry people here trying to stop people from having fun. look around you the world sucks. if someone can get enjoyment out of homebrew it doesnt really matter imo as long as they arent paying for it. the homebrew community used to be about sharing technological achievements with each other and providing end users with more options.

now most homebrew creators just want to profit and whine when someone else gets in the way of their profit. shame on those people.

mnk3_ · Feb 23, 2026

AndorfRequissa said:
just alot of angry people here trying to stop people from having fun. look around you the world sucks. if someone can get enjoyment out of homebrew it doesnt really matter imo as long as they arent paying for it. the homebrew community used to be about sharing technological achievements with each other and providing end users with more options.

now most homebrew creators just want to profit and whine when someone else gets in the way of their profit. shame on those people.

Yes, really sad that a dev is angry when he should be enjoying his work. The world isn't against him, even if he thinks so. Though I guess it's hard to enjoy it when you're focused on profiting from code written by people who aren't profiting at all.

...wait, you didn't mean the Tico dev?

Viri · Feb 23, 2026

Anyone have a tl;dr about the drama? I missed it. lol

garbagehuman123 · Feb 24, 2026

the — are killing me, stop using chadGPT to even answer these questions man :rofl2:

your source needs to be available as soon as you are distributing modified binaries, you can even ask your LLM about that, you are currently in violation of GPL my man, next time use a cuck license like BSD and vibe it which is exactly what you are doing here.

Also the buffoons comparing this to game piracy pop off but if you are comparing it to a banned thing here this thread should get nuked (and I wish this vibemess project did get nuked too but I highly doubt any dev will bother with it)

Oh and btw gl getting a 3DS emulator fellas

purple_bandit · Feb 24, 2026

mnk3_ said:
Again, this has NOTHING to do with piracy. That's a textbook fallacy, trying to discredit an argument by attacking the person making it rather than addressing the point itself. It doesn't work here. The homebrew community isn't about piracy. If it were, this forum would already be shut down. The issue is simple: someone took a GPL-licensed emulator, ported it, and didn't publish the source. That's a license violation, full stop. It's not credit what the license means, it's the modified source code published.

Look at the license from the repo: https://github.com/devmiyax/yabause?tab=GPL-2.0-1-ov-file#readme

So if someone distributes a GPLv2 emulator binary/port for Switch without either shipping the modified source or a proper written source offer, they are not complying with Section 3 and are in violation of the license.

If the dev wanted to build an emulator from scratch, not based on any GPL code, and keep it closed source, sure, no problem. But since it's not the case, he accepted those terms when he modified the original code and distributed it. Can't just pretend they don't exist.

Keep crying "BuT pEoPlE aRe PiRaTiNg11!1!!" while forgetting that without free software like this GPL emulator, you wouldn't have Saturn emulation at all. The best ones (Yaba Sanshiro 2, Kronos (both forked from Yabause), Ymir, Mednafen) are all GPL-licensed. Forget that small thing and the entire scene you love and want on your Switch crumbles.

Also, to the mods: I think we should close any thread discussing Tico. It always devolves into silly flamewars like this, and it doesn't make sense to discuss with people dodging the actual issue. I even saw empty messages from the dev a few posts above (guessing multi-account caught in the act, and I bet these people came from the Discord where they talk about Tico). When he releases the modified source as GPLv2 requires, obviously he'll be welcomed back to discuss anything.

Who cares?

Post automatically merged: Feb 24, 2026

Viri said:
Anyone have a tl;dr about the drama? I missed it. lol

Guy has made a new emulator front-end like Retroarch with a fancy GUI and stuff.
But it's closed source (who cares lol) and a bunch of moral nerds are seething that it breaks the Reddit internet rules around sharing code.

Meanwhile, this guy has ported over the Sega Saturn libretro core Yabusa Sanshiro and has got it running at full speed at stock clocks. Insane performance. The absolute best Saturn emulator anyone's been able to drop on Switch in 8 years. But instead of celebrating his work and talking about how impressive it is and it's still only early stages with it, people are instead dogpiling on the guy cus "muh license, muh open source". Cringe.

ertaboy356b · Feb 24, 2026

Viri said:
Anyone have a tl;dr about the drama? I missed it. lol

People are pissed that an application used for "preservation" is getting pirated for "preservation".

garbagehuman123 · Feb 24, 2026

ertaboy356b said:
People are pissed than an application used for "preservation" is getting pirated for "preservation".

Can you please elaborate how using open source emulators (with or without changes done to them) is helping preserve anything? I would love to hear more about that!!!!, we literally don't give a shit about his frontend, we only expect this clown to properly source the emulators he is using on this shitty iisu copycat so guys like you!!! can use for example yabause without having to depend on a closed source tool and a forced frontend to play saturn games and even have your illegal forwarders!!!!

Homebrew So that tiicu thread has been deleted?

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

GBATemp's Official Psi-Hater

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

BBMB

Member

Member

Member

BBMB

Gungan Philosopher

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum