Nintendo seems able to detect use of Mig Flash carts, which can also help enable piracy.
See full article...
See full article...
Playing personal game “backups” could get your Switch 2 banned by Nintendo
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Nope. They want to sell worldwide to normies, they gotta provide access until at least 2027.
Here’s one of many legal documents Nintendo signed stating they must provide security updates for all the software they ship, irrespective of any user agreements: https://www.nintendo.com/eu/media/d...ementOfCompliance_NintendoSwitch2_Console.pdf
Since they built their devices to comply with EU and UK laws using online updates as the mechanism for securing their devices, they’re kinda screwed. They know this, which is why the European EULA doesn’t explicitly allow them to do stupid things like the US one does. If they failed to supply security updates to specific devices due to some silly EULA nonsense and something bad happened to people in the EU or the UK as a result, Nintendo could be held liable for cleaning up the mess, or potentially barred from being able to sell any future products.
It’s also worth noting that Nintendo considers their new product to be e-waste as they’re not committing to the industry standard minimum security support period, claiming the product could go end of life as early as 2027, which is the bare minimum needed for their product to be legal to sell to consumers in the first place.
Knowing Nintendo has barely any respect for the law themselves, I doubt many will jump to their defence on this one.
Upvote
-7
(5
/
-12)
Or it could be that many of us just don't agree with your position on Nintendo.
Can you conceive that maybe people have different points of view on this issue?
Seems pretty presumptuous and rude to call people "bootlickers" just because they don't have the same opinions as you on Nintendo.
Upvote
8
(12
/
-4)
You probably shouldn't buy any modern console used without first making sure it functions, and can connect to online servers.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
On the bright side, since they can't get updates anymore that means any future exploits that are found in the early firmware by jailbreakers can't be patched for them anymore...
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Which is all that Nintendo has done.
It's a good thing Nintendo hasn't bricked anyone's devices then.
Upvote
6
(7
/
-1)
But is it necessary to have a backup copy of a video game?
These Mig Flash devices are convenient, sure, but are they necessary?
Upvote
7
(9
/
-2)
You are wrong here about British law.
1) That it is not an infringement of copyright to make a backup of a computer program, that doesn't mean anyone has to facilitate you doing so. Literally all that means is that Nintendo can't sue someone for doing it. But they are under no obligation to continue to do business with you if you do or permit you to access any ongoing services. They can't overrule being able to sue you contractually, but they can absolutely just block you from their services.
2) Most importantly, this section of the CDPA is only applicable to copies that have been "lawfully obtained", which is impossible as it's subject to the amendment in 296 of the Copyright and Related Rights Obligations that prohibits devices or services which bypass technical protection measures. There is a provision where you can specifically ask the Secretary of State to issue a specific allowance where the act isn't prohibited by copyright, but last time someone FOIed it the government had never issued such a letter in the last 22 years, so you probably don't have it, and it's unlikely they would just say this is fine anyway, as the commercial availability of backups is supposed to be considered and you could buy the title from the e-shop instead.
And if you don't believe me on this matter, maybe you would believe the government - https://assets.publishing.service.g...60aaa293c4d/response-copyright-techreview.pdf (page 5).
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
It's more than a little ironic to consider that Nintendo would be more than willing to comply there precisely because they're commited on blocking piracy. Preventing tampering or and/or unauthorized transmission of data are what security updates are supposed to do.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
As I said: when the law says so.
In Europe, resale of licenses is expressly permitted. So is format shifting.
Regardless of what the license says, terms that sign away your regular rights are invalid.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
It's rude to keep shoving the same shoddy hardware into a consumer device and calling it new and improved. It's also rude to brick someone's gear for doing something like backing up a game that was purchased.
But yeah, I see your point - I'm a bit salty on that part and admit I deserved the digital scores I received. I'm going to sit back and grin widely when the switch2 joystick drift issue or the Nintendo store closes its doors on the switch2 becomes a news story.
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
Weird that you would come here to say something that's false.
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
Depends upon the jurisdiction. In the USA, that's the law. Do you have anything of value to say?
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
That's not the law in the USA, where the DMCA allows the creation of backups.
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
Don't ping me if you can't even do the bare minimum of reading about the law or can't parse what I originally said properly. We're talking about getting around Digital Rights Management being illegal in the USA because of the DMCA. I never said it was altogether illegal to create a backup.
Thanks for playing. You're blocked.
Upvote
0
(2
/
-2)
Could someone explain the appeal of owning physical cartridges these days?
Personally, I was a big proponent of physical media, but starting with the 360/PS3 era, those physical copies have been worth less and less as far as having an actual copy of the game goes. It seems the vast majority of games these days are barely playable without a day one patch, making the physical copy pretty useless.
At this point, I've pretty much switched to digital. If they ever take away access to my digital copy, I'll sail the high seas with zero guilt.
Personally, I was a big proponent of physical media, but starting with the 360/PS3 era, those physical copies have been worth less and less as far as having an actual copy of the game goes. It seems the vast majority of games these days are barely playable without a day one patch, making the physical copy pretty useless.
At this point, I've pretty much switched to digital. If they ever take away access to my digital copy, I'll sail the high seas with zero guilt.
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
In most cases, it's because if the rights-holder decides to (or is obligated to) revoke the license for whatever reason, it's far easier to cut off access to digital media than send a demand to recover the cartridge.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
You said said that the DMCA prohibits copying for backups, but the DMCA explicitly allows copying for backups. I never claimed that you said that it was altogether illegal to create a backup, so you're the one who needs to work on his reading comprehension.
Good riddance to bad garbage.
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
Their post said exactly "Yep. I came here to say this. It's consumer-hostile, yet illegal to create a backup if you have to break DRM to do so. I hate it, but that is the law."
Emphasis mine. So no, they did not say that the DMCA prevents copying for backups. And no, they did not say it was altogether illegal to create a backup. They very clearly said the DMCA prevents you from legally creating backups if DRM is involved. And given you quoted that exact post, you have zero room to claim a lack of awareness of what they said.
If you want to have arguments with yourself over things other people are not saying, you are going to find yourself doing exactly that as multiple people block you.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Anyone who bought supports that piece of sh*t Nintendo by buying a Switch 2 at this point, deserves whatever they do to them. 
Upvote
-4
(0
/
-4)