Nintendo files two new lawsuits against TX-related resellers

Two years from now there will be people on this forum arguing about which exploit is better for the new Nintendo console ...

 

You mean like in Atmosphere v0.11.0 where they reflected the changes to HOS 10.0.0 that moved ACID checks into loader?

 

I'm slightly surprised at how quickly Nintendo's acted but I guess it's not totally unexpected.

These devices will just end up on aliexpress - what can Nintendo do then?

 

Its not "possible", TX is absolutely using Nintendo code in their XCI loader, not sure how most here forgot that. Nintendo may not be able to prove it in court, but such things have happened in the past, BnetD comes to my mind when Blizzard claimed they could reproduce some bugs from their code in BnetD's server emulators and they won.

 

What does that mean in layman's terms?

 

Shouldn't it be easy to argue that SXOS isn't an actual operating system? I mean it's just patches and partly reimplementations for the official OS.

 

People need to recompile loader without the check, or make loader patches alongside sigpatches to circumvent the changes.
Otherwise (illegitimate) installed content won't work.

 

Atmosphere should just stop making CFW all together because honestly it's for piracy. Let SXOS be the face of piracy. When it comes down to them being in court they can say that they stopped producing CFW

Besides these end users are not loyal anways lol once atmosphere stop supporting future CFW its going to lead people into getting SXOS anyway if they want to continue to enjoy future games

 

Which makes piracy more difficult, right?

 

Again, Nintendo is not going to take them to court because Atmosphere does not outright enable piracy or use copyrighted code.

Funny you say that, considering more than half of SXOS compatibility updates are ripped straight from Atmosphere.

That aside, Atmosphere is open source. There have been plenty of forks and if active development were to come to a close I can assure you another group would pick it up pretty fast.

Yes.

 

If you really want to turn this thread into another SXOS VS Atmosphere post, Atmosphere has sysmodules and support for more homebrew. XCI can also be installed legitimately by using a custom made extractor instead of Big N's code. Also, there's a high chance that A, Atmosphere will continue to update to future firmwares, as Nintendo cannot patch the vulnerability on older switches, B, a lot of people might just use multiple emunands for higher FWs anyways and C, Atmosphere isn't SX, and where SX is objectively illegal by their marketing and their use copyrighted code, Atmosphere is still in the gray area of console hacking, like i said, if Nintendo attacked Atmosphere, they wouldn't have a lot of arguments as the keys and sigpatches aren't included in it, which means that it doesn't allow piracy, which also means that they would lose the case and would make console hacking legal, which Nintendo doesn't want.

 

Not young. 25 years old dude.

 

@8BitWonder & @HRudyPlayZ

This isn't a who's CFW is better im only saying Nintendo would sue either of them. Technically speaking you are not supposed to use sigpatches with atmosphere because its not included people are not using atmosphere as intended. Atleast with SXOS you know what you get vs Atmosphere some people have to dig a tunnel (sigpatches) to use a CFW that isn't intended to be used. Atmosphere isn't designed to run piracy but its manipulated to run it so it makes thier group liable for legal action. If no piracy could be enabled on their CFW nintendo wouldn't care about them because they aren't a threat. I'm a pirate and I understand the game I have no issues with SXOS all I'm saying don't be surprise if Atmosphere step out the scene like Kosmos when people feel the heat they drop out.

 

1) This isn't "an isolated case." This is a regulation, and it has the weight of law behind it. It can be challenged, and it undergoes periodic review, but this ruling has been upheld and is in effect to this day.

2) "The special exception request was declined, but it wasn't declared illegal?" What does that even mean? The reason that an exemption was being sought in the first place is because the practice of jailbreaking is presumed to be illegal under the DMCA without one.

Maybe you or someone else could make a more convincing argument to reverse this ruling, and you are welcome to do so when this comes up for review next year. However, my whole point is that jailbreaking video game consoles is illegal under the DMCA, and your argument that it is legal as long as you don't market it for piracy doesn't have a leg to stand on.

 

They aren't doing this to get money, they are doing this in the hopes that the legal fees will force the resellers to shut down.

 

That's like saying if I downloaded/ran Nintendo ROMs on Windows; an OS not intended to allow piracy that mind you, I wouldn't even need to make modifications to, then Microsoft can be sued for my actions.
That's completely asinine.

 

Seems like a lot of people aren't really understanding why Nintendo does this...

It doesn't matter if it's illegal or not, it doesn't matter if they win at the end of not, Nintendo knows the operators of those websites don't have the money or resources to engage in a legal fight that may last years, they will just choose to settle before any trial begins.

 

1) It is an isolated case because it's one of the first and only times where there was an official legal response to it, there was only one court analyzing this case.

2) If it's not forbidden in the law, it is automatically accepted. Jailbreaking your console is still in a gray area because there's still no official law to make it illegal. The case you linked to was about adding jailbreaking as an exception, making it legal. Though, the case ended with a decline of the exception, making console hacking still in a gray area.


I have a lot of counter-arguments but i wouldn't take the risk to face Nintendo and their army of 10 billion advocates, i might write a list here at some point if i have the time...
Please also note that the DMCA can only apply in the US, making all external websites unaffected by it.
And yes my argument that the piracy marketing is what will Nintendo use in the case is pretty valid. Even if you consider hacking as infringing on the DMCA, which as of now hasn't been proved... As SX was marketed as a piracy device, Nintendo will win for sure as it is 100% illegal to promote illegal activities such as piracy, though, Atmosphere which doesn't do that and doesn't even include the keys to do so cannot be attacked as as of now, Atmosphere has a lot of counter-arguments to Nintendo and some of which being that it only aims at running homebrews, and that it still wasn't proved as illegal, where SX can't really be saved as they were proved to purposely market it as a piracy-device.

 

Finally someone who can talk sense. I never react on this site cause its flooded with no brainers and kids, but thank you for doing so.
This is gonna be an interesting lawsuit indeed.