Homebrew Freeshop gets DMCA'd on Github...

[N64]

Just the CIA for it, we don't have a custom cache or anything, so as long as the titlekey site stays up, CIAngel will function even if the repo is DMCA'd

then I guess the follow up question is:
what files do I need from that title key site in order to maintain access to existing eshop content?

 

[Aletron9000]

I just converted the sd card contents of freeshop to a cia as a backup. (the actual app, not the data from the app)

 

[cearp]

so we know the main alternative to this is CIAngel.
what files do I need to have in order to make sure that IF ciangel is taken down, that I can continue using it?

nothing, just download it. because CIAngel only relies on the titlekey site.

if that site goes down, we can still just share that json key file ourselves on other sites... so it's not so bad!
as opposed to freeshop which i think relies on a lot of prebuild data like icons etc, i'm not too sure since i didn't test it out.

 

[DarkenedMatter]

That is true, but it doesn't help the fact that the sole purpose of Freeshop is to aid the user in pirating, which is illegal.

Technically not everyone owns every ROM that they play on emulators so that's still very illegal? Where is the take down on every single emulator in existence? And the websites that hosts the ROMs.

 

[cearp]

And what other homebrew app has had a DMCA takedown? FreeShop is specifically for piracy. Anyone who uses it is 100% guaranteed to have pirated games. Other stuff, not necessarily.

yeah but it doesn't mean nintendo is going to ban anyone who has used it. we have no idea what logs they keep.
there is not much to argue or talk about because they haven't really banned anyone for piracy or homebrew. so, yeah every one of us might get banned tomorrow, but i doubt it.

 

[Drakia]

then I guess the follow up question is:
what files do I need from that title key site in order to maintain access to existing eshop content?

The json_enc file, which gets names wings.json in the CIAngel folder. Easiest way to get it is just to start up CIAngel.

I highly doubt the titlekey site will go away though, the developer of it seems pretty decent about avoiding things like DMCAs

 

[duffmmann]

Again, this is the Torrent client argument. Anyone can use their own encrypted title keys and legitimately download games they purchased. Just because people use it for piracy doesn't mean that's its intended purpose.

And torrent clients were literally just outlawed in Australia. Thing is about Torrent clients though, they had far more uses than just illegally downloading things, there were legit legal uses for torrent clients. You really can't argue that about Freeshop, I mean you can try, but no one that has used Freeshop has used it strictly to redownload titles they legit paid for in the past or demos, and even if they were, there is no reason they couldn't instead just use the official eshop for that. So the torrent client argument isn't really an apt analogy here, though I do see where it is coming from.

 

[OrGoN3]

The console itself is what decrypts the content, not freeShop. We also can't decrypt them on a PC. This is why D9 is needed when downloading from the CDN on a PC. And no, GitHub doesn't properly respond to these. This is an ill-faith DMCA claim, but unfortunately there are no laws against that. GitHub just bent over because they don't want to deal with Nintendo. YouTube does the exact same thing, and there have been many uploaders that were falsely DMCA'd into oblivion. The problem is that when one company receives a DMCA notice from another, the receiving company just says "sure" without even doing any sort of investigation. Bottom line; freeShop is not illegal for what it does.

Roger. First, ty for replying in a respectable manner. I know things can get hairy on here sometimes, and I appreciate you toning it down. Seriously, much appreciated.

Okay, so I was wrong. I am sorry about that. I assumed NUS decrypted content. I guess it boils down to 2 things now. 1) Is creating a program that allows users to decrypt data illegal, even though the console is doing the decrypting? Normally, decryption is behind a paywall. Doing so without paying is doing so without permission. Is that illegal? And, 2), the use of trademarked images, which can be rectified very easily and quickly.

Most major sites assume DMCA's are legit from major corporations. Sure, I'll agree to that. Is GitHub refusing to restore a DMCA'd repo after a legal ruling against Ninty's claim? If so, then I'll agree they are not doing the right thing. It's not on GitHub to research if the DMCA is legit. It's on the user to do that. Valid DCMAs also have to be responded to within 24 hours usually, so freezing is always the easiest thing to do.

The icons infringing is still legit.

 

[Hozu]

yeah but it doesn't mean nintendo is going to ban anyone who has used it. we have no idea what logs they keep.
there is not much to argue or talk about because they haven't really banned anyone for piracy or homebrew. so, yeah every one of us might get banned tomorrow, but i doubt it.

Also, the "they haven't done it before" argument doesn't mean much when they banned people for playing Pokémon online early, which "they haven't done before". Nobody knows what they're willing to do, so if a banwave comes, nobody should be surprised.

 

[4gionz]

Why are people saying that freeshop is ONLY made for pirating? It's actually made to be used with your own private enctitlekey.bin that you make from your own console so you can redox load your own games. It's also made to allow people "eshop access" on region changed sysnand. It's not the fault of the guy who makes the application that the community have a massive enctitlekey.bin on the Internet with nearly all games in it.

If there wasnt copyrighted content in the boot logo or wtv Nintendo would straight up have no claim, that EXACTLY why Nintendo in hanging on by a thread with this claim and using the random logo as a reason instead of straight up saying this application is illegal.

 

[OrGoN3]

And torrent clients were literally just outlawed in Australia. Thing is about Torrent clients though, they had far more uses than just illegally downloading things, there were legit legal uses for torrent clients. You really can't argue that about Freeshop, I mean you can try, but no one that has used Freeshop has used it strictly to redownload titles they legit paid for in the past or demos, and even if they were, there is no reason they couldn't instead just use the official eshop for that. So the torrent client argument isn't really an apt analogy here, though I do see where it is coming from.

Ummmm, no. Australia ISP's were mandated to block torrent sites, but that's the extent.

 

[duffmmann]

Ummmm, no. Australia ISP's were mandated to block torrent sites, but that's the extent.

Well whatever, my overall point still stands. That everything freeshop could do legally, the already legit eshop could do as well. So the *wink *wink *nudge *nudge reality is that the only real purpose the freeshop serves is for illegal means.

 

[OrGoN3]

Well whatever, my overall point still stands. That everything freeshop could do legally, the already legit eshop could do as well. So the *wink *wink *nudge *nudge reality is that the only real purpose the freeshop serves is for illegal means.

Creating an application/program for the purpose of illegal means is not illegal by itself. Kthx!

 

[Boured]

At least we still have CIAngel, granted it's not Eye Candy.

 

[Drakia]

At least we still have CIAngel, granted it's not Eye Candy.

It's a god damned beautiful special unique snowflake damnit!

 

[Boured]

It's a god damned beautiful special unique snowflake damnit!

I actually used CIAngel before freeShop was taken down. Mostly because it could create CIA's, that and I like the text based gui.

 

[Joom]

And torrent clients were literally just outlawed in Australia. Thing is about Torrent clients though, they had far more uses than just illegally downloading things, there were legit legal uses for torrent clients. You really can't argue that about Freeshop, I mean you can try, but no one that has used Freeshop has used it strictly to redownload titles they legit paid for in the past or demos, and even if they were, there is no reason they couldn't instead just use the official eshop for that. So the torrent client argument isn't really an apt analogy here, though I do see where it is coming from.

Were they? Australia has always been strict on certain things, so it doesn't surprise me that much. Anyway, the burden of proof is on Nintendo here or anyone else claiming that its sole purpose is for piracy. We all know that that's what the majority does with this, but there has to be legitimate proof that freeShop advertises this. This is what an attorney would argue.

Roger. First, ty for replying in a respectable manner. I know things can get hairy on here sometimes, and I appreciate you toning it down. Seriously, much appreciated.

Okay, so I was wrong. I am sorry about that. I assumed NUS decrypted content. I guess it boils down to 2 things now. 1) Is creating a program that allows users to decrypt data illegal, even though the console is doing the decrypting? Normally, decryption is behind a paywall. Doing so without paying is doing so without permission. Is that illegal? And, 2), the use of trademarked images, which can be rectified very easily and quickly.

Most major sites assume DMCA's are legit from major corporations. Sure, I'll agree to that. Is GitHub refusing to restore a DMCA'd repo after a legal ruling against Ninty's claim? If so, then I'll agree they are not doing the right thing. It's not on GitHub to research if the DMCA is legit. It's on the user to do that. Valid DCMAs also have to be responded to within 24 hours usually, so freezing is always the easiest thing to do.

The icons infringing is still legit.

I apologize for being snappy. I had to skip breakfast this morning so I'm a little hangry. But yes, the icons and other intellectual graphical property is a legitimate claim. I'm not arguing that. And no, decrypting content with the console technically isn't illegal so long as you own the content. However, this is a catch 22 for Nintendo since the console itself is using their own private keys for decryption.

 

[duffmmann]

Creating an application/program for the purpose of illegal means is not illegal by itself. Kthx!

Again, I go back to what I said earlier:

"I can see the argument that it is a grey area. But the reality is this: FreeShop can only be used for one thing. On its own, it is a shell waiting to accomplish that one task. If you had a device that's only function is to blow up the planet as soon as the keys are inserted and turned in the device, would you not want that device to be removed/dismantled if possible? Even if the keys are nowhere near it, I'd still be worried that the device is out there just waiting for someone to insert the keys and turn."

I don't know about the full legal picture here, but I can totally see how and why Nintendo would have a case.

 

[Wolvan]

I can see the argument that it is a grey area. But the reality is this: FreeShop can only be used for one thing. On its own, it is a shell waiting to accomplish that one task. If you had a device that's only function is to blow up the planet as soon as the keys are inserted and turned in the device, would you not want that device to be removed/dismantled if possible? Even if the keys are nowhere near it, I'd still be worried that the device is out there just waiting for someone to insert the keys and turn.

Please ban webbrowsers I can download protected zip files with them and use the key written down somewhere else!
Please ban encryption, the encrypted data might be able to destroy the world if I get it, even if the keys are nowhere near me. Also how would our dear NSA read through it?

 

[duffmmann]

Please ban webbrowsers I can download protected zip files with them and use the key written down somewhere else!
Please ban encryption, the encrypted data might be able to destroy the world if I get it, even if the keys are nowhere near me. Also how would our dear NSA read through it?

Dumb counter argument. Web browsers serve so so so so so so so so many other uses than to download illegal files. Note how I said the device's only function is to blow up the planet, not that its a device capable of all sorts of things including possibly blowing up the planet.