Yuzu decrypts the games with your prod.keys which already means circumventing anti piracy measures. Pretty much all countries that care about piracy (EU and US) have anti-circumvention laws that make this action illegal, even if its for your own use of your own games. No matter how stupid it may sound, there is no possible way to ever use Yuzu in a legal way in most of the first world.
Jako301
joined 1 year ago
By using these keys to decrypt the games they are circumventing anti-piracy measures which is already illegal in a lot of countries. Even if no actual piracy was involved, what they are doing with the prod.keys almost guarantees them a loss in court in all of the EU and North America.
In a dorm its legal but may be against your contract.
At school/work you probably aren't officially allowed to charge your devices, so it's theft.
Even if you are allowed to charge your phone at work, they technically may have to meter it and tax it as additional benefits depending on your country.
Why don't they sue PC manufacturers for producing the hardware that led to the emulator?
This one is perfectly analogous to the Nintendo tomfoolery, though.
Not really. PCs aren't purpose build to run emulators, these emulators just happen to also work on them.
Emulators on the other hand are purpose build to circumvent anti piracy measures (which is illegal even for your own use), even if piracy may not be their primary intention.
Thats probably 1500$ in apple parts. These parts most likely already include R&D costs as well as the additional increase for their brand.
We aren't facing a binary outcome. Our actions now, even small ones, have tangible effects on the outcomes we face in a highly non-linear way.
That would be the case if a global change for a better world would have started already and its just a question of how long it takes, but that simply isn't what's happening right now.
Even the most impactfull laws made are only at the level of feel good politic like the plastic straw ban was. The only thing the EU seems fixed on are EVs which honestly aren't much of an improvement. And any government that tries to implement good policies looses tons of support cause people can't deal with any loss in quality of life.
At the moment the only outcome we are facing is the worst possible one and no amount of personal change has any impact whatsoever.
We are long past the point where any self imposed limitations of the average person can change anything for the better, the world is burning and 90% of the population is still in denial or doesn't care. The only way anything major can change is if the lawmakers get their shit together, but chances for this are close to nill as long as we allow them to get bankrolled by corps.
Sure I could spend my last few good years eating nothing but gras while gluing myself onto the road in protest just to delay the inevitable by 5 nanoseconds, but I honestly don't care anymore. This world doesn't want to save itself and that includes everyone from boomers to zoomers.
Incomprehensible/overcomplicated ToS already get declared as void every now and then by a competent court, so they aren't really enforceable.
They should be forced to have a simplified part and a jurist part.
This will never work. Most of the time they are this complicated to cover any potential loopholes from every angle and point of view.
Offering a simplified version will just lead to some idiot exploiting a loophole that doesn't exist in the juristic version and once that case goes to court we have the issue of what version counts for the average consumer.
If we preface this by saying only the juristic one is legally binding and you have to read it either way, then the simplified one lost its purpose.
Who is the simplified version even meant for? Pretty much no one reads ToS, the only ones doing so will have some kind of business relations. Be it the ToS of their Software or their supplier, they will need the juristic version either way.
Besides all that, most Software ToS are at least comprehensible if you take a few seconds to think about what you read.
This isn't about server costs or infrastructure, but rather about licensing rights and artist payments.
Spotify pays 70% of its revenue to artists and despite that most of them are still severely underpaid compared to their listening times. They could pay artists 5-10% more I'd they give up all profit they make, but that's about it. You already pay artists less than 1ct per song, if that's still too much or not is for you to decide.
Youtube Premium works cause they pay creators even less while showering every non-premium watcher with ads every 5 minutes.
Netflix has an entirely different business model. They only pay an initial license fee for a finished series. The artists/studio already got paid, the price negotiations is purely between Netflix and a few big publishers. Due to that they can calculate if a series will bring in a profit and only then decide to buy the license for a period of time. Due to that their offer, while it may seem large, is just a tiny fraction compared to Spotify or YouTube.
Now to Spotifys books. I'm not sure what their exact business model is, but either they buy the license for the books or they allow others to sell their books directly on their platform. Whatever it is, its a huge increase in costs for them. Either Spotify has the big upfront license cost that they try to get back by gaining new customers or premium allows you to "rent" a book which means Spotify still has to pay the creator even if you didn't pay them anything.
Taking the extra money from the already existing premium subscription won't work. Artists are already underpaid, reducing that even further will lead to them leaving Spotify.
Premium is pretty much only for music, the audio book part is more like a free demo. Including them in the normal premium sub is unsustainable.
In the case of CSAM they really have to care, if they want to or not. Otherwise the instance gets shut down pretty fast and the police will have a not so nice chat with the admin.