You fundamentally misunderstand how emulators work. Emulators are the recreation of the actual spec of the hardware itself in software. They do not need some unique key for TOTK to work as the hardware itself is what's being emulated not some encryption key pulled of the hardware. All the key does is decode the ROMs encryption so it can be run by the hardware and inturn the emulator that's mimicking the hardware. Literally any encryption key dumped from any homebrew'd switch can decode TOTK. Not once did Yuzu access TOTK ROMs files, more over the TOTK ROMs was leaked by a 3rd party with no connection to Yuzu.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

They did multiple things illegally, yet you want to still believe that they did this one specific thing correct…? While everything else they did wasnt…? What have they done correct to make you believe that this was also done “by the book”…?

The key that they were caught with (the one they would have given someone to clean room with) was illegally acquired. So sure they may have clean roomed it, but they acquired the original illegally, which means the software itself, before everything else, wasn’t done correctly as well. So they couldn’t use that defense like other lawsuits, so that’s why they settled out of court before discovery, since discovery would have made it far worse for them and other developers.

They fucked up, but sure defend them I guess?

[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Where is the proof that they illegally acquired an encryption key? Actually. Even if they acquired a key without homebrew, it still doesn't qualify as copyright infringement, that only comes into play if they were publicly distributing an illegally acquired key. Which you've yet to provide any evidence of. Again, provide literally any screenshots of them disturbing an illegally acquired key.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And again the goalposts get moved.

Why are you blindly defending Yuzu who have done every other step of this illegally and wrong? It’s honestly quite sad.

Nintendo is scum, but that doesn’t mean Yuzu also isn’t in the wrong, or does this possibility not exist here….?

[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I'm asking for proof that they illegally acquired an encryption key and were illegally distributing said key. All sources I've found state that the Yuzu devs used "prod.keys" obtained from legitimate Switch hardware for internal use and didn't publicly distribute any said keys. The said many sources even state that they provided directions on how to obtain your own key which isn't illegal and is in favor of them not distributing keys. This is also backed by the Yuzu source code persevered in the previously provided mirror and Yuzu website preserved here and by wayback machine.
Your failer to provide literally any source at all points to you being a biased corrupt source.

https://www.wired.com/story/nintendo-yuzu-emulator-lawsuit-piracy/

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2024/02/how-strong-is-nintendos-legal-case-against-switch-emulator-yuzu/

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world -4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Read your own links dude… they are identical as well? Thats weird for being two different places…

Anyways

That guide also includes links to a number of external tools that directly break console and/or game encryption techniques.

They distributed tools…. Which is what you just claimed they didn’t do, I appreciate you providing the source that shoots your own foot though.

The key they used was acquired illegally, they provided means for you to acquire your own illegally, they tested with illegal Roms, they profited from it, etc you’re ignoring all of these in favor of what…? Exactly…? That it doesn’t somehow matter…? What…?

Again, what have they done RIGHT to be able to claim the defense you’re claiming they can use, all the evidence and their own website contradicts what they claimed they stood for. And here you are, evidence provided by you, and still shouting they didn’t do it, yet your source says they did? Give your head a shake lmfao.