I’m going to spoiler tag all the Nintendo legal-ese because it’s A LOT.
It boils down to this console is banned from logging in online. So a couple of questions:
Do you HAVE to be online to play Switch 2 games?
If the ban is correct for user violations, why ban the hardware? Why not ban the account?
spoilernintendo.com/…/error-codes-2124-4007-2124-4508/?s…You’re unable to connect to an online service and you receive the error code 2124-4007 or 2124-4508. You receive the error message “The use of online services on this console is currently restricted by Nintendo.” What to do: This error code indicates that the Nintendo Switch console you are using has been permanently banned from connecting to the internet due to a breach of the user agreements. A breach of user agreements may include, but is not limited to, activities such as: Fraudulent or unauthorized transactions Violation of the Code of Conduct accounts.nintendo.com/term/eula/AU5 Nintendo Code of Conduct When using the Nintendo Account Service, you must comply with the Nintendo Code of Conduct and ensure that your Nintendo Account is not used in breach of the Nintendo Code of Conduct. The Nintendo Code of Conduct prohibits all illegal, harmful or otherwise inappropriate conduct, including, but not limited to, the following: Illegal, harassing, hateful, defamatory, embarrassing, offensive, obscene, sexually explicit or otherwise objectionable actions performed with the Nintendo Account; Soliciting, accessing, storing or distributing prohibited materials; Providing any incorrect or false data when registering or using the Nintendo Account; Submitting false reports (either in a game or through an online service) regarding other users or content; Making, sharing or playing unauthorised copies of games, applications, software, add-on content, music, images, videos and other content available via the Nintendo Account Service; making new versions of Digital Products or other content available via the Nintendo Account Service (“derivatives”); Using cheats, automation software (bots), hacks, mods or any other unauthorised device or software designed to modify the Nintendo Account Service or any part of it or using any unauthorised User Device or any unauthorised modification of a User Device; attempting to derive source code of the Nintendo Account Service; Gaining unauthorised access to any of Nintendo’s computers, hardware, equipment, servers or networks used to support the Nintendo Account Service; hosting, intercepting, emulating, reverse engineering any part of the Nintendo Account Service or redirecting the communication protocols used by Nintendo as part of the Nintendo Account Service, regardless of the method used to do so; Engaging in any commercial or advertising activity, or arranging meetings using a Nintendo Account; Selling, trading, assigning or otherwise transferring a Nintendo Account to another person or entity; Posting, sending or otherwise making available via Nintendo Account Service any content that infringes the rights of others, including any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright, privacy rights, portrait rights or other intellectual property or proprietary rights; Posting, sending or otherwise making available via Nintendo Account Service any content that contains personal information (including photos, images and videos) of any third party without their permission; Selling, trading, assigning, licensing, or otherwise conveying virtual property for real money or for funds credited to a Nintendo Account, where “virtual property” refers to any features of games or other content that can be traded with other users for free or for in-game virtual currency; Fraudulent activities performed in relation to the Nintendo Account Service (in particular in relation to transactions in Nintendo Shopping Services).
Yes, in order to download your “Game Keycard” games, you must get the game data from nintendo online services. This is why banning online services is considered effectively bricking the console, at least for all 3rd party games on keycards.
If an account is banned, another one can be made for free and the user can keep utilizing their online services… Nintendo obviously looks at that like a burden, and wants to financially punish that user, making them have to buy another switch. This in turn benefits them.
For point 1, this sounds like a class action waiting to happen.
You buy a Nintendo console, Nintendo says you broke the rules and bans that console, now non-Nintendo games won’t work on it because it’s banned from reaching online services.
Any platform that restricts how and what I can run in it has inherently less value to me. This is why I mostrly avoided consoles all my life.
The only console I bought was the original Wii. The games were extremely expensive, and they disabled all the services that made the console useful after a few years (weather channel, news channel, store).
Fortunately I added a few SNES, PCEngine, Genesis/Megadrive and Gamecube emulators otherwise I would now have a very pretty white doorstop.
Switch - play w/ kids; Smash has been amazing for this
Steam Deck - not a console, but I use it as one; got it to play games in bed
I play most games on PC because I’m just not as interested in exclusives anymore, except maybe Zelda games, and with BOTW and TOTK, I’m less interested in those (they lost the formula I like).
I’ll probably get the Switch 2 eventually, but I’ll wait until there’s a game I really want (say, ALttP remake or something), my kids break our OLED Switch, or there’s an OLED Switch 2 with better battery life.
I don’t personally like Nintendo’s actions, but I’m not sure why this article is trying to imply Nintendo miscalculated and don’t know what they’re doing - as if bricking consoles will somehow lose them money.
From Nintendo’s perspective, turning the used market into a minefield of bricked consoles can only be a good thing, because it encourages people to buy new, and buying new is money in Nintendo’s pocket.
And the conclusion that people won’t buy the console for their kids because of this? “Sorry kids, but Nintendo are bad so we cant play your favourite Mario - you’re getting a steam deck instead!” Like heck! A small minority maybe, but people will generally buy their kids what the kids ask for.
While true, I think it’s important to note that many buy the Switch for other reasons. My kids wanted a Switch, but I didn’t get it until there were enough games my wife and I really wanted to play. My wife was bummed about Kinect dying and was Ted a replacement for her exercise games, and I had been missing Zelda games, so I got the Switch, some Just Dance games, Ring Fit Adventure, the two Zelda remakes, and a couple games for the kids. The kids have kind of taken it over, but it still fulfills our purposes in getting it.
My point is that the Switch has a lot more appeal than just shutting kids up for a bit. It’s a good console on its own, and the only console I’m willing to buy. The PS5 and Xbox Series has nothing I’m interested outside of a few exclusives, so my wife and I just play on our PCs and my Steam Deck.
it can suspend all kinds of services on your console, up to and including bricking it completely.
No, just online services.
Xbox and PlayStation have the same terms & conditions. Why is Nintendo being singled out?
Xbox:
You will not attempt to defeat or circumvent any Xbox Console, Kinect Sensor or Authorised Accessory technical limitation, security or anti-piracy system. If You do, Your Xbox Console, Kinect Sensor or Authorised Accessory may stop working permanently at that time or after a later Xbox Software update.
The second part simply isn’t true. Look at the ToS wording (US version). Nintendo added a clause specific to the device’s functioning, not only to online services.
“This shitty company has been shitty for 20 years, why do we care” is one of the most fanboi, dickriding responses possible. Why are you riding for Nintendo so hard given their shitty anti-consumer practices?
Agreed. Permanent hardware bans have been a thing since the PS3/360 era.
I’m not saying it’s a good thing that they can unilaterally disable hardware you purchased (although I certainly understand the reasoning wrt cheaters and pirates) but the author here is acting like the idea is some completely new scheme from the diabolical industry villains du jour.
This whole article is dumb because this is the same as it ever was with Switch 1. Resold switches could be banned from online play, how is this unique to the Switch 2? If you're going to buy used, go for a reputable source.
The change in EULA was the hint; I have not; and will not be buying any Switch 2 games, consoles or related merchandise. Nor will I be paying any further into my Switch beyond NSO as I have or buying any games for the Switch that are not explicitly on a physical cart.
I don’t buy games often anyways and would rather support Pocketpair and Palworld and Valve. So that’s where my discretionary spendand gift requests will go henceforth.
In general Nintendo is having it’s villainous arc; and I don’t believe they will survive it…given that they’ve run out or demoted their creatives and visionaries to workers. Nintendo is dead; what’s left is a greedy and soulless shell that behaves more like a gang or mafia. Given their History; that doesn’t surprise me.
I wish people would boycott but most people don’t know or think about right to repair, game preservation etc.
Nintendo is selling record numbers of Switch2 and they can just keep phoning it in because they have proven that people are willing to pay a subscription to rent emulated copies of their childhood games whilst replacing drifting joy cons every month.
Doubt this will be the end of Nintendo even though I would be happy to see some consequences for companies that clearly hate their paying customers.
It will be the end of Nintendo. …Eventually.Of course these things take time; and people in general are slow on the uptake; especially uninterested masses.
Eventually though; they will grow too bold; brick a larger number of systems than is absolutely necessary to intimidate people away from piracy and basically piss off the gaming userbase; at which point the Steam Deck and related hardware will likely draw all casuals in.
This is how you challenge actual pirates and grow your real enemy, while you punish innocent civilians. Pirates will pirate, regardless of what Nintendo says, wants or does. The real losers are loyal customers who pay lot of money.
When I got banned from online play on the Switch for using homebrew I stopped paying them for games on the platform. A lot of people are former pirates, and they’ll only accept so much before they decide the grass was greener.
And the loyal customers don’t care else they would have switched to a deck ages ago (like I did).
Nintendo doesn’t care and neither do its customers apparently. We can throw a hissy fit here on Lemmy but the cold hard truth is nobody outside Lemmy and reddit cares.
I also posted this in another threads a few days ago:
Nah, the OP of one reddit thread admitted he tried more than just his backups:
Dude is a prolific poster in Switch hacking communities and he used an account which he previously used with a hacked Switch 1
He admits trying the migswitch with the Switch 2 and it starting downloading something.
They got an online ban, so offline games and such still work.
You can agree or disagree whether piracy should be legal or whether backup copies are permitted (depends on jurisdiction), but this dude obviously played with fire and got burnt.
TL;DR: don’t be stupid and get banned for breaking ToS (whether you agree with it or not)
Yeah I was thinking the same, first few votes were down lol. Now you seem to catch the fire for pointing it out. Hope you care as much about votes as I do
Things you should never get caught liking on Lemmy:
Nintendo
Windows
Auth-right, lib-right, or lib-left politics
A can of beans
Police
Man vs bear hypothetical
CalyxOS
Etc.
I know Lemmy’s objection to most of these and I honestly dislike them too (oh no, brainwashed drone alert! Honestly, I consider myself quite lucky I hit a group where I actually do match the hivemind instead of being different yet again. Except I think Lemmy has a much higher tolerance for political posts, and for personal insults towards people who don’t share the hivemind than I do, but hey, you’ll probably never hit 100% consensus with any big group), except: I wasn’t aware that Lemmy had something against a can of beans. Genuinely, could someone please explain? Is this a reference to something, or is it genuine dislike towards canned beans? What’s wrong with canned beans?
Luckily at the moment they have a lot more upvotes than downvotes. Probably because they are providing information and aside from the “you are stupid for breaking (a likely-predictable) TOS and expecting nothing to happen” judgment, it’s pretty neutral on passing judgment on the bigger argument at hand: whether this policy should be here in the first place.
Stop moving the goalposts. Nobody cares about the votes themselves.
This is about observing a fact and recounting it to someone who’s misinformed about the situation and even has the audicity to gaslight someone over it
Tbf, I hope nintendo keeps going this route and punishing more and more its customers. After all, if you keep supporting a company that hates you so much, you deserve what you get.
Well if you’re already a pirate you don’t need the MIG or benefit in any way from using it. Presumably you’ve got an Erista Switch or a modchip. The MIG is only for pirating stuff on modchipless Lite/Mariko/OLED/Apparently 2 (but watch out) consoles. It can’t pirate updates or DLC or eshop-only games so it’s always worse than CFW or modchips for those that can use CFW or modchips.
Even if that is legal (it isnt), but it will be circumvention of encryption at worst and recreation of protected algorithms, code and keys in a non-nintendo product at best ( and thats before talking about game cartridge content ).
Last i checked that is still illegal hehe
I am not a lawyer, but I have talked to lawyers about this before and their answer was basically:
The owner of a copy of a game or other computer software may “make or authorize the making of another copy.” Legally speaking, the law does not require the person who owns the copy to personally make the backup copy, nor does it specify that the backup copy be made only from the copy owned.
This is important because on Nintendo’s own website they state the following:
Therefore, whether you have an authentic game or not […] it is illegal to download […] a Nintendo ROM from the Internet.
What Nintendo is saying here is outright wrong. A person who only has only temporary possession of a game (such as rental or borrowing) gains no rights under 17 USC 117, and may not download a copy without separate permission, which obviously Nintendo would never grant However, A person with permanent possession of a game (such as a legally purchased game either from retail or used) DOES gain those rights to an archival copy. These rights supercede any restriction on those rights Nintendo would presume to apply. Nintendo presumes to add extra conditions and terms that do not actually exist in the law.
The purpose of the archival copy provision is to protect legal owner’s access to the computer software in case of damage. If your copy of a game breaks, such as a broken CD, you have the legal right, as owner of that CD, to continue to use the computer software on that CD no matter its physical condition. An archival copy could then be used to create a working version of that CD so that you, the legal owner of that copy, may continue to access that computer software. This is also the case when access to that software becomes difficult or impossible, such as a game or other computer software that is stored on archaic storage media such as a floppy disk or paper tape.
This is correct, as long as the copy was produced lawfully, which is only possible if no copy protection was circumvented.
Section 103 (17 U.S.C Sec. 1201(a)(1)) of the DMCA states: No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
This law was created to limit the rights from 17 USC 117, and yes exceptions to section 103 exist, but those are very specific and some of them even exclude games specifically from the exceptions.
But I am no lawyer, and as a European I only have a very limited view and knowledge of US laws, so yes it is only my understanding of those laws and I could be wrong, so don’t take my words as a legal advice or anything like that. I am only a normal human with some experience with laws and jurisdictions, but far away from a specialist.
What is defined as copy here? Cartridge data (game data, not firmware etc) is encrypted and can only be accessed by a protocol that is like spi, but is proprietary, by a specific chip running nintendo code. Or is a copy a full backup of everything on the chip?
Is the copy a raw copy? Has the data been modified/decrypted/or any algorithm processed it?
These things define wether a copy falls under this or not. Check what the fineprint or laws defines what ’ a copy’ is exactly in this case.
If it doesnt, what i mentioned are important to see if what you said apply here or not.
Like @DarkMetatron said, its only legal if nothing is done with the data. Any decryption using a nintendo key is infact, illegal, and falls under piracy.
This is why dolphin was removed from steam, because they do exactly that. Decrypt the data to use it.
If the process of dumping does any encryption or decryption, you also get in trouble in what they said.
These are the laws, and the lawyer you asked this too must not have been specialised in ip law, copyright and games, or doesnt know the technical details to decide on this.
The mig chip uses a proprietary protocol to send data of a partly, semi decrypted, game image. That will not go well in court, no matter if the rom was obtained legally.
You may have the right to make a backup, but playing that backup on a non sectioned device or via non sectioned means is still a breach of the TOS and breaking the license terms of the game and/or console. Oh and it is in violation of the DMCA as far as I know, because to make the backup it is needed to circumvent copy protection, which is forbidden by the rules of the DMCA (and equal laws in other jurisdictions like Europe). You may own the cartridge, but you still only have a license (with very specific terms and rules) to use the software on it.
Using modified hardware might break other regulations or terms of services, but using a backup copy of a copy you own that hardware is not piracy in several jursidictions. Which is the answer to the question in the comment.
And no, it is specifically not against DMCA to make a backup of media that you physically own. That’s actually a major part of what make self-copied ROMs legal in the US.
Nearly all jurisdictions have DMCA like laws which clearly say that circumventing copy protection is against the law. So in those jurisdictions it is piracy to use a backup of a copy protected game and I am very sure that a map of the countries where the Switch 2 can be officially bought and a map with countries who have thoses laws will produce a lot of matches. Maybe I am wrong, but I highly doubt it.
techdirt.com
Aktywne