Why Banning Tripping Should be Considered at Most National/Regional Brawl Tournaments

[JOE!]

@jack:

even if it is something as simple as turning off tripping, which we wont even need to bring up?

hell, arent there tourneys with texture hacks all the time?

 

[Jack Kieser]

@jack:

even if it is something as simple as turning off tripping, which we wont even need to bring up?

Yes. Because now we're setting up a precedent of lying about the legality of our tournaments to our venue managers. That's going to make us look great.

hell, arent there tourneys with texture hacks all the time?

Yes, and I don't agree with that, either. Is it something that we're going to be called on? Probably not. Is it ethical? Hells to the NAH.

 

[GimR]

@Keiser:


I'd just like to point out that most smashers got their wiis before "the new agreement" that Nintendo wrote up so most people aren't being unethical

 

[Jack Kieser]

@Keiser:


I'd just like to point out that most smashers got their wiis before "the new agreement" that Nintendo wrote up so most people aren't being unethical

Ok, one more time:

Nintendo provides updated EULAs automatically; therefore, any user attempts to block, ignore, or otherwise turn down updated EULAs are the USER'S responsibility, not Nintendo's, and Nintendo can still hold the user to update EULAs due to clauses in the ORIGINAL (Day 1) Wii EULAs.

FURTHERMORE, by not fully informing venue managers that potentially (probably) illegal events (hacking) are taking place, or by specifically hiding this fact from a venue manager, TOs are being patently unethical. Lies of omission are still lies. Lies that the VENUE MANAGER can be held liable for if a Nintendo rep actually DOES catch on and decides to press charges.

There's PLENTY of things unethical about purposefully lying about whether we hack our systems.

 

[Veril]

@Keiser: you make me sad. That is probably the worst post I have ever read. Hacked brawl variants are different games. Official mandate be d***ed.

The argument only matters for MLG. You think B+ (or whatever mod) is going to be a legal issue for TOs now, despite it not having been before? Cause it wasn't. It isn't, and it will never be the case.

People should play the game they want to, not the game we're force fed. If that game is a mod of an existing game, so be it. I put more time into B+ than I ever imagined I would into anything I wasn't graded on or paid for, and dozens of other people have as well. And we should leave the community because of this? Get *****! Stiffling creativity and attempts to improve this poor excuse for a competitive fighter (with its amazing concept and flawed execution)... that's the only unethical act here.


Nintendo isn't allowing freakin live-streaming from MLG. MLG obviously will not be able to run hacks of any sort. I don't care. MLG and corporate sponsors are cool, but they aren't what make a community.

 

[GimR]

Ok, one more time:

Nintendo provides updated EULAs automatically; therefore, any user attempts to block, ignore, or otherwise turn down updated EULAs are the USER'S responsibility, not Nintendo's, and Nintendo can still hold the user to update EULAs due to clauses in the ORIGINAL (Day 1) Wii EULAs.

FURTHERMORE, by not fully informing venue managers that potentially (probably) illegal events (hacking) are taking place, or by specifically hiding this fact from a venue manager, TOs are being patently unethical. Lies of omission are still lies. Lies that the VENUE MANAGER can be held liable for if a Nintendo rep actually DOES catch on and decides to press charges.

There's PLENTY of things unethical about purposefully lying about whether we hack our systems.

I'm sorry but what we really need to figure out is whether it is illegal in the first place to hack you Wii

Nintendo can't bind you to an updated contract if in the update they do something illegal, or them saying "you can't do X" is illegal.

For example, if in the updated EULA they say that they now have the right to take your wii at any time it, wouldn't matter. Since you signed the original document that says they can update the EULA you wolud think that they could take your Wii but because the contract violates American law it is invalid.


so the question is: is the thing Nintendo put in the EULA that says you may not make changes to your own property legal?


I say it violates our constitutional rights. We have the right to our own property. I bought my Wii when it came out. As long as I'm not doing anything illegal under America law I should be able to do whatever I want to it(AKA as long as I'm not stealing their games, or manipulating there games and then selling the manipulated version..)



I would also like to point out that I bought the Wii first, went home, and then their contract thing popped up. How can they push a contract on me AFTER I bought their product? That's messed up.

 

[Veril]

Yes, and I don't agree with that, either. Is it something that we're going to be called on? Probably not. Is it ethical? Hells to the NAH.

Thankfully we aren't compelled to agree with you.

"Hacks another wii"

 

[Ripple]

didn't nintendo get sued in europe over this exact debate? I heard they did

I heard their "contract" is actually; you never buy a wii, they lend it too you indefinitely and therefore, is not your property to modify

 

[Jack Kieser]

We've already gone over this... but ok.

I'm sorry but what we really need to figure out is whether it is illegal in the first place to hack you Wii

It is. This was NEVER disputed.

Nintendo can't bind you to an updated contract if in the update they do something illegal, or them saying "you can't do X" is illegal.

For example, if in the updated EULA they say that they now have the right to take your wii at any time it, wouldn't matter. Since you signed the original document that says they can update the EULA you wolud think that they could take your Wii but because the contract violates American law it is invalid.

Correct. Obviously, you've never read any of the EULAs. Let me assure you, there is nothing in there on Nintendo's side that breaches (current) American law.

so the question is: is the thing Nintendo put in the EULA that says you may not make changes to your own property legal?

Yes. Because it's not your property. The physical system is, sure. But the OS (or in the Wii's case, IOS's) are not; you're simply licensing them for use as per your user agreement. As is the case with your Brawl disc; you can't make backup copies or change the code on the disc because you own the physical disc, but are licensing the data on it for usage as per Nintendo's agreement. You don't own your copy of Brawl. No one does.

I say it violates our constitutional rights.

Current case precedent does not agree with you.

We have the right to our own property.

A lofty ideal. As of right now, you can own physical property. All computer code falls under "intellectual property", and as such is governed under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, or DMCA. It states that you don't own the data on your copy of Brawl, Nintendo does, and you're (basically) borrowing it. You have to follow their rules of use, or you lose.

I bought my Wii when it came out. As long as I'm not doing anything illegal under America law...

You are.

...I should be able to do whatever I want to it(AKA as long as I'm not stealing their games, or manipulating there games and then selling the manipulated version.)

Sorry, chief. That's not how the law works. That's how the law should work, I'll give you that. But that is not how it works as of right now.

I would also like to point out that I bought the Wii first, went home, and then their contract thing popped up. How can they push a contract on me AFTER I bought their product? That's messed up.

They can do it because of the clause in the original EULA that says they can update the EULA at any time, without warning, and that your usage of their product, whether you blocked the update or not, constitutes implicit agreement to the update EULA.

Law sucks, doesn't it?

@ Veril: Go for it, man. I'll be over here playing Balance Brawl. I'll just be doing it in my home, not at a tournament.

 

[GimR]

wait but the actual ISO is never changed, the codes are on an SD card which is your property and you only activate them through the Wii. Is it possible to say with that argument that the actual code on the disc isn't being effected? Thus the EULA wasn't breached.



btw could you quote on the original EULA where it says that the EULA can be changed at any time? I couldn't find it :/


BTW Jack I think you'r getting "the Law" mixed up with "A contractual obligation" Nintendo's contract isn't law. A person signing a contract and then breaking it is against the law though.

 

[Orion*]

Yeah, unless you're a Nintendo PR rep getting his info straight from Reggie, I'll take what you say with a grain of salt...

...you know, since every patch since around March of last year has been used to try and stop homebrew. And, technically, piracy doesn't just involve making copies of games. You're breaking Nintendo's DRM and anti-piracy countermeasures every time you try to run homebrew, so yeah, even running Gecko is (technically) an act of piracy, since you're repurposing Nintendo's OS code to do things they don't want it to do.

as long as im not illegally DLing anything, i bought the game so im going to do what the **** i want with it. i seriously doubt they can put me in jail or bring me to court for hacking my wii to have music on it lol. if you buy music, you can edit it, if you buy shoes you can draw on them, if you buy a condom you can rip it. just because its "made" for something doesnt mean its illegal to do something else to it.

 

[Veril]

@ Veril: Go for it, man. I'll be over here playing Balance Brawl. I'll just be doing it in my home, not at a tournament.

That's pathetic.

 

[Jack Kieser]

wait but the actual ISO is never changed, the codes are on an SD card which is your property and you only activate them through the Wii. Is it possible to say with that argument that the actual code on the disc isn't being effected? Thus the EULA wasn't breached.

It doesn't have to be changed. Any code run that is not authorized to be run by Nintendo is breaking the EULA.

Chapter II: Unauthorized Software, Services, or Devices or Unlicensed Accessories

Your Wii Console and the Wii Network Service are not designed for use with unauthorized software, services, or devices or non-licensed accessories, and you may not use any of these with your Wii Console or the Wii Network Service. Such use may be illegal, voids any warranty, and is a breach of this agreement. Such use may also lead to injury to you or others or cause performance issues or damage to your Wii Console or the Wii Network Service. We (and our licensees and distributors) are not responsible for damage or loss caused by unauthorized software, services or devices or non-licensed accessories. We may take steps to disable or delete any unauthorized software, services or device installed in your Wii Console, for example, by detecting and disabling them through the Wii Network Service and/or game software. If we detect unauthorized software, services, or devices, your access to the Wii Network Service may be disabled and/or the Wii Console or games may be unplayable.

Since any code that is run on the system uses system-specific function calls written by Nintendo techs and inherent to the IOS on the system, any unauthorized code is in breach of the EULA.

btw could you quote on the original EULA where it says that the EULA can be changed at any time? I couldn't find it :/

Article 13: Current Agreement and Update

We may change the terms and conditions of this agreement, the Wii Code of Conduct, or the Wii Privacy Policy, at any time. A current version of this agreement will be available on the Internet at http://support.nintendo.com. If you do not have Internet access, you may contact our customer-service department, and we will mail you a current version of this agreement, free of charge. We will post notice on http://support.nintendo.com if the agreement is changed at least 5 days before the changes become legally binding. If you do not agree to these changes, you must cancel your Wii Network Service in accordance with this agreement. If you do not have Internet access, you should periodically contact our customer-service department and ask whether there have been any changes to the agreement since the last version you obtained.

BTW Jack I think you're getting "the Law" mixed up with "A contractual obligation" Nintendo's contract isn't law. A person signing a contract and then breaking it is against the law though.

Yes, and use of the console (as I've explained before) is an implicit agreement to Nintendo's EULA, which is a legally binding contract. Therefore, breaking the terms of their agreement is breaking the law (especially since the passing of the DMCA), and Nintendo can seek damages, both civil... AND criminal.

Source: http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/systems/wii/en_na/privacyEULA.jsp

@ Veril: Well, that's not very becoming of a moderator.

@ Orion: Learn the law, man. You're going to get yourself sued one day, be it by the RIAA, MPAA, ECA (Entertainers Consumers Association), Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, or the government.

 

[Ripple]

as long as im not illegally DLing anything, i bought the game so im going to do what the **** i want with it. i seriously doubt they can put me in jail or bring me to court for hacking my wii to have music on it lol. if you buy music, you can edit it, if you buy shoes you can draw on them, if you buy a condom you can rip it. just because its "made" for something doesnt mean its illegal to do something else to it.

sorry but they actually can.

like jack said, buying the game does not give you ownership over it. they lend it to you indefinitely and therefore, you may not do anything to the disc that they(nintendo) says you can't do which includes hacking

 

[Eddie G]

Wow Kieser...way to let "the man" bring you down. This "indefinite loan" concept is bull****, and ***** the original concept of you buy it, it's yours.

I see it as just another small step toward this entire country being completely institutionalized and ownership being monopolized; our rights, our ability to call something our own, everything. In other words...a masked variant of a communistic order. It sure is beginning to look that way, especially if we just sit back and take it like what you choose to do here.

 

[Ripple]

Wow Kieser...way to let "the man" bring you down. This "indefinite loan" concept is bull****, and ***** the original concept of you buy it, it's yours.

sorry but Jack is right on this. you do not own the information stored on the wii and/or brawl game disc. modifying that content is against the contract you agreed to when you "bought" (were loaned) the wii and/or brawl game disc.

I see it as just another small step toward this entire country being completely institutionalized and ownership being monopolized; our rights, our ability to call something our own, everything. It sure is beginning to look that way, especially if we just sit back and take it like what you choose to do here.

its sad but true, like jack said. nintendo was recently sued over this exact debate but I do not recall hearing a verdict

 

[Tommy_G]

Is it ethical? Hells to the NAH.

Is it hurting anyone? No. Is it making a liked game more enjoyable? Yes. Is it unethical? I doubt it, then again, something being unethical is pretty subjective.

Tournament directors don't know a lot of specificities about Brawl/Brawl tournament rulesets and don't care to learn. They copy the BBR rule set, collect door fee, and tell us to go sit in a corner until our matches start. They ones that do care would understand right when we say "we're disabling tripping." Usually common rule is if both players agree on it, then it's allowed.

 

[GimR]

Unfortunately the revolution already happened :/ I'm for the restoration of constitutional law

I mean seriously, 99% of Americans including president bush and Obama don't even know what type of government we have. We aren't a democracy lol

If anyone is wondering what type of government we are say just the first 4 lines of the "Pledge of allegiance" in your head.





Also, people please get back on track!!!

 

[Jack Kieser]

Wow Kieser...way to let "the man" bring you down. This "indefinite loan" concept is bull****, and ***** the original concept of you buy it, it's yours.

Hey man, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just the guy educating you all / quoting information you all really should have been responsible enough to read on your own. International IP law is only as crazy as it is now because individuals didn't stand up to it and stop it when it was still in bill form.

I see it as just another small step toward this entire country being completely institutionalized and ownership being monopolized; our rights, our ability to call something our own, everything.

Then you have NO IDEA how IP law really works, since it means that people can't share ANYTHING without express consent from the original IP holder. IP law is made expressly to STOP people from sharing things freely.

In other words...a masked variant of a communistic order. It sure is beginning to look that way, especially if we just sit back and take it like what you choose to do here.

Yeah, and especially if you have no idea what you're talking about. IP law is a capitalist as it gets.

 

[fkacyan]

This thread is full of people who are years late to what many PC enthusiasts have been fighting against for like, twenty years.

 

[JOE!]

better question(s), Jack:

1) who the hell would honestly care enough to bring the hammah down on someone for turning off tripping?

2) why do you have BBrawl for just your own enjoyment when it's sole purpose is to replace vBrawl as a tourney standard with a more balanced Roster and stage selection?

 

[Jack Kieser]

better question(s), Jack:

We'll see. ^_-

1) who the hell would honestly care enough to bring the hammah down on someone for turning off tripping?

Honestly, the law is the law; I may not agree with it, but any law-abiding citizen, in theory, could do it. Case-in-point: next to my job is a "Mario's Auto Body Repair", and their sign has a picture of Mario on it. Now, are they hurting anyone? Probably not. Certainly not Nintendo. And do I agree with current IP law? HELL NO. But, I like to think that I'm a law abiding citizen, and until the law is changed, it's still the law; technically (if I don't want to be a hypocrite), I should contact Nintendo and have them talk to that auto body shop about their IP infringement.

My point is: anyone who really abides by the law can turn a TO in.

2) why do you have BBrawl for just your own enjoyment when it's sole purpose is to replace vBrawl as a tourney standard with a more balanced Roster and stage selection?

Easy: because I believe in personal choice. I like BBrawl. Doesn't mean everyone will. Who am I to say that BBrawl has to, or even should, replace the competitive standard? So, I play what I enjoy from the privacy of my own home and give, as they say, each his own.

EDIT: Yes, Thio. God, yes. Thank you.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Thank you jack for continuing on the legal issue, you were complete enough that I didn't need to address it.

Basically he's completely correct, and while fair use provisions can be argued to cover individual use (and possibly "not for profit tournaments") any sort of commercial use is completely out of the question.



Of course, this doesn't mean that getting a venue is impossible, the real point of this is that making something patently illegal our standard is a bad idea because it exposes the community as a whole to a major risk.

Wow Kieser...way to let "the man" bring you down. This "indefinite loan" concept is bull****, and ***** the original concept of you buy it, it's yours.

I see it as just another small step toward this entire country being completely institutionalized and ownership being monopolized; our rights, our ability to call something our own, everything. In other words...a masked variant of a communistic order. It sure is beginning to look that way, especially if we just sit back and take it like what you choose to do here.

There was a concept of "if you buy it, it's yours"?


Honestly, think about it in terms of an MP3 player, let's say you bought an Ipod, it's yours right? Now how do you think Apple would react if you used the Ipod you bought as a model for a line of knockoffs making slight changes along the way.


Basically, whenever you buy... well anything, you're buying the physical product, but you're not buying the idea, the idea is only licensed.

The reason people don't get this about video games is that they're basically just the idea, but the same rules still apply.




For those of you who wonder why companies crack down on this... think about what modders have done in the past. Hot coffee mod, sure it can be good PR, but it can also really hurt you, and who needs the hassle?

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

It is Thinkaman and my legal position that Balanced Brawl is legal software. We post about it in public freely. Nintendo has not contacted us in any way, and they probably never will. The law is actually pretty complex here with a key note that the DMCA and similar laws focus on circumventing copy protection which is actually completely unnecessary to play Balanced Brawl or use any other codesets. We offer the means to inject code into a running game in a way that still requires the original game to play. This is legal under the precedent established by Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. v. Nintendo of America, Inc. (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 1992). Further information on this important precedent can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc.

Furthermore, any violation of Nintendo's copyright in this situation (given that we aren't distributing copies of Brawl) would be a tort violation, not a criminal violation. This means that the government (either state or federal) would have no authority to interfere with Balanced Brawl tournaments (or any other tournaments) using these codes prior to Nintendo taking express legal action. So no, you don't have to lie to venue operators about the legality; there's a pretty good case it's perfectly legal, and even in the event the courts would side against us, it would be a tort that would require Nintendo to act first (probably by getting a cease & desist issued) and then for action to be necessary. Given the circumstances, the code authors and distributors would be the ones getting sued as well, not players.

 

[Anther]

I was going to comment on the legality thing too. Aren't they our wiis?

I mean, I guess I'm all for a company deciding what files you're allowed to keep on your own personal copy of digital media when it has no bearing on anybody else..

No one else takes issue with stuff like that? What if Microsoft or Apple decided to just remove files from your computers because they want to digitally sign everything =p?

 

[fkacyan]

I was going to comment on the legality thing too. Aren't they our wiis?

I mean, I guess I'm all for a company deciding what files you're allowed to keep on your own personal copy of digital media when it has no bearing on anybody else..

No one else takes issue with stuff like that? What if Microsoft or Apple decided to just remove files from your computers because they want to digitally sign everything =p?

The scary thing is is that provided they put it in the EULA, they can do that.

Like I said, people have been fighting to own the software they purchase instead of licensing it for ages.

 

[Jack Kieser]

There's actually plenty of reason to believe that the Game Genie precedent wouldn't apply in this case. Of course, it hasn't been sent to the courts yet, but...

A Game Genie, Gameshark, or Action Replay is a stand-alone product that is separate from the game / system it is running on or modifying. This isn't the case with Ocarina hacks and most homebrew. All homebrew requires existing Nintendo code exploits and runs code that belongs to Nintendo; remember, Game Genies (et al) do not make any specific function calls: they overwrite memory locations independently of the coding of the console. Meanwhile, homebrew is using Nintendo API function calls to operate, basically mimic-ing software that is created by Nintendo or a 3rd party. They, unlike a Game Genie, are using Nintendo's own functions in a way that is not authorized by Nintendo, and since those functions were written by Nintendo engineers / programmers, those functions are Nintendo's IP; as such, if you are using their functions in a way that they do not authorize, you are breaking IP law.

Also, you are correct that any IP infringement would not be (immediately) taken to a criminal court, just to a civil one... but IP cases are heavily publicized as it is (see: RIAA, MPAA). A suit of this kind would be a first, and would probably get more attention that usual. Try getting a venue after Brawl is blacklisted by hotels, arcades, and other high-profile venues. Sure, players wouldn't get sued, and chances are TOs wouldn't, either, but (again) the venue at large could be held liable, and then we'd REALLY be screwed (or rather, the TO would; I'm sure the hotel would have the right to sue the TO after their civil case was finished).

All in all, we're in a pretty bad situation here, and the DMCA, historically, has been used to argue cases far easier than this.

 

[Anther]

It's true, but I feel like EULA's are butting their ways into other rights and taking where they shouldn't be allowed to take. I also don't have qualms with software being licensed.. as long as it's an ongoing work in progress or just basically being kept up to date for its needs of its users.

I just think that the things in terms of services are just somewhat illegal, and I understand that a lot of it is in the name of software and user protection... since all sorts of other doors open up when the systems are exploited. Iunno. =[

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

How is it not the case with Ocarina hacks? If you use smash stack to load gecko, you are causing a stack overflow and running unique code. Challenging the legality of causing a stack overflow would be bizarre given that you have a clear right to play the game and the code is designed to read what is input. You are just inputting something that causes your own code to run instead of some other event happening; if Nintendo has a right to say I can't input the name of my replay file as (some ridiculously long string causing the stack overflow), they also logically can prevent me from naming a custom stage "Nintendo sucks" or whatever... it's just absurd and obviously has no legal basis.

Gecko is a non-Nintendo program that simply hooks the game, basically forcing a part of the RAM to be overwritten with our code instead of Nintendo's code. Ocarina codes are Game Genie codes just forced upon the console in a different way than a stand-alone device. The closest you could try to attack would be file replacement .pac files, but even those are basically code snipets of a much larger work. It's pretty clearly fair use seeing as those files are worthless if not used within Brawl itself and how they are a truly insignificant percentage of the overall game; it would be if the estate of JRR Tolkein sued me for posting the following:

Three Rings for Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

^Another good example of fair use, just like the .pac files used by major code projects.

Calling Nintendo API functions and such isn't "mimic-ing software created by Nintendo or a 3rd party" by the way. It's simply software designed to run under the Wii operating system running. Nintendo suing over it is as absurd as Microsoft suing someone for writing a program designed to run on Windows. Yes, your Wii is a computer, and all those internal functions and such are merely OS components. It's somewhat more difficult to get your own code running than on your own computer, but that's fairly irrelevant. We emphatically are NOT circumventing any copy protection. We're running our own programs. This is pretty clearly well within the bounds of the law.

The suggestion that it's a bad idea because Nintendo could sue even though they would eventually lose the case is fairly ridiculous. We could also not run tournaments because in many states they vaguely might be in violation of gambling laws. We could stop uploading tournament videos or streaming tournaments because honestly video of the game being played (especially with the music on!) is about as flimsy on copyright grounds as something like Balanced Brawl. Almost anything you do may be in violation of some obscure law or another, and someone might sue you over almost anything with no case. It's just irrational to worry about that, not only because we have sound reason to believe we are actually in the right of the law in the end but also because Nintendo has absolutely zero incentive to sue. We are massive fans of their games, and we actively promote people buying and playing their games. If Balanced Brawl became huge, the only way it would affect Nintendo would be a very small increase in their sales of Brawl. Suing dedicated fans has an obvious negative effect on sales. So we cause them to make money, and suing us causes them to lose money regardless of how the case turns out. I don't think they'll be suing anytime soon.

 

[Mew2King]

I agree tripping is gay. It's all luck and you can get rewarded when you don't deserve to or vice versa

 

[Jack Kieser]

How is it not the case with Ocarina hacks? If you use smash stack to load gecko, you are causing a stack overflow and running unique code.

EXACTLY. Which is directly, explicitly, and plainly prohibited by the Wii EULA. Something that people are not getting is that all sorts of shenanigans happen when contracts are involved, and a EULA is a legally binding contract. The EULA says no unauthorized code, so there is no unauthorized code. Period. End of discussion.

The case precedent you cite was years before EULAs even existed! According to that case precedent, Action Replays and Gamesharks are still fully legal to produce and sell...

...but the Wii EULA you implicitly sign when you use the Wii console in any capacity cites that you, effectively, sign away your right to use said products. You heard right: you are implicitly signing away your right to cite that case as precedent because you agreed to the terms of the contract. You knew (or should have known) what you were signing away, too bad for you.

^Another good example of fair use, just like the .pac files used by major code projects.

Even worse! Now you are mimic-ing and recreating copyrighted file types and compression / encryption algorithms! .PAC files are Nintendo created IP; who gave you the right to recreate their patented file types? Clearly not Nintendo.

Calling Nintendo API functions and such isn't "mimic-ing software created by Nintendo or a 3rd party" by the way. It's simply software designed to run under the Wii operating system running. Nintendo suing over it is as absurd as Microsoft suing someone for writing a program designed to run on Windows.

Except that Microsoft explicitly allows people to use its function calls without licensing. Nintendo does not. Nintendo licenses its functions, API, and dev tools out to 3rd party developers for a hefty price.

Yes, your Wii is a computer, and all those internal functions and such are merely OS components. It's somewhat more difficult to get your own code running than on your own computer, but that's fairly irrelevant. We emphatically are NOT circumventing any copy protection.

Yes, you are. You are circumventing Nintendo's own methods of disabling or preventing foreign, unauthorized code from running on their systems.

We're running our own programs.

Go ahead and admit that. It will get you oh so far in a court of law.

This is pretty clearly well within the bounds of the law.

It's not. Read / know the law. It helps.

The suggestion that it's a bad idea because Nintendo could sue even though they would eventually lose the case is fairly ridiculous.

Oh no, Nintendo could sue, and would win by a landslide. I've never asserted that Nintendo would lose.

We could also not run tournaments because in many states they vaguely might be in violation of gambling laws.

Correct.

We could stop uploading tournament videos or streaming tournaments because honestly video of the game being played (especially with the music on!) is about as flimsy on copyright grounds as something like Balanced Brawl.

Also something Nintendo is within its legal rights to stop; they could force YouTube to remove all Brawl videos on the grounds of Copyright Infringement, and they'd be totally within their rights to do so.

Almost anything you do may be in violation of some obscure law or another, and someone might sue you over almost anything with no case.

True, but in this case, the laws aren't that obscure. Well, maybe to you and the people on SWF, but that's just because you're all purposefully ignorant. Read your EULAs, people.

It's just irrational to worry about that, not only because we have sound reason to believe we are actually in the right of the law in the end...

You're not.

...but also because Nintendo has absolutely zero incentive to sue. We are massive fans of their games, and we actively promote people buying and playing their games. If Balanced Brawl became huge, the only way it would affect Nintendo would be a very small increase in their sales of Brawl. Suing dedicated fans has an obvious negative effect on sales. So we cause them to make money, and suing us causes them to lose money regardless of how the case turns out. I don't think they'll be suing anytime soon.

Quite true, in the case of simple tournaments. But in the case of hacked tournaments as a standard, Nintendo would probably rather protect its IP and it's right to lay the smack down on pirates and other people who avoid copy protection than allow you to run your hacked version of Brawl at a tournament. How much money is Nintendo claiming to lose to piracy every year due to IP infringement and copy protection circumvention, as well as unauthorized code running?

Here's a hint: it's much, much, MUCH more than the income generated by all of the sales of Brawl to competitive players. We're a drop in the bucket, comparatively.

 

[GimR]

Ampharos does only loading no tripping apply in the same way as the "game genie vs nintendo" case?

no other hacks just no tripping

 

[Miamisportsfan45]

Ampharos does only loading no tripping apply in the same way as the "game genie vs nintendo" case?

no other hacks just no tripping

Even if this is the case, I still disagree with the setup. I personally do think tripping is a stupid feature in the game (outside the sense of it being a Diddy tactic of course), but a hack is a hack. As far as tripping goes, it's an unnessecary hack. Arguments in previous pages agree with my point of this.

 

[swordgard]

Youtube vids fall under fair use imo. They do not bring us any revenue and mostly advertise the game.

 

[JOE!]

jesus jack....AA essentially brought up that theres relativley **** nintendo can do to us if they ever for god knows why have an exec at a tourney, and find out we turned off tripping, and for god knows why reports it back to the big-boss/etc....

and what is the big deal with it being a hack?

"Hmm, this new cure will eliminate cancers, cure aids, and make you gorgeous by giving your body F-cells that eliminate unwanted fat! Unfortunatley, we got the cure by killing a Panda Bear...."

Your type of dudes: " ZOMG!!!!!!!!!! NOT T3h PANDA! D:>"

completley ignores the outcome of the supposedly negative method to bring it about, even tho the outcome is awesome...only because the method is something you dont like...

As of now, the only way to turn off tripping would be to harmlessly go in, and turn it off with Gecko. If AR came along and did the same thing, would you be opposed to that too? Or will you think it's hunkey-dorey because you had to spend money on AR to do so?

 

[Miamisportsfan45]

jesus jack....AA essentially brought up that theres relativley **** nintendo can do to us if they ever for god knows why have an exec at a tourney, and find out we turned off tripping, and for god knows why reports it back to the big-boss/etc....

and what is the big deal with it being a hack?

"Hmm, this new cure will eliminate cancers, cure aids, and make you gorgeous by giving your body F-cells that eliminate unwanted fat! Unfortunatley, we got the cure by killing a Panda Bear...."

Your type of dudes: " ZOMG!!!!!!!!!! NOT T3h PANDA! D:>"

completley ignores the outcome of the supposedly negative method to bring it about, even tho the outcome is awesome...only because the method is something you dont like...

As of now, the only way to turn off tripping would be to harmlessly go in, and turn it off with Gecko. If AR came along and did the same thing, would you be opposed to that too? Or will you think it's hunkey-dorey because you had to spend money on AR to do so?

You can't compare a cure for cancer to a video game. The seriousness of each is entirely different, as well as the circumstances.

Aside from that, knowing our government, even if there were a cure for cancer with that being the method of situation, we'd deny it for that reason. Liberals.

 

[JOE!]

*facepalm*

it was an example of what you are saying:

you would enjoy brawl without tripping, yet dont want to soley due to the method needed to turn it off...even though said method wont do anything harmful to anyone nor be caught realistically

 

[Jack Kieser]

Ampharos does only loading no tripping apply in the same way as the "game genie vs nintendo" case?

no other hacks just no tripping

Most likely, it doesn't matter what codes are activated. If you do it via anything that doesn't have a Nintendo Seal of Quality on it, it's probably violating your EULA.

Youtube vids fall under fair use imo. They do not bring us any revenue and mostly advertise the game.

If that's the case, then all of those music videos that people post shouldn't be continually taken down, either; they don't bring any revenue and mostly advertise the songs.

Fact of the matter is that Brawl is still Nintendo's IP. If they really wanted to, they could make YouTube take videos down in the same way Warner Brothers is constantly forcing videos off of YouTube that have even a second of unauthorized music.

jesus jack....AA essentially brought up that theres relativley **** nintendo can do to us if they ever for god knows why have an exec at a tourney, and find out we turned off tripping, and for god knows why reports it back to the big-boss/etc....

Yeah, in some fantasy land where the law doesn't apply and/or the law applies in ways that aren't realistic. There is plenty Nintendo can do to you. They can brick your systems if they really want to. Purposefully. And legally.

and what is the big deal with it being a hack?

"Hmm, this new cure will eliminate cancers, cure aids, and make you gorgeous by giving your body F-cells that eliminate unwanted fat! Unfortunatley, we got the cure by killing a Panda Bear...."

Your type of dudes: " ZOMG!!!!!!!!!! NOT T3h PANDA! D:>"

A more accurate analogy would be:

"Hmm, this new cure will eliminate cancers, cure aids, and make you gorgeous by giving your body F-cells that eliminate unwanted fat! Unfortunatley, we got the cure by killing a Panda Bear...."

"Hmm... but killing Panda Bears is currently against the law, even for medical purposes. It seems that we should change the law, but as it stands now, we should hold off on the Panda killing until it's legal. After all, we're already killing Pandas; doing it illegally will only make things worse."

"NO, WE MUST KILL PANDAS NOW. **** THE LAW. BESIDES, IT'S A STUPID LAW, AND I DON'T AGREE WITH IT."

"But, that won't make the law change any faster. In fact, it will probably increase protections for Pandas, making it harder to get the Pandas we need to cure canc--"

"NO, KILL PANDAS NAO!!11"

completley ignores the outcome of the supposedly negative method to bring it about, even tho the outcome is awesome...only because the method is something you dont like...

There's LOTS of reasons I'm opposed to hacking being a standard. The legal standpoint, the security / logistics standpoint, the ethical standpoint, the slippery slope standpoint...

I have plenty of reasons, perfectly logical reasons, to disagree.

As of now, the only way to turn off tripping would be to harmlessly go in...

Not harmlessly, from a legal standpoint, but continue.

...and turn it off with Gecko. If AR came along and did the same thing, would you be opposed to that too? Or will you think it's hunkey-dorey because you had to spend money on AR to do so?

Yes, I'd be opposed to that, too. It's hacking the game. Hacked games are not competitive standards. You don't make a hacked game a competitive standard. At least a AR method is more likely to be legal, so side events are ok. But not a competitive standard. Not the main event. Not now, not ever.

 

[JOE!]

...isnt there some SF hack that replaced the "standard" during it's time in the sun?

 

[GimR]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtseYTh_kco


watch the whole thing, this is from Herb 3


Also @ Kaizer: if the precedent from Game "Genie vs. Nintendo" falls along the same lines as putting just "no tripping" in the game then it wouldn't matter what Nintendo put in the EULA because even if you were brought to court all you would have to do is bring up "Game Genie vs. Nintendo" and that what we're doing the exact same thing.