Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch

from the Nintendon't dept

So, here’s the thing: I get accused of picking on Nintendo a whole lot. But please know, it’s not that I want to pick on them, it’s just that they make it so damned easy to. I’m a golfer, okay? If I have a club in my hand and suddenly a ball on a tee appears before me, I’m going to hit that ball every time without hesitation. You will recall that a couple of years back, Nintendo opened up a new front on its constant IP wars by going after ROM and emulation sites. That caused plenty of sites to simply shut themselves down, but Nintendo also made a point of getting some scalps to hang on its belt, most famously in the form of RomUniverse. That site, which very clearly had infringing material not only on the site but promoted by the site’s ownership, got slapped around in the courts to the tune of a huge judgement against, which the site owners simply cannot pay.

But all of those are details and don’t answer the real question: why did Nintendo do this? Well, as many expected from the beginning, it did this because the company was planning to release a series of classic consoles, namely the NES mini and SNES mini. But, of course, what about later consoles? Such as the Nintendo 64?

Well, the answer to that is that Nintendo has offered a Nintendo Switch Online service uplift that includes some N64 games that you can play there instead.

After years of “N64 mini” rumors (which have yet to come to fruition), Nintendo announced plans to honor its first fully 3D gaming system late last month in the form of the Nintendo Switch Online Expansion Pack. Pay a bit extra, the company said, and you’d get a select library of N64 classics, emulated by the company that made them, on Switch consoles as part of an active NSO subscription.

One month later, however, Nintendo’s sales proposition grew more sour. That “bit extra” ballooned to $30 more per year, on top of the existing $20/year fee—a 150 percent jump in annual price. Never mind that the price also included an Animal Crossing expansion pack (which retro gaming fans may not want) and Sega Genesis games (which have been mostly released ad nauseam on every gaming system of the past decade). For many interested fans, that price jump was about the N64 collection.

So, a bit of a big price tag and a bunch of extras that are mostly besides the point from the perspective of the buyer. Buy, hey, at least Nintendo fans will finally get some N64 games to play on their Switch consoles, right?

Well, it turns out that Nintendo’s offering cannot come close to matching the quality of the very emulators and ROMs that Nintendo has worked so hard to disappear. The Ars Technica post linked above goes into excruciating details, some of which we’ll discuss for the purpose of giving examples, but here are the categories that Nintendo’s product does worse than an emulator on a PC.

  • Game options, such as visual settings for resolution to fit modern screens
  • Visuals, such as N64’s famous blur settings, and visual changes that expose outdated graphical sprites
  • Controller input lag
  • Controller configuration options
  • Multiplayer lag/stutter

If that seems like a lot of problems compared with emulators that have been around for quite a while, well, ding ding ding! We’ll get into some examples briefly below, but I’ll stipulate that none of the issues in the categories above are incredibly bad. But there are so many of them that they all add up to bad!

Let’s take the problems around how N64’s blur is used, or not used in this case.

This issue rears its head much more often in The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, which avid speedrunner ZFG1 detailed at length in a seven-hour stream shortly after the NSO Expansion Pack went live. The pack’s issues with inaccurate blur become immediately evident in that classic game’s opening zone of Kakariko Village. In that zone, the looming Deku Tree normally hides in a massive field of fog above hero Link’s head. In the current NSO version, on the other hand, the blur is absent, revealing an unseemly low-resolution sprite. Worse, Nintendo originally used selective fog placement as a way to guide players’ attention towards points of interest in the village, yet these fogs have now been erased.

Anyone who’s looked into the NSO Expansion Pack’s launch has almost certainly seen ZFG1’s most glaring discovery, as well: the game’s Water Temple battle against a “shadow” version of Link, which takes place in a foggy, open-air zone surrounded by reflective water. On Switch, this room pares back the fog effect almost entirely. Worse, it fails to properly cast reflections on the water’s surface, which changes the aesthetic tone of the subsequent, harrowing battle.

This sort of thing breaks immersion and the overall feel and flow of a game. And the Legend of Zelda example is not isolated.

As to the way controls are handled, well…

In Ocarina of Time and Star Fox 64, constant C-button access is imperative for proper control in ways that don’t suit removing your fingers from the primary A and B action buttons. Yet instead of making those crucial C buttons available at all times, Nintendo bolts only two of them on the ABXY array. Players are then required to use an awkward shortcut system to access those buttons: hold the “ZR” button, which temporarily “shifts” the ABXY array to become the four C-button directions.

If this all strikes you as minor details not worth being upset over, I have two responses. First, you are probably not a huge fan of these classic Nintendo titles and systems, because these “minor” things represent a massive break from the experience you have in your head playing these games. Given that the sales pitch for this NSO uplift is all about nostalgia, that freaking matters!

And second, fans of these titles had a better product to give them what they wanted: the emulation sites Nintendo shut down. Granted, getting ROMs from those sites without owning the original certainly was/is infringing activity… but if Nintendo was going to slay the piracy dragon in favor of its own offering, that offering should at least be on par with the emulators, no?

Because in the end, here’s the reality: Nintendo worked hard to prevent fans of antiquated games and systems from enjoying those games in order to get them to buy an inferior product. Love Nintendo, hate Nintendo, that’s the stark reality. And it’s a shitty look for a company.

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: nintendo

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
433 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Pirates yet again have the superior version

It all makes sense now, it wasn’t so much that the ROM sites were providing competition in the available games so much as they’d allow people to see just how terrible the official offerings were compared to the unofficial ones and might have forced Nintendo to do more than the absolute bare minimum.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Pirates yet again have the superior version

"…it wasn’t so much that the ROM sites were providing competition in the available games so much as they’d allow people to see just how terrible the official offerings were compared to the unofficial ones…"

…and that the happy amateur using the equivalent of spit and wire still presents a more functional version than the professionals who built the damn thing in the first place.

It really shouldn’t come as a surprise. We should know by now that Copyright makes everything worse – like every other Red Flag Act designed to protect an industry from the hazards of competition.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

One thing confuses me about Nintendo, though.

Why is zophar’s domain still up? They don’t distribute ROMs, they only distribute emulators and music from the games, yet Nintendo’s Donkey-Kong-rampage against ROM sites didn’t target them (despite them going after people who uploaded their music in the past; I’m not sure there’s a good control case with emulators, though).

Why is that? Is Zophar next on the chopping block? Should they be worried?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
James Burkhardt (profile) says:

Re: One thing confuses me about Nintendo, though.

Emulators are, under the betamax and Atari V Nintendo rulings, facially legal.

So long as the developers properly reverse engineered their codebase (unlike Atari which got ahold of the 10NES lockout chip object code illicitly), which emulators have, the emulator itself is not copyright infringement. It also presents significant legal uses for homebrew, and seemingly under various rulings so long as you legally own a copy of game, you are legally allowed to create a digital backup (absent a DRM-induced super copyright)

By not hosting ROMs or links to roms, (and probably enforcing a ban on the discussion of where to find ROMs on forums, if any, its been a while) Zophar’s Domain doesn’t provide the Nintendo had against RomUniverse. As I said, under a number of legal rulings, emulation is legal. And even if Nintendo thought they had a chance, Fighting Zophar’s Domain would likely inspire the EFF or other interest group to provide legal defenses, and the last thing Nintendo wants is to push the point in court and lose in a clear case.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: One thing confuses me about Nintendo, though.

Thank you for your explanation! Also, Emulators are good for my music, as they allow people to play back some of the songs I compose on the original hardware without actually owning the original hardware. So one doesn’t need to sail the copyright infringement seas to have a reason to want emulators to exist. ????

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: One thing confuses me about Nintendo, though.

"It also presents significant legal uses for homebrew"

Yeah, one thing that people always seem to forget is that people still develop for these platforms. They are naturally niche hobbyist markets aimed at a tiny fanbase, but they still exist, and you really don’t want to start basing laws on mainstream fashions.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: One thing confuses me about Nintendo, though.

you really don’t want to start basing laws on mainstream fashions.

This is too often a problem with legislation these days, such as the rush to legislate targeting Facebook but would end up affecting the entire internet making Facebook the de facto internet as a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 One thing confuses me about Nintendo, though

I prefer retrofreak. It allows me to use my real carts. It’s got firmer sockets than the original systems.

Yes, I know it’s a super micro android system.
Like I said it’s the best built cartridge ports I’ve come across.
Takes care to push them in perfect vertical, but there is no play in the connection like you have on consumer sockets.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: One thing confuses me about Nintendo, though.

Likewise, RetroArch is still going strong, and is even available via Steam. And there’s multiple front ends for libretro, and multiple back end cores feeding into libretro that provide N64 emulation such as paraLLEl N64 and Mupen64Plus, both of which run circles around what Nintendo has attempted to do — and yes, they’re available for use in RetroArch on the Switch for a direct comparison to Nintendo’s own offering.

A neat thing about RetroArch is that someone’s published the designs for producing your own N64 cartridge reader that plugs directly into RetroArch, so you can create the reader, plug it into a RetroPi, and immediately have a legal, sub-$100 console that’ll play all your legitimate N64 cartridges, on a modern screen, properly upscaled with modern visual effects.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Emulators are legal. It’s been true for years the best way to play older classic Nintendo games is on a pc, you get a choice of resolution. Graphics options, also you can change the control button settings to buttons you prefer , most switch nes, n64 games have a limited control scheme which may not suit many gamers
And the emulators keep getting better all the time
Nintendo does not seem to like offering options to
Change remap buttons in games
And soon there will be a steam deck handheld console out which plays all steam games and
will compete with the switch

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

The ‘work’ that Nintendo did on the N64 emulation and atuff was garbo, yes. But the continued revisionism of ROMUniverse as some innocent site is silly. The site had current Switch games, recent movies, and also eBooks for some reason, alongside a premium subscription option for unlimited downloads. To answer “why did Nintendo do this?” to ROMUniverse, it’s because the site was selling access to their recent games from their most recent console.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

Nobody here has ever acted like ROM Universe was “some innocent site”. Even back when that saga first began, numerous commenters (including myself) were showing little-to-no mercy to the site precisely because of its profit scheme. Those of us who knew the full details of the situation had no illusions of the site being “some innocent” ROM archive or whatever.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
James Burkhardt (profile) says:

Re: Re:

ROMUniverse is the well-known example, but Nintendo shut down more than RomUniverse. Indeed, most of the sites shut down were much more responsive to Nintendo’s legal missives for over a decade. Journalists and opinion writers can never provide full context to years-long legal debates in a single article. They will reference an event and expect the reader to remember or look up the context that reference provides. So when Techdirt references "That caused plenty of sites to simply shut themselves down, but Nintendo also made a point of getting some scalps to hang on its belt, most famously in the form of RomUniverse." They use RomUniverse as a landmark for the events in question and expect you to take phrases like "That caused plenty of sites to simply shut themselves down" or "Nintendo also made a point of getting some scalps to hang on its belt" to remember all of the sites that shut down and the various discussions from the time. To position your complaints as though RomUniverse was the only site being discussed, and then to misrepresent what the article said about RomUniverse (which the article vary clearly positions in the legal wrong) is highly manipulative.

As I keep finding myself saying: you are discussing the legal argument, "Can Nintendo shut down ROMUniverse?" Of course they had the legal basis to do so.

Nintendo was perfectly happy to let rom sites stay up, sending occasional threats or DMCA claims for 1st party titles, but couldn’t be bothered. ROMs didn’t really threaten their business model. Despite the claims of switch piracy, 1st party Nintendo titles were breaking sales records for their series left and right. And it wasn’t switch piracy that motivated this move. Switch piracy is an issue, but they didn’t shut down switch piracy, they shut down any rom hosting at all, to the point sites that did not host switch content were shut down by notices or by the owners when Nintendo started going scorched earth.

This leads to the "should they" argument. The timing of the move and product releases suggests the big concern is emulation cannibalizing the subscription service. And now that we see the subscription service, it suggests they have long known they can’t compete with the amateur emulation market. The drip of content on NES and SNES has already turned off some, and the horrible lag and visuals on the "expansion pack" makes NSO+ an objectively bad purchase (switch has every single sega game on offer in one retro release, and buying DLC outright is more cost effective than renting it for the 1 year minimum NSO+ buy in. Without N64, there is no good reason to purchase NSO+.)

Having engaged in the war with their fans, Nintendo may find the perennial fanbase doesn’t renew the next time. Emulation provides an ‘in’ to the hobby that NSO+ can not provide. Emulation provides an easy way to capture gameplay and has helped the retro review, speedrun, and game design discussion communities thrive. Fighting game tournaments won’t host Super Smash Brothers Ultimate because of Nintendo being overly litigious, which has hurt the excellent fighting game’s presence. I wonder if I’ll hear about it in the news now that all the fighters have been released.

This is about more than RomUniverse. As noted at the time, RomUniverse was upsetting because it was such an obviously bad set of facts that would set bad precedent. No, that case is just a guidepost. This is about the fanbase turning on nintendo (look at the NSO+ direct and the ratio), and a cornerstone of Nintendo’s ongoing popularity and recent sales records (retro gaming) being eroded with seemingly no concern for the damage it might cause Nintendo itself.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Who’s revising? This very fine article pointed out that they had it coming and were doing obviously illegal things — and that they’ve been punished by fines the people involved will never be able to pay off in their lifetimes.

Your point is good though: ROMUniverse went further than other sites by distributing Nintendo’s currently for-sale properties for personal gain. I can’t really see how they expected to AVOID being taken down.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

fans of these titles had a better product to give them what they wanted: the emulation sites Nintendo shut down

Pirates can always offer better product than what you can create yourself, since they can pick the best products from the market. Whoever creates his own content is always locked to one product only, and if it turns out to be poor quality, jumping to another product simply isn’t possible…. Pirates not only are doing this illegally, but they can always produce better product than those who are actually paying proper price… I.e. the price of genuine product is always higher too.

So choosing genuine product, you get poor quality and higher price.

But that’s what you pay for not having to become criminal.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

Tero, Tero, Tero. Here is a link to my latest EP Tomoyo-San in Another World on bandcamp. It came out last October with a preorder five months before that. So far, I made six US dollars on that EP which had three extremely short tracks. The EP is also licensed with a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 license. I’d be kidding if I said I’m raking in the dough, yet to my knowledge, you’re making a serious argument that your product has "high demand" that one person downloaded your program which has DRM which made fewer sales than my EP which has a sharable creative commons license.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

This statistics only show what happened this week…

Obviously I have total of 2189 views and 413 downloads, but the trend is downward for older products. $6 is the total revenue.

So you’ve made the same amount of money for DRM’d Meshpage as I did for a CC-licensed 3-song EP I released 33 days ago? Okay.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:8

By your own admission, your software has no users. We can thus safely assume nobody has pirated your software. That means you have no one to sue, since no infringement has occured and you lack standing to sue for any other reason (including your imagined right to a mansion paid for by your government).

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

That means you have no one to sue, since no infringement has occured

Copyright owners need to prepare for all the possible alternatives, including copyright infringements. Even if it doesn’t happen today, the situation could be different in 3 years or something.

and you lack standing to sue for any other reason ‘

I can always sue the neighbours for loud noises, or shopkeeper for not providing magic wands, or restaurant for selling steak with a fly in it, or tier/voi scooters for making their scooters not survive stone impacts.

(including your imagined right to a mansion paid for by your government).

This is a long term project. I only expect this plan to activate when I get retired, so there’s still like 20 years of time left before that plan is relevant. But proper beforehand preparation is the key to getting plans up and running.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:10 Re:

Copyright owners need to prepare for all the possible alternatives, including copyright infringements.

Like your friends at Malibu Media, whose principals recently were at risk of being arrested for refusing to pay lawyer’s fees for a defendant they lost against?

I can always sue the neighbours for loud noises, or shopkeeper for not providing magic wands, or restaurant for selling steak with a fly in it, or tier/voi scooters for making their scooters not survive stone impacts.

None of this actually helps you sell your software, mind you. I would actually like to see you sue a shop for not having imaginary wands.

I only expect this plan to activate when I get retired

If your plan only starts to make you money after you retire, i.e. you stop working at all, why are you angry that we’re not giving you money now, when that’s literally your intended plan?

But proper beforehand preparation is the key to getting plans up and running

What you have is not nearly what anyone would call "proper beforehand preparation".

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

if you only made $6, how can you prove in a court of law that people are pirating your work?

If someone actually pirated my work, proving it for a court is very trivial operation. You can do it in many ways:
1) file names
2) screen shots
3) videos of animations
4) script format
5) displayed logos/progressbars
6) distributed zip files

etc. tons of different ways to prove copyright infringement.

The $6 money amount is not an issue, it can even be used to prove damages of their piracy operation.

It’s known fact that settlements are bringing in like 100 times more money than actually licensing copyrighted works to actual clients.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:10 Re:

If someone actually pirated my work, proving it for a court is very trivial operation. You can do it in many ways:
1) file names
2) screen shots
3) videos of animations
4) script format
5) displayed logos/progressbars
6) distributed zip files

etc. tons of different ways to prove copyright infringement.

Have you ever done any of this in a court of law? Or are you speculating and hypothesizing?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

No. All my information comes from reading other people’s experiences/riaa-related-paperwork with suing pirates.

There’s a ginormous gap in demand between the music sold on major labels and meshpage. I mean, you can measure it in light years.

But you can’t be a master of content creation, if you don’t have an option to sue pirates.

So, Jonathan Coulton and Cory Doctorow are terrible? Fuck you. They’re awesome.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14 Re:

They’re probably using millions of dollars for marketing their product to real customers. My marketing budget is a little bit smaller than that.

Now you’re getting it. See, that has more to do with how successful a product is rather than ©.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:18 Re:

You know how I said that I made $6 on bandcamp from one album? 0% of them downloaded the album (I assume they will listen on Spotify or wherever). So that means I have 100% less customers to worry about. I also upload my album to the internet archive, and people can share as they please. I would only be concerned if

  1. people try to sell my work or any adaptation of my work, and/or
  2. people don’t credit me.

And yet I made as much money as you did. Fancy that!

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

Sorry to double post, but…

But you can’t be a master of content creation, if you don’t have an option to sue pirates.

this really bugs me because Anamanaguchi are fantastic and beloved by the likes of Porter Robinson, Herman Li, Rivers Cuomo, and Flux Pavilion (and they’re friends of mine), and most of their music is Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Noderivatives.

Then there’s Trent Reznor, who is now doing music for Hollywood movies and TV shows. Seriously, TP (for my bunghole), not even Hollywood agrees with that statement, which shows how delusional you are.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14 Re:

Having an "option" to sue is always a good thing.

I disrespecfully disagree. Suing people for sharing my copyrighted work creates ill will among fans, who will then pirate out of spite. Waiving that part of © for my work is a genuine sign of good will towards people who like my work. Not only that, but the fact that I made the same amount of money giving that up on my work (for that particular work) that you made on Meshpage shows that maybe I don’t need litigation to make money.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:15 Re:

Waiving that part of © for my work is a genuine sign of good will towards people who like my work.

I used to have my work available for free with permissible licenses, but sadly internet misuses the trust that I can provide. When they misuse the github availability of the software source code, these miuses cause them to lose ability to see the github repo. And since they were not careful enough to limit their misuse to reasonable area, the world lost permissible license too. It took a while to get content inserted by Stallman removed from the project, but the end result more accurately reflects the current reality in the internet.

Basically when internet misuses the provided features, they’re going to lose access to them.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:17 Re:

"If what was being done with your work was permissible within the license, then what’s the problem?"

This seems to be where part of his disconnect is. His initial success appears to have been with some kind of embedded code where he was the master of his domain and he controlled the entire pipeline without collaboration. He’s found it extraordinarily difficult to move to a domain where collaboration is key, and he has to consider the requirements of end users above and beyond his own desires.

Basically, he wants to be able to create his code, and then control both what other people do with the code and how people use the complied utility. Then, blames everyone else for this being impossible in modern reality.

Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:18 Re:

"Basically, he wants to be able to create his code, and then control both what other people do with the code and how people use the complied utility. Then, blames everyone else for this being impossible in modern reality."

Mmmh, yeah, tp is just that sort of guy. Logic and causal reality don’t agree with him and so he tries to argue them into obedience by shitposting on tech forums.

Or we could look back to the bit where he admitted to being a troll and realize his only motive around here is to spam the thread asunder. Arguably that does do more towards shutting our side of the debate up than trying to argue in good faith given that every fact keeps backing us.

At this point I wish people would just realize that tp is that guy you give a total of three replies at most, then just flag and ignore for the troll he is – because scrolling down five pages of spam is annoying even if all his comments have become flagged into hiding.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:19 Re:

He’s the sort of guy I like poking at because even within his own invented reality there’s no logical consistency. It makes a change from other arguments where people really have drunk the Trump / QAnon kool aid and think that a failed con artist is going to solve all their problems just so long as we destroy the foundations of democracy to give them what they want, that people can be truly free so long as we hold social media platforms responsible for things other people do, that climate change will go away if we just ignore it, or various other political issues.

Sad to say, the mocking of someone whose online persona is of someone who cannot deal with verifiable reality is a nice break.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:17 Re:

If what was being done with your work was permissible within the license, then what’s the problem?

basically using github repo to bash the product isn’t technically against the license, but its also not valid use case for github repo that was publicly available for purposes of customization, modification or recompiling the binaries for multiple platforms etc… Basically misuse in a github repo for undeserved critique is not acceptable use of the feature. If they want to publish critique, they should write articles about the features that are included in the product, not take the source code and boast about indentation practices.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:16 Re:

"I used to have my work available for free with permissible licenses"

Depending on what those licences were, it’s likely that anyone who was interested in any of your code could have legally forked it and continued working on it under a different project. It’s really not a good sign of the quality of the code if nobody wanted to do that.

"these miuses cause them to lose ability to see the github repo"

You… do realise that doing that didn’t revoke the licences, right? As in, anyone who cloned the repo before you locked it up but hasn’t deleted it yet can probably push it to a new repo and there’s nothing you can do about it? because you gave them permission to do it under the terms of the original licence that was granted at the time?

"It took a while to get content inserted by Stallman removed from the project"

Translation: you’ve spent so much time pointlessly rewriting the functionality of the FOSS code you originally based your project on that it’s now hilariously dated, and pointless in comparison to the original projects, that have been fully maintained and updated by thousands of people in the meantime?

"Basically when internet misuses the provided features, they’re going to lose access to them."

OK, then they will move to programs with those features available according to their needs. You might, at a long stretch, manage to get away with this stuff with your games, but there’s no chance it will happen when the supposed reason for your utility software is to allow others to create.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:17 Re:

there’s no chance it will happen when the supposed reason for your utility software is to allow others to create.

Target market for the software (for creating new stuff) is children smaller than high school level, so I don’t really expect the target group participants care much about which license I offer the material. Basically the license issues and free software and all the riaa/mpaa horror comes afterwards.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:19 Re:

You’re bonkers if you think you can compete with them out of all companies.

Well, i just offered the product to some mom of children who wanted ps5 for birthday, and they received links to meshpage and builder, but then didn’t forget ps5 either. Guess we’ll see soon which one stays longer, ps5 or urls to my website.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:22 Re:

This is, of course, ignoring the fact that copyright fans like Tero Pulkinnen and out_of_the_blue have such distaste for games and gamers, they regularly complain that gamers would be vandalizing public property if copyright and coding didn’t exist. They want stronger copyright enforcement for games, but they absolutely don’t want games to be developed.

Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:20 Re:

"Guess we’ll see soon which one stays longer, ps5 or urls to my website."

The ps5 is likely to generate hundreds of millions in margins before it is supplanted by a ps6 which will continue to generate hundreds of millions in margins.

You, on the other hand, measure "success" by for how long something is around? If that’s your kpi for the success of a venture may I suggest you take up rock carving?

But take that suggestion with a grain of salt. There may be runestones and steles still standing a millennium or more after creation but in your case pot odds are your contemporaries will make sure they’re buried or broken up as the neolithic equivalent of spammy shitposting.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:21 Re:

You, on the other hand, measure "success" by for how long something is around?

Remember that Tero has also stated that in order for new products to make it to market, older products need to be destroyed along with the public domain so tech support doesn’t have to be provided for older products.

So based on his logic, the more "successful" Meshpage is, the more it deserves to be destroyed. I have to say, it’s funny as fuck when copyright trolls do my work for me by shooting their own arguments.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:19 Re:

The fact that no one has touched your code in years despite its availability should tell you something

yes, it tells me that the people are lazy. Just like you are. You didn’t even pass the very basic tests I had designed for high school level children. Basically you couldn’t even get a cube to the screen with my technology, and as such, you’re unable to place valid critique to the technology. Basically all your messages are not worth a damn, because you fail to do proper research on the subject before spouting your opinion.

the capablities of the technology are way beyond displaying a cube, but still techdirt has noone who is able to get cube done.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:25 Re:

why would I want to use your shitty program when I could do it much more efficiently in Blender

Well, f you use my program, you gain ability to send real critique of the technology. If you only use blender, your critique must target only blender and you cannot say anything about how bad my technology is. This kind of ability to send real critique should be extreamly valuable for your trolling…

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:26

The fact that someone would prefer to use Blender rather than Meshpage is, itself, a critique of Meshpage. If you could demonstrate that your program is better than (or at least as good as) Blender, you wouldn’t get “I’d rather use Blender” comments⁠—you’d get an actual userbase.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:28 Re:

How about a demonstration, then? If you can prove that Meshpage does a better job than blender, you’ll prove yourself, get a userbase and the people currently making fun of you will owe you huge apologies for doubting you.

Now? My magic 8-ball says "Outlook not so good", and I doubt it’s referring to the Microsoft email program.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:32

One could do that, if they were so inclined. That most Blender users aren’t inclined to do that isn’t an indictment of Blender, but an acknowledgement that the average Blender user wants to make something more advanced than the CGI found in the first Golgo 13 animated feature.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:31 Re:

If you spent a tenth as much time working as you do bitching.

I actually did the work before arriving to this place. Now I just sell air to people who doesn’t bother to check the featuresets that are available. All the extra work is not really helping since YOU as users don’t even bother to check them out. How is that "working" actually contributing to the end result, if users don’t even bother to check out the existing features?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:35 Re:

Now, let’s be fair. When he first decided coming here it was to whine that notch had made a lot of money selling Minecraft to Microsoft and that the government owed him a similar sized mansion because he thought that it was unfair that his bus adverts failed to produce sales.

The defending copyright abusers and inventing his own parameters for what he thought copyright should be came after everyone laughed at him, or at least that’s my recollection.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:36 Re:

The admitting that he was a "professional troll" like Malibu Media was something he’d only done after he was dumb enough to create a user account, true. He’d already been here around… 2015? Trying to shill his product using the url field of the "Add a Reply" function with his brand of non-comprehension.

Funnily enough, Malibu Media themselves came very close to being arrested about a week ago. One can dream.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:30 Re:

A few things:

  1. Is a cubic wreath the best you could do? Because those aren’t the upper limits of Blender’s capabilities. It can do everything from Pixar-like 3D animation to work similar to hand-drawn animation.
  2. You keep saying that Blender can’t make cubes, which is beyond ludicrous seeing as the when you start a new project in Blender it automatically provides you with a cube.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:31 Re:

I can’t understand what you’re doing in Meshpage and I have a minor in Computer Science.

My own experience is that 10-15 year olds can read "amiga hardware reference manuals" and write assembler code and high school level kids can write compete computer games released in real publisher (with amiga)… While the tech environment has slightly changed after amiga times, I simply cannot assume that high school level kids are alot more stupider than what we did when we were young. If you have trouble understanding meshpage, then maybe you’re not in correct area of expertise.

What makes you think preteens would understand what you’re doing?

I used to be young too. And whlie I understand that young people have challenges with learning all the necessary technologies, I simply cannot declare them idiots simply because internet thinks the technologies are not suitable for that young people.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:32

My own experience is that 10-15 year olds can read "amiga hardware reference manuals"

Your experience is not universal.

While the tech environment has slightly changed after amiga times

That you still think Amiga is a worthwhile reference point for any reasonable benchmark of modern technology is…well, it’s a laughable idea, which is the kindest statement I can make on that matter. (It might also explain why you think late ’80s/early ’90s CGI is the highest possible achievement for Meshpage.)

I simply cannot assume that high school level kids are alot more stupider than what we did when we were young.

Didn’t you say you were marketing Meshpage towards preteens now? ????

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:32

Blender is open source and has a large community base for support. Meshpage is essentially closed source and has one singular dickhead for support.

Try and guess which program the average person would use. (Here’s a small hint: IT’S NOT MESHPAGE.)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:36

If I downloaded Blender right now and started using it with little-to-no prior training, I probably could get a cube done. But I’m not going to do that, because:

  1. I have no interest in 3D modeling, either as a hobby or a career; and
  2. I don’t take orders from delusional whackjobs like you.

Insulting me as a way of goading me into doing something that you apparently can’t get done won’t make me do it for you. You want a cube done in Blender? Do it yourself. I’m not your slave, your employee, or your bitch.

Grow the fuck up, Tero.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:39 Re:

This kind of stuff just leads to the obvious conclusion is that you’re all hot air. Your critique has no teeth, because you don’t bother to test the technologies that you talk about. You don’t even know how blender works even though you have been praising it like its 2nd coming of jesus. But given that you haven’t tested either of the technologies, anything you say about them can be dismissed as just false statements lacking any ground truths.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:40

You don’t even know how blender works even though you have been praising it like its 2nd coming of jesus.

No, I haven’t. I’ve been calling it “better than Meshpage”, which is true. Comparisons between the output you’ve made in Meshpage and the output others have made in Blender⁠—numerous examples of which are all over the Internet⁠—back up my opinion.

Before what you’re doing was called “negging”, it was called “reverse psychology”, and incels didn’t invent it, Bugs Bunny did. You’re not going to make me use Meshpage or Blender by insulting me, Tero. Grow the fuck up.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:41 Re:

Comparisons between the output you’ve made in Meshpage and the output others have made in Blender

It’s better to compare output of one person to output of another "one person"… Basically comparing output of one person to output of whole country or whole community is just showing your reasonablessness.. Basically what makes you do it is google’s search. They made their technology work in such way that people need to "find technologies" and "reject large number of them" by "comparing their output to the output of the whole country"….

Basically I could claim that blender cannot do a real tank, even though finnish army has several real tanks available. And that would be always true statement recardless of the features that blender has. I don’t even need to look at blenders featureset to know that it cannot simply create a real tank.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:42 Re:

Er, um, actually…!

By exporting blender renderings as a series of abstract grid coordinates via a modified svg collection rather than video, you could feed those into a CAM system capable of translating it to physical grid points for 3D manufacturing.
Now if you did that via a small scrypt using a macro or key binding within blender…
Blender makes a real tank.

I’m not taking sides here. Btw. But you may want to think through your argument a bit better.

On my he other hand, has anyone seen a rotating cube produced with blender? Just asking.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:43 Re:

you could feed those into a CAM system capable of translating it to physical grid points for 3D manufacturing.

Your process has a magic box in it which does something magical which you haven’t told what it actually does or who can manufacture such boxes. And even if someone could manufacture such a magic box, that’s anyway outside of blender. I.e. blender cannot do it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:44 Re:

magic box

?
Huh?
I figured someone capable of co-writing software would understand what CAD/CAM/CAP was.
There’s no “magic” here.
Note: your program could do this too!

Without getting too technical, and admitting this is outside my area so I’ll probably miss something.

3D animation is no different then 2D other than adding the appearance of depth. So moving from blender to a tank has a few extra steps. After which the process is the same as CAD to CAP. And ultimately CAM.
Step one. Using secondary model abstraction we request the absolute grid points based on a pre fed set of dimensions. Then we render the model component within those dimensional points.
We export each of those design parts as tagged SVGx.
We use the machine’s (your OS of choice, Win in your case), PS driver to then translate those SVGx to PSPC and output it over serial to the production processor, which is part of a manufacturing system.

Now, we can head over to a scrypt program, I like Martin but that’s Mac/BSD, or notepad++ in your case and write up a command operation for export location and sort order. A standard TDV table should work well.
We then create a load, print (send) operation. Called print. That will send the data to the serial output.
Now we create a master scrypt to run those two scrypts in order.

We can then use an interjection in the source of blender to call the master script when choosing a predefined output option.

So blender, via Save As, would directly be the source for creating a tank.

You could even get fancy and send operation instructions to the assembly system if it supports aHO.
But personally I’d prefer to walk down to the factory floor and push the start button.

Thing is I’ve seen demos of people using blender to make 3D printed objects. And just about every other 3DAni program.

Now you could argue that it’s not accurate in that the “printer” is not part of the program. But then I’d argue the program itself is not a single item but a large collection of of individual actions combined to make a usable “machine” and thus your software, and blender, are nothing more than someone else’s work. High level activities translated into low level translated into binary commands.

But that would be just as much an arse argument as a “printer” output not being part of the program’s design.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:46 Re:

Funny thing with that, I don’t. See. I bug hunt. Occasionally I fix other peoples’ errors.
Sure, I’ve CIS and ITS education. But I couldn’t begin to tell you crap about how CAM and CAP work.

What I can do is tell you how to take five minutes in a format-free text editor to type up a few command line entries, make a quick scrypt, throw it in an automated Xcode builder and have an active module you can call in with a key binding. Or a plug in. Or a command replacement.

I question, now: how do you, TP, get stumped on a simple relocation directive? So stumped as to pull out the 1992 “magic box” card?!!!!??

Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

"Sure, I’ve CIS and ITS education."

Which is arguably better than what tp appears to possess given that his technical explanation emerge from a mix of 30+ years old "state of the art" computer understanding and, apparently, one of Hogwarts less successful curriculums on defense against the dark arts.

Then again we also have tp freely admitting once or twice that he’s around here only for the trolling. Which is why every thread featuring him tends to end up with some 300 comments worth of bullshit and people lured into countering that bullshit.

I have a rule. More than two or three comments on a tp thread is the limit. After that it’s just flag & ignore.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

Let me be clear: the only way TP is going to stop what he/she wants to stop is to block system calls.
To do that you need to self host your program in a sandbox. And with modern OSs not allowing that:
You need to place your sandboxed program in a sandbox launcher. Wrapped in a to memory emulated OS, in a standalone binary or package. And since you can’t lock any of the Unix decedents, or Unix, you’d need to supply a licensed copy of Microsoft Windows with each sale, as your guest.
so adding an extra $100+ to the sale price.
Plus the $1200 annual redistribution fee to Microsoft.
Ouch.
See, using Unix et all you can simply use the TE to brew or bld another unrestricted TE via live translation. Called CLinCL or TnT. And then SUDo your way around restrictions of the guest.

I’ve done just that to demonstrate how to break a sandbox. In more than one case.
Locking your doors doesn’t help when there’s a tunnel to the middle.

This isn’t BlackHat level stuff either. My BFF’s daughter used this method when she was 9! To bypass a restriction setting on an iPAD! Using iSH!
Sure, she’s a little hacking goddess genius: But the point is you don’t have to hack it.
You simply look at HOW it’s restricted and walk around it.

And keep in mind you can still tunnel in power shell in a fully locked instance of windows.
Just use PS to Regedt Recovery = on
Crash the system by scrypting enough devide by 0 operations in sequence to fill the memory with errors. The guest will restart to the recovery service, which allows a command line! Create a new user, set them to Admin, and restart with user switching turned on.
I just screwed your security lockout plan.

And here’s biggest problem TP has. Nobody wants to take the effort to do any of that because we can just download blender. And I’d just fire up my LeadingEdge 486 DX4 and load TurboCad and be done in a fraction of the time.

It’s a lost cause! You can’t stop me from building a tank with your software. I’m now dedicated to doing that.
so anything you can think of to stop me, I’ll tell you exactly how to get around it.
And I spend my life finding ways to get around Software and hardware restrictions. It’s called bug hunting.
I find ways to break things. For fun ????

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

And here’s biggest problem TP has. Nobody wants to take the effort to do any of that because we can just download blender. And I’d just fire up my LeadingEdge 486 DX4 and load TurboCad and be done in a fraction of the time.

And he thinks that by enforcing copyright law to the extreme, it’ll eventually pay off by restricting what everyone else wants to do. TP’s entire gimmick is to pray that each and every one of his competitors gets destroyed for alleged copyright infringement.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

is to pray that each and every one of his competitors gets destroyed for alleged copyright infringement.

This is true. We expect criminals to disappear from the market at some point. Then there will be freedom to tinker and develop technologies without competing against people who do not follow the copyright rules. And money will flow to the people who deserve it, not just those who bend the rules the most.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

We expect criminals to disappear from the market at some point.

And that’s your tough sell: You can’t convince everyone that Blender, 3dsmax, Maya, AutoCAD and all the other modeling software that exists in the market are criminals. They simply don’t fit any definition of criminal copyright infringement. Not even in the RIAA’s fevered dreams.

Meanwhile, you know who else has disappeared from the market for being criminals? Your copyright enforcement heroes at Prenda Law. Malibu Media is going to join them soon. At this rate, Meshpage is likely to follow. Soon you’ll be marketing to prisoners, not preteens. 🙂

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

"This pretty much implies that they should be next in line for copyright witch hunt."

No, it implies that if there were some fundamental reason for them to have been held liable, it would have happened by now. It’s true that there’s nothing to avoid a witch hunt if some failure wished to launch one against them, but it will be hard to convince anyone of a legal basis for one at this point given the huge level of non-infringing uses for both Photoshop and its many competitors.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

it will be hard to convince anyone of a legal basis for one at this point

Except that stephen gave the legal basis in a golden plate, served directly to emphasize that their business has been based on "allowing people to infringe". There’s only very small step from this flexibility, to the act of encouraging infringement to happen. And when they instruct their followers to commit copyright infringement, it’s at least secondary infringement. It’s simply not acceptable that companies actively encourage their user base to commit copyright infringements, even if there was significant demand for such activity.

Basically we could find that any company that builds a system that relies on user’s illegal activity, i.e. company implements all legal modules, but leaves illegal pieces for end users to fill, is guilty of secondary infringement, because customers of such company often has no other choice than commit direct copyright infringement. It’s either that, or their valuable gadgets will not work properly as the vendor company has designed it to work. This is why requiring end users to fill in known-to-be-illegal-blocks is considered secondary infringement. The product has been configured for piracy, and thus the product itself is illegal and users who opt to purchase such product will be in big legal trouble.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:46 Re:

TP, however, thinks he’s entitled to money.

So you didn’t even look at the technical superiority of the product? Tell me exactly why are software developers developing technologies for your use? Shouldn’t you be happy if the tech just disappears? You don’t seem to value the technical aspects enough, so we could sell you air and you wouldn’t be any wiser?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

No offence. Seriously. This is a moment for you to reflect on things a bit.

Your design immediately reminded me of Fast Cad on the IBM 360 platform.
Specifically on the 360 302

You know what else hat shite implementation and went on to greatness? Multiplan. Which they merged under a third party front end to create excel!

You may or may not have something there. I will download and look tomorrow/today and try it out. But… your webm demo shows a design layout late 90s that is neither retro nor modern. Rather the best forgotten era.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

"So you didn’t even look at the technical superiority of the product?"

That doesn’t matter as to whether or not you get paid. Plenty of superior tech has lost out in the marketplace to stuff that people think is inferior, and that’s why you have to deal with the market instead of your own twisted ego.

You could have created the greatest software known to mankind. However, because you refuse to collaborate with others, demand that people use it in the way you want to and actively try and stop uses that customers actually want, you failed.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47

This isn’t true.

By your own admission, you literally closed off the source code of Meshpage because other people tried to edit it.

my way or the high way

This is why only a handful of people, at best, will ever use Meshpage: Nobody wants you telling them exactly what they can do with an application meant to help them unleash their own imagination.

If they wanted piracy use-cases, those were rejected.

If they wanted legitimate cases, you’d still reject them because of the potential of copyright infringement. After all, you’ve said before that you would intentionally sabotage your own software to prevent any input from being entered into it to prevent copyright infringement. (Don’t say otherwise; we can look at your comment history.)

Given how you’d basically be saying “fuck you if you try to use this like Blender” to anyone who uses Meshpage, for what reason would anyone in their right mind use Meshpage and deal with a complete asshole like you when both Blender and its diverse support community are available to them?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

By your own admission, you literally closed off the source code of Meshpage because other people tried to edit it.

No, the decision to close the source code stems from several aspects:
1) there was new management available (called qtamo)
2) stallman didn’t contribute enough to the project
3) it was developed on windows systems for several years
4) it was gaming, which is not critical to behaviour of linux systems
5) it was preparation for steam release (which is known to be against free software)
6) the github repository was being misused by internet community
=> and thus we wanted source code hidden and free software licenses do not like source code hidden
7) the web is using different rules than free software, i.e. the server-side source code is usually not public, and commercial/proprietary entities are welcome

Basically the decision is a combination of all these aspects.

> If they wanted piracy use-cases, those were rejected.
If they wanted legitimate cases, you’d still reject them because of the potential of copyright infringement.

Their requirements are stuff like:
a) mp4 file support, so that hollywood movie clips can be used with the animations
b) mp3 file support, so that RIAA’s music files can be used with the animations. (this was actually approved, even though it’s dubious; given that I have no other way to get sounds done)
c) text support, so that pirates can implement localised texts/subtitles for pirated movies (this was implemented, but in a way that prevents large scale operations handling whole movies)
d) taking screenshots and screen grabbing of builder window (this was approved because youtube is significant non-infringing use case, but it’s still dubious since screen grabbing video files allows our animations to be used as "logos" of pirate groups and mere aggregation is then needed to include it to pirated hollywood movies)

Which one would you prefer that definitely needs to be implemented?

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

"1) there was new management available (called qtamo)"

QTamo appears to be a proprietary software with the same marketing talent that you possess. Maybe there’s something about Finnish software developers that prevents them from explaining what their software does or why they should use it? Even so, your decision to arbitrarily block everyone from working on a project because there’s something shiny that caught your eye elsewhere explains why you found it hand to get people to work with you.

"2) stallman didn’t contribute enough to the project"

Your idea of free software development that attracts millions of people across the world to collaborate with each other is that Richard Stallman has to personally contribute to every project personally?

"3) it was developed on windows systems for several years"

Many projects that are currently cross-platform were, including some of your major competitors.

"7) the web is using different rules than free software, i.e. the server-side source code is usually not public, and commercial/proprietary entities are welcome"

You should try using the same web the rest of us use, it’s amazing how much is open source. Especially server side stuff.

"Their requirements are stuff like"

Things that make it useful. Wow, I wonder why your refusal to offer that stuff has crippled your mainstream ambitions…

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

You can pirate Hollywood movies using all sorts of things given the time and inclination and available materials – a video camera, a still shot camera and tape recorder, a USB stick. That doesn’t mean you get to outlaw all the tech and the vast amount of extra value they give to everybody just because you couldn’t work out how to get people to pay for the rancid piece of shit you directed instead of the superior competing products.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

That doesn’t mean you get to outlaw all the tech and the vast amount of extra value they give to everybody

Vendors of the hardware like video cameras, still shot cameras, tape recorders, usb sticks, ssd disks, hard disks, etc need to look for illegal uses of their hardware and actively prevent misuses. This means examining the technology environment where the products will be used, and prevent combinations that are likely to be used for piracy. This applies to vendors of larger than usual hard disks, video/webcam vendors, audio vendors, dvd recorders, browsers, protocol developers, router vendors, kernel developers, etc… Anything that can handle pirated data/streams. The vendors need to work together to actively prevent misuses of their gadgets.

Simply sticking your head to sand is not acceptable.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47

Technology doesn’t do context. You can’t make a camera that can differentiate between a legal use (filming your own movie) and an illegal use (filming someone else’s movie in a theater)⁠—it’s so technically improbable as to be practically impossible. Hell, for all your crowing about Meshpage being able to suss out infringing works from legal ones, you still didn’t catch how you ripped off Scott Cawthon until I informed you that you had done an infringement. (Congrats, Tero, you’re as much a criminal as you think every other infringer is.)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

Technology doesn’t do context. You can’t make a camera that can differentiate between a legal use (filming your own movie) and an illegal use (filming someone else’s movie in a theater)⁠—

Technical solution to this is shorten your video camera shutter speed enough that the frame rate of the movie theater causes huge flickering when stored to the camera. This makes all pirated filming in theater impossible to watch. Unfortunately this practice with causing camera to record flickering output was declared illegal at some point, because some people get real medical problems with watching flickering lights/screens. This is why some star wars movies have warnings about flicker. So basically context isn’t needed, there’s always tech solutions like this available if you truly want to prevent these use case. Another problem with this solution is that all cameras in the world need to be modified for it to be effective, so they’re always looking for stuff that doesn’t really require such big changes.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47

there’s always tech solutions like this available if you truly want to prevent these use case

But unlike you, who has no problem with hurting other people for fun, companies don’t tend to sabotage their own hardware for the sake of copyright. That would make them bleed customers, who will happily go find non-sabotaged tech from competitors and use that instead.

Again: Technology and context don’t really blend well together. Shooting part of your own movie in a dimly lit room and filming a movie off a screen in a dark theater can look similar through the lens of a camera. How could that camera ever tell the difference between those contexts without being supernaturally aware of the context in which it’s being used?

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47

They do

Have the developers of programs such as Photoshop, Blender, Notepad++, and the web browser you’re using to view this site intentionally sabotaged those programs in a way that limits their core functionality (e.g., image editing, 3D modelling, text editing, browsing/interacting with the Internet) for the sake of preserving copyright? Remember: The functionality must provably be sabotaged (or removed) only for the sake of preventing copyright infringement to count as a proper example.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

Photoshop, Blender, Notepad++, and the web browser you’re using to view this site intentionally sabotaged those programs in a way that limits their core functionality

Web browser is easiest example. Main functionality of web browser is downloading data from the internet. Sadly browser developers managed to ruin their download feature, by limiting the user interface of download manager which requires multiple steps by the end user per file… Hard core internet users would never accept that manual work is required per file, when best download managers can download gigabytes and large directory structures with one command, but browsers require user interaction per file.

This download manager limitation is clearly based on copyright law.

Basically only way to avoid this limitation is via zip files, and that brings you outside of web browser.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

"Sadly browser developers managed to ruin their download feature, by limiting the user interface of download manager which requires multiple steps by the end user per file"

I’m not sure which browser you use, but it seems you might need to upgrade at some point.

"This download manager limitation is clearly based on copyright law."

You should always check the distance in front of you before making leaps like that, you always seem to land somewhere other than reality.

"Basically only way to avoid this limitation is via zip files, and that brings you outside of web browser"

So do the majority of other files. Is your bullshit position now that if you download a PSD file and it opens in Photoshop, then some other copyright exists than if you downloaded the GIF format of the same image that opens natively? Do file associations have some random relationship in your insane mind now?

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47

In-browser download managers are used to keep track of downloads, not to download files themselves. That’s how they’ve always worked, in my experience. Whatever limitations in-browser download managers may have, they are not the result of copyright law and you can’t even come close to proving otherwise in a way that matters to people who live outside of your alternative reality.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47

I have already provided enough details

No, you haven’t. You have offered no proof to back up your claim that download managers in modern web browsers function the way they do because of copyright law.

I don’t expect your verification results

I don’t have to prove a negative and I don’t have to do your work for you. You made the claim, so the burden of proving its truthfulness lies with you. Prove your claim is factual or shut the fuck up forever.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

in modern web browsers function the way they do because of copyright law.

Would you consider that a feature where browsers actively prevented users from downloading large amount of data from the internet, would prevent significant amount of copyright infringements if browser vendors managed to get the technology adopted as widely as web browsers have been?

Basically this is the case currently, i.e. browser features are preventing large scale download operations and are actively replacing them with downloads from known legal areas of the world. Basically browser’s sandbox protects http/https transfers, actively making them (more) legal(because it’s not distribute, but only display), while download manager encourages people to use
more convinient http/https download feature instead of the more cumbersome download manager which allows saving the data to local hard disk.

This kind of gimmick has no other purpose than prevent copyright infringement.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:43 Re:

If you can’t stand having your work compared to the work of one person or the work of one hundred thousand other people, don’t put your work out there for everyone to judge.

I’m always up for fair comparision, but your attempts at comparing products seem kinda shortsighted:
1) you don’t bother to look at the featuresets of the products
2) you don’t bother to check the price of the product
3) you’re only comparing humans. I’m not selling a human, I already know you wouldn’t pay anything to get access to this particular human, so I just write technologies and sell you tech. If that isn’t acceptable, I sell you air in a convinient can of fresh air taken from english countryside.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:44

I don’t need to look at the feature sets when I know Blender has been around for far longer than your shit-ass software⁠—and when I know Blender is more developed, more supported, and more widely used than Meshpage will ever be.

I don’t need to check the price of the product when I know Blender is free and open source; that fact makes the price of your product irrelevant.

And I’m “comparing humans” because⁠—and I know you’re going to hate hearing this, so please get a fainting couch ready for yourself⁠—people are the ones using Blender. (And they’d be the ones using Meshpage if both it and you didn’t suck more than a black hole.) You invited comparisons between the output potential of both Meshpage and Blender; your throwing of a temper tantrum because such comparisons don’t flatter you is not my problem.

Also not my problem: you taking offense to being reminded that Blender was developed by multiple people. Don’t like that? Let other people help you develop Meshpage. Or shut the fuck up⁠—whichever one you want to do, so long as you stop whining like an entitled two-year-old who thinks they’re owed the world because they exist.

Grow the fuck up, Tero.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:45 Re:

Blender has been around for far longer than your shit-ass software⁠

So featuresets do not matter, only development time? Maybe we should drop the features and just idle during the development, so that we gain dev time without actually implementing features?

I don’t need to check the price of the product when I know Blender is free and open source;

You’re not calculating the full price of the software. The price isn’t about money amount in free software projects. But it’s how much annoying operations developers of such software will need to endure to get the project up and running. The money (as you mentioned) is zero, but on those kind of products, different metrics are needed which captures the full impact of the development to the world. This means that if some poor developer used 15 years of his life to make blender reality, then that’s the true cost of blender, not your sucky 0 money amount.

Count the real impact to the world, do not look just the money.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:46

So featuresets do not matter, only development time?

Otherwording aside: Excluding claims of theoretical functionality like being able to stop copyright infringement (which you couldn’t even stop yourself from committing with Meshpage!) what can Meshpage do right now that Blender can’t do? Because from where I sit, Blender can do far more than Meshpage will ever be able to do.

Maybe we should drop the features and just idle during the development, so that we gain dev time without actually implementing features?

And you called me lazy for not falling for your negging…

if some poor developer used 15 years of his life to make blender reality, then that’s the true cost of blender

There may be at least one developer that has been developing Blender since the beginning. But unlike you, they didn’t mind working with other people⁠—which means they weren’t alone across that span of development time.

I’m sorry your efforts with Meshpage have amounted to nothing, but projecting your failure onto others by acting like someone being part of a development team for a successful piece of software has wasted their life by working with others for years is…well, it’d be hilarious if it weren’t so goddamned depressing to see you hate yourself this much.

And really, all the bitching about Blender is ultimately projection on your part. You couldn’t hack it as a developer, so rather than admit the truth, you shittalk your “competition” and claim shit like “they wasted years of their life developing this thing” or whatever. You say your program can make a cube easier than Blender, but when confronted with the fact that Blender gives you a cube right out of the gate, you go eerily silent. Everything you keep saying as a criticism of Blender and its development team is an indictment of yourself⁠—of your failures, your hatred for other people, your self-loathing. I mean, my God, would you even be trolling people on Techdirt right now if you didn’t hate yourself to the point where you thought trolling people on Techdirt was a good use of your time? (I hate myself, too, but at least I’m self-aware of the damage I’m doing to myself by continuing to argue with you.)

Count the real impact to the world, do not look just the money.

Okay:

  • Blender is a well-known, widely used, inconceivably powerful piece of software that anyone interested in 3D graphics can legally download and modify without financial cost.
  • Meshpage is an almost entirely unknown piece of software that no one has any interest in, and the only place anyone talks about it is on a blog where its creator trolls people by acting like someone with early onset dementia.

Far more creative works⁠—more tangible additions to culture and society, for better or for worse⁠—have been made and will be made with Blender than with Meshpage. When the history of 3D graphics is written, Blender will have at least one full chapter, but Meshpage won’t even warrant a one-line footnote in an appendix. If and when development on Blender stops, that software will be long remembered as a useful program; when you die, nobody will even think once about Meshpage.

How’s that for some real world impact?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:47 Re:

I mean, my God, would you even be trolling people on Techdirt right now if you didn’t hate yourself to the point where you thought trolling people on Techdirt was a good use of your time? (I hate myself, too, but at least I’m self-aware of the damage I’m doing to myself by continuing to argue with you.)

I look at engaging with trolls the same way I look at Kitboga, Pierogi and Jim Browning. In the long term they are probably not contributing much more than wasting the time of a scam artist. But the process and results are funny as fuck.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:41 It's a chicken and egg thing

Are you a bitter bitch because no bought your work, or did no one buy your work because you are a bitter bitch?

If you’re looking value from actual humans, you should go to some other shop. We’re not trafficing humans. We only sell technology. We never considered nerds like Bill Gates to be good salespeople, so the human aspect you need to find from some other shop. Come back when you’ve fulfilled your human requirements, our technology will help once you get your bricks in order.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:32 Re:

And you’re not able to do any meaningful modifications given that you cannot even get a cube done with the technology.

When you open up a new project in Blender, the first thing it provides you is a cube. Meanwhile, you have to do a lot of work in Meshpage as per your demo.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:34

if you need 2 cubes, you still need to figure out how to create or clone one

That’s why tutorials and online support exist: If someone can’t figure it out on their own, they can find help from people willing to help. (Unlike you, who would apparently kill people over TCP/IP if you could if they ever asked you for any help with Meshpage.)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

So if pirates can always offer the better product why isn’t there a better version of Meshpage?

My copy-protection actually works?

Either way, it’s kinda telling that the pirates chose the exact same nintendo product than what nintendo was releasing to the public. I.e. if pirates can easily jump from one product to another in search of best user experience, why would they choose nintendo’s products for their pirated warez? Shouldn’t they just jump to another (better quality) product?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

You don’t need “copy protection” if nobody is ever going to copy your product in the first place.

With copy-protection, I don’t need to:
1) compete against my own work
2) watch my user base disappear when pirate version of the same
product becomes available in pirate sites
3) deal with the maintainance of users who didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line
4) translate the product to languages that the pirates use
5) include large font files supporting chinese glyphs
6) make the product follow laws of arabic muslim countries, including harrassment of women
7) customize the product to different geographic areas, like time zones or city maps
8) setup 24h product support web sites/phone lines/facebook pages/chat rooms

See, there’s huge amount of burden that the copy-protection technology saves.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

"With copy-protection, I don’t need to:

4) translate the product to languages that the pirates use"

Then why is available in English? I mean, it’s clearly not your native language so why do you choose to operate in a language that is mainly useful to you for people to laugh at your incompetence?

"See, there’s huge amount of burden that the copy-protection technology saves"

Most of the burdens you just stated were "providing support for your user base". That’s nothing to do with piracy, but it’s obvious why you fail constantly to attract such a thing if you think that offering i8n and time zone support are bad things.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

James Burkhardt (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Re:

One of the fun parts of software is that support for legitimate users is support for illegitimate users.

3) deal with the maintainance of users who didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line

A system of registering purchases to gain support is a well-known way to provide support for a product while locking out support for illegitimate copies without the downsides to copy-protection. You can do this without copy protection.

4) translate the product to languages that the pirates use
Do the priates use different priate languages than your 3 users? No one requires you to localize your product. But you won’t make as many sales if your software isn’t localized. I doubt you plan to localize after you already have my money, so pirates likely pirate such a program because if the program isn’t localized, its value is much lower. Not localizing encourages piracy outside the default languages.

And, again, even if it non-localization discouraged piracy, you don’t need copy protection to not localize your product. Copy protection has nothing to do with whether or not you are required to localize.

5) include large font files supporting chinese glyphs
So #4 is repeated here. I am unsure what your claim here is, but your statement seems to be that that by putting copy protection you don’t need to localize for chinese users or account for those with vision imparement.

Again, you don’t need copy protection to do without these things. Software developers love to not factor in accessibilty or chinese language support regardless of DRM use. so WTF does this have to do with copy protection?

6) make the product follow laws of arabic muslim countries, including harrassment of women

Copy protection does not protect you against legal action for violating laws. Id be very intersted which laws you are concerned about though and how copy protection defends against those laws.

7) customize the product to different geographic areas, like time zones or city maps

Again, you can ignore localization without copy protection. WTF are you on about?

8) setup 24h product support web sites/phone lines/facebook pages/chat rooms

Or, set up one free discord or a basic forum widget. you are a single developer with under 500 users. So long as you set expectations most users will accept a single developer not having the time to do 24 hour support, as you must know since you don’t provide it now. If pirate support requests are really that bad, require accounts be verified. But a lot of those pirate support requests can help fix legit user issues if you keep them somewhere public like a forum (google will even index you and direct people to your support pages over time, reducing the support burden as you grow). Whether you do so or not, copy protection doesn’t make the issue of user support better.


You seem to not want to localize your product. You have produced an under-developed product. You seem to believe that large masses of pirates really want your software, but your software is not localized and is therefore not worth its cost to the majority of your userbase. So much so that there is an army of pirates representing a fraction of your untapped userbase is stealing it and patching in localization themselves.

As Techdirt has noted, Piracy is often an issue of service and convenience. If your software is truly as good as you claim, and you have the pirate user base you do, it sounds like localization is a major hurdle for the majority of your customers.

Your first 2 benefits of copy protection are :

With copy-protection, I don’t need to:
1) compete against my own work
2) watch my user base disappear when pirate version of the same
product becomes available in pirate sites

but that only works if your copy-protection is airtight. And unfortunately, benefits 3-8 are impairments of the usefulness of your software. 3-8 encourage piracy as they impact the value of your software to any user that needs the localization. Thats why they are a benefit of copy protection, absent copy protection you need those localizations to access your audience or compete with pirates who have improved your software.

and thats the problem. you don’t care about competing with your own software. You care about competing with an objectively better version of what used to be your software.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:8 Re:

You seem to not want to localize your product

I have english terms used in the builder. But sadly the technical terms are pretty much impossible to translate to finnish. Other languages (which I don’t know) are even worse than finnish. Are you going to translate m_phong to finnish for me? Basically it’s impossible task.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

But sadly the technical terms are pretty much impossible to translate to finnish.

If finns do not have equivalent "technical terms," then that can only mean finns just don’t do those things at all. Now, I personally find it pretty unlikely that there is any field which exists only outside of Finland, but I’ll concede to your knowledge of the subject.

Regardless, finns are are certainly not pirating software which they don’t have any use for. So either there is a translation of all your technical terms into finnish… or you don’t need copy protection from the finns.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

"But sadly the technical terms are pretty much impossible to translate to finnish"

OK. I thought that one of your regularly bullshit claims when people were laughing at you for failing to compete with any similar product is that it was really aimed as kids and other non-technical users. Are you admitting another of the many reasons you’re failing – that you’re using technical terms in the UI of a product aimed at the people who don’t understand technical terms? Or, are you so much of an idiot that you think that presenting different UI options to different i8n regions requires you to translate the source code that’s not presented to users as well?

"Are you going to translate m_phong to finnish for me?"

I’m not sure what m_phong is due to the fact that you closed your source code in a tantrum when people tried to build on it, but a quick search suggests that it’s a code function you built that would never be presented to an end user during the operation of the UI. Why would that need to be translated?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

So, you don’t offer anything that your claimed target audience of children would understand?

I’m sure that children will find some of the 600 features useful for creating cool 3d graphics and animations. They don’t need to use all of them, but if they explore just the first 30 of them, they’ll already feel like they’d get something useful done.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:13 Re:

"I’m sure that children will find some of the 600 features useful for creating cool 3d graphics and animations"

I’m sure that they’d find way more useful from your many competitors. Which is your problem.

"if they explore just the first 30 of them, they’ll already feel like they’d get something useful done"

If they explored writing on the wall with their own feces they might get some interesting art done, but their parents and anyone wanting to employ their talents in later life would rather they explored the other options available to them instead.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14 Re:

I’m sure that they’d find way more useful from your many competitors

Sadly the competitors are all targeting to the professional graphics design market, which is completely broken for 15 years old children.

This is exactly why target groups are important to identify properly, otherwise you’d enter the same market where your competitors are already popular.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:15 Re:

"Sadly the competitors are all targeting to the professional graphics design market, which is completely broken for 15 years old children."

A faulty assertion on multiple levels.- First of all, a 15 year old is hardly a child in the way that needs a dumbed-down interface to get to grips with a concept. In fact, by that point a teenager wishing to pursue a career in design would be way better off using industry standard tools, rather than learning an interface that nobody uses professionally then having to move their skills to the software that’s used in industry. In fact, by that age they might already be taking specific courses aimed at giving them those skills, especially summer courses -and exactly zero of those courses will be taught using Meshpage.

So, then what about younger children? For some the niche is already filled by the likes of Minecraft and programs that might get them thinking about design in certain ways before they take the next step. There’s certainly choice in alternate tools if you want them using more general purpose tools, a quick Google on 3D modelling for children suggests tools like TinkerCAD and Solidworks also offers apps specifically aimed at kids. There are of course plenty of tutorials out there aimed at beginners, including kids, and while some of them might require an actively participating adult to help learn the tools correctly, it’s not impossible for a younger child to learn the professional tools, even if they might find it hard if you do nothing but sit them in front of the tool and tell them to use it with no instruction.

The further problem is your overall attitude to the person using the program. If anyone is going to exercise their creativity by infringing copyright, it will be children. Kids learn by imitating what they see around them, and most young artists will initially explore by copying what they see. The average 8 year old isn’t going to come up with something completely original off the bat, they will learn by imitating their heroes, by trying to work out how they can create a version of their favourite Disney or videogame characters before moving on to new ideas. Given that you state that the purpose of your software is to block this type of creativity, it’s not a good tool for this type of learning.

"This is exactly why target groups are important to identify properly"

You’re correct in that if you’re unable to market your product to a mainstream professional market then finding a niche area that’s currently underserved might be a good way to go. But, I’m not sure if its the product from the guy who originally claimed he was trying to beat Pixar, then changed to claim it was aimed at kids, then even more recently it was intended for mobile icon displays, all while being completely hostile to the way most users would want to use such a product.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:16 Re:

First of all, a 15 year old is hardly a child in the way that needs a dumbed-down interface to get to grips with a concept.

It’s worth recalling all of TP’s statements on what he thinks of professionals and 15 year olds. Apparently professionals are all too dumb to use his software, and 15 year olds are such geniuses that you have to artificially complicate software UI in order to make it suitable for them, because they’ll supposedly boycott your tech if they think they’re being "underestimated", according to TP a few comments down. While also dumbing down the UI.

If that statement makes absolutely no fucking sense it’s because TP has consistently made no fucking sense.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:16 Re:

Given that you state that the purpose of your software is to block this type of creativity, it’s not a good tool for this type of learning.

This is exactly why my software is better for this use case. Children will have safe environment where copyright infringement isn’t possible. You wouldn’t want your kid to learn copyright infringement practices and get sued for 300k euros before even learning to walk…

We’d trust RIAA/MPAA to sue your kid to get his weekly allowance to increase the cash register of entertainment companies. They simply don’t care if he’s 8 years old or not, the copyright industry need to get the money they deserve.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:17

Children learn by copying. But you’d rather treat them as potential criminals and either prevent them from doing anything that would help them learn how to express themselves creatively or subject them to insane punishments, and all because you believe all copying (regardless of context) is copyright infringement.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:18 Re:

all because you believe all copying (regardless of context) is copyright infringement.

This is what the law says. Basically there’s only 2 alternative ways to get permission to use some copyrighted work: either you created the material yourself, or you properly licensed the material. Any other context dependent crap is just illegal. The law has declared these two alternatives to be the complete list of possible ways how to get permission, so that any further context is not required when doing legal determination of copyright infringement. The law explicitly says that your "context dependent" ideas are some bullshit that you invented from your ass.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:19

This is what the law says.

No, it doesn’t. But hey, you keep telling yourself that a 6-year-old kid who traces a Disney character out of a coloring book or a YouTuber who makes a movie review using clips from the movie itself needs to be punished with massive life-destroying fines and/or jail sentences. Ain’t like you can make your reputation any worse, after all.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:20 Re:

But hey, you keep telling yourself that a 6-year-old kid who traces a Disney character out of a coloring book or a YouTuber who makes a movie review using clips from the movie itself needs to be punished with massive life-destroying fines and/or jail sentences.

Well, the solution to this problem is to obtain the actual licenses. Keeping the brand identity up and running might have some costs involved, to the tune of millions, so it’s just fair that the people who benefit from the brand will pay license fees for using the brand to sell products to children. Basically you get access to millions of investments with a small license fee (usually 10k or something), so the companies who are building bigger brand identity can divide the 1 million investment between 100 shops that carry the products containing the brand.

This "divide costs between users" is what you copyright infringers never understand properly. If there’s significant number of freeriders in the system, the legal shops that actually take licenses will need to pay significantly more and then pirates will be complaining that the license fees are too large, even when there’s someone paying 1 million bucks for the priviledge of providing brand identity products for your shops.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:22 Re:

I bet you’d kill a kid for tracing Mickey Mouse out of a coloring book.

This has happened in finland recently. Some company called "marimekko" carbon-copied some paintings from a gallery’s painting display book, and created curtains from the outlines. The model was significantly recognizable and the artist who painted the paintings sued marimekko in court for plagiarism and copyright infringement. The company got bad reputation as a result.

So your supposed situation isn’t that some young kid does it from colouring book, but instead commercial companies with millions in sales does it and get sued for it.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:23 Re:

I love that your response to "I bet you’d kill a kid for tracing" was "This happened in Finland recently" as if it was a good thing. But, after a little research and. application of facts and common sense, what a surprise – nothing remotely happened like that.

First of all, the case happened in 2013. That being recent to you might help explain your laughably outdated design and development techniques, but it’s not really that recent for most people.

The actual story appears to be that the National Museum of Ukrainian Folk Art complained that Marimekko was publishing a design that appeared to have been plagiarised. The company confirmed this, the artist Kristina Isola issued a public apology and was fired from the company. There was some problems with the design having been used on Finair aircraft as a tail design, and that was to be replaced.

English language sources may be a little thin on the ground, but from what I can see it was a sane, amicable response with very little of your drooling insanity. Oh, and that "bad reputation" doesn’t seem to have had much affect since on the date the plagiarism was admitted stock in the company were worth around €10, today’s price is €92.30. You might claim that’s down to further plagiarism, but that doesn’t seem to be in evidence, and in fact one of the biggest stories you can see when searching for the company was about them settling with Dolce & Gabbana for ripping of one of their designs.

"get sued for it"

One day you might also learn that getting sued doesn’t actually mean all that much. Depending on the legal system, I can sue you for whatever the hell I want to. The question is whether the court finds in my favour and issue damages. If they don’t, then "getting sued" just means "some asshole said something", which is not relevant to anyone except failed Finnish developers.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:8 Re:

Or, set up one free discord or a basic forum widget. you are a single developer with under 500 users. So long as you set expectations most users will accept a single developer not having the time to do 24 hour support, as you must know since you don’t provide it now.

The claim that 24h support is a necessary component of any software product is a key part of Tero’s recurring arguments. He claims that developers can’t be expected to provide ongoing support for older products, because setting that up and maintaining it would increase costs to the point of impossibility. Therefore older products have to be purged from the market so developers can exclusively provide support for their newer products – and according to Tero, the way that this can be achieved is the destruction of the public domain and strict enforcement of copyright via exclusive control from the copyright holders.

It’s an absolutely bizarre argument premised on a mistaken understanding of how IP law works and the RIAA’s wet dream of copyright, but when you consider we live in an age where content creators regularly use copyright law as a hammer to shut down critiques of their work, copyright is simply a beast that has evolved into a monster that gets its grubby fingers in every damn pie.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

it would increase costs to the point of impossibility. Therefore older products have to be purged from the market so developers can exclusively provide support for their newer products

Actually, you’re focusing on slightly wrong area of the market, when you consider only single vendor’s products in this… This applies to all products in the world. I.e. if vcr video recorders are being dumped, then it gives space for dvd players and cd-roms, i.e. old products are being purged and new ones replace them. But the vcr’s and dvd’s do not need to come from the same vendor. I.e. the market as a whole is constantly purging old products and replacing them with new ones.

vcr’s and dvd players are not copyrighted works, because they have hardware component also included. But the same needs to work also with copyrighted works, i.e. old books are being dumped to trashcan, and newer books and voice books replace them. Copyrighted works also need to get products disappear from the market so that new products have a chance to shine. This cannot happen if copyright rules allows people to use very old works. Only the most popular ones are required to survive, not all works like some anti-copyright people think about 70 year copyright duration.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:10 Re:

need to get products disappear from the market so that new products have a chance to shine

Except that when DVDs started appearing on the market, there were no companies or governments suddenly ruling that VCDs were illegal. There was no initiatives or movements to "disappear" them from the market. The products simply became obsolete over time. Copyrighted works like books and movies on the other hand don’t do this. This is a distinction you consistently ignore because somehow it fits your "I hate the public domain with the ferocity of a thousand suns" worldview.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:10 Re:

need to get products disappear from the market so that new products have a chance to shine

That’s just not going to happen. Not completely. In audio phonograph still makes up 10-17% of music sales. More than CDs today.

In video VHS releases still come out regularly enough. A few each month.

Some formats are so good at some specific aspect they never will disappear.
Just look at computing? LTO is still the choice for high-latency long term storage. LTO8 puts 30TB on a $50-$100 tape.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:11 Re:

This is a big part of tp’s playbook – he’s not failed because he’s incompetently marketed a product that has no real benefit against his competitors, it’s because it’s unfair that he has to compete against things that were available before e released his product. If only the competition could be destroyed then people would be forced to use his product…

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Your rambling idiocy is even more off point than normal it seems.

The discussion at hand is Nintendo dealing with its own products. Your claim is that copyright is so insanely messed up that they are legally prevented from selling a version of its own games emulated from hardware they designed that are as good as pirated versions.

If this is true, I can’t find any better reason for the insane versions of copyright that you and Nintendo demand to be abolished.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

that are as good as pirated versions.

Pirate sites can offer:
1) large content collections
2) always chosen from best products from the market
3) with zero or low price
4) before the original content is released to public
5) in channels where ordinary content creators are not allowed to access
6) delivered by criminals instead of respectable vendors
7) and did I mention that money doesn’t need to be passed to the vendor at all
8) and license requirements do not need to be followed
9) and it’s fun to track the location of piratebay when content owners ban/block their ip address
10) and avoiding police cars and RIAA’s lawyer’s emails/snail mail legal demands is supposedly fun activity too
11) and we definitely wouldn’t be able to create this kind of content ourselves, so copying it is just all ok
12) oh, there’s also requirement to use VPN to protect our own IP from evil content owners/corporations
13) and no, we never found any viruses or ransomware from pirate sites
14) etc.. the reasons to use pirate sites keep piling up…

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Just a reminder that your list of idiocy is even less relevant than normal. We’re talking about 20-25 year old games built and designed by Nintendo being emulated on Nintendo hardware that’s been out for 4 years.

If the law is stopping Nintendo from doing this properly themselves, the problem isn’t pirates.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Then why did you claim it was?

Nintendo cannot do proper emulation of their own work, simply because it would require them to move to a product different from what they have available. Pirates can jump from one product to another, but respectable companies cannot do that. Once they create the product, the invested work amount (to that product) is large enough that throwing away all that work is not an option. Failure is not an option.(check this quote from nasa) They need to succeed, even though criminals are using the same digital assets and software code.

That’s the price of success. Pirates will use your work in ways that kills your business. This is why all businesses need to invest significant amount of money building copy-protection schemes. Bundling your software with the hardware is the ultimate copy-protection scheme, since end users cannot avoid purchasing the hardware. But bunding software with hardware means that you need to cover the cost of software development from the money you are able to extract from the market by selling hardware. So your hardware product will be more expensive than what competitors can do.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

"Nintendo cannot do proper emulation of their own work, simply because it would require them to move to a product different from what they have available."

Like what? They’re emulating N64 hardware on a Switch, and they designed and built both fucking systems, along with the games. What can’t they do?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Re:

They’re emulating N64 hardware on a Switch, and they designed and built both fucking systems, along with the games. What can’t they do?

Once they have some piece of code available, they simply cannot switch to another code piece that does the exact same functionality. Basically only never-ending software development projects are swapping the dependencies in middle of development cycle. Once the dependency (to emulation software or games or whatever) exists, swapping it to something more robust isn’t any longer possible.

People who create actual products have this kind of limitations — they cannot throw away the whole project without killing their own market, and they cannot keep invested work amount without staying on a failure train long after clients have declared it unsuccessful and fleed from the market.

It just depends on how much work was invested to the product that determines how long your need to stay within product that is no longer cool. Every project meets this end at some point, end users gets frustrated with quirks of the product very quickly, and familiar products are always declared boring or not interesting. Even after this happens, the products still need to be maintained and kept available until the developers of next product line will appear. The time how long unsuccessful products need to be maintained is longer than you expect. You think it just disappears when the cool factor is no longer available, but this isn’t the case.

I’m sure nintendo has this exact problem with the games that was built in 1980s. in 1990s they lost the coolness of the product. And now when market starts to think the product might again has a chance of next wave of success, the pirates have already filled the market with illegal copies of the previous wave of success story. New children who have not seen the 1980s product might still accept the old software, even if it looks lower quality. But sadly pirates already filled the market with bootleg copies. So they simply have no other choice than send DMCA notices to the emulator/rom sites and hope they disappear before next wave of children will get access to the old nintendo games.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:8 Re:

you consistently demonstrate a goldfish’s understanding of how things work.

You simply have no idea how much effort it takes to get a virtual goldfish to behave correctly in 3d modelling world. Goldfish are actually pretty smart and simulating the behavior with software is more tricky than you think. If you put a goldfish to a torus, and let it swim endlessly forward, you’ll get a nice demo effect from 1990s.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Re:

"Once they have some piece of code available, they simply cannot switch to another code piece that does the exact same functionality."

Why? It’s their code? It’s completely proprietary (unless they’re violating some FOSS licences somewhere), so anything they wanted to switch to is also theirs.

"they cannot throw away the whole project without killing their own market"

Why would anyone throw away an entire project? Legacy code is still very much a thing in most companies, and most companies would leap at a chance to re-release it with minimal changes over and over again. There’s an entire industry out there based around allowing people to buy games they already own that have been modified to run on new hardware – entire companies have been built on this concept.

"in 1990s they lost the coolness of the product"

No, they didn’t. They lost the ability to sell it on a single cartridge at the same price as the older copies, but there’s always been a market. In fact, if you want to talk about games going out of fashion, first-party Nintendo games are probably the single worst example you can give.

"Even after this happens, the products still need to be maintained"

Again, you prove that you don’t know what you’re talking about. The codebase was complete, because it was developed before aftermarket patching was even possible. The code that ran on the original NES cartridge is the code people wish to play – and that code has never been updated or maintained on those cartridges since they were manufactured.

"hope they disappear before next wave of children will get access to the old nintendo games"

You are an extraordinarily poor businessman, but we knew that.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7

Nintendo’s issue isn’t with the age of the games in question or piracy/emulation; neither one affects the market for people who want to play older games but don’t want the hassle of setting up emulators. It’s with Nintendo’s “homegrown” emulation being worse than emulators developed by other people⁠—which is rightfully fucked up.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:8 Re:

It’s with Nintendo’s “homegrown” emulation being worse than emulators developed by other people⁠—which is rightfully fucked up.

This is always the case. Any one entity cannot compete against the whole world. If they try, they will get burned out like crazy. And if they don’t, there will always be rough edges in the product that they can offer to customers.

Note that it’s only pirates that can avoid this problem. Pirates are doing this with "mere aggregationi" by choosing any product available in the market. It’s completely different situation when you have implemented the product from scratch yourself and have invested time and money to get the features done. Dropping existing features when you have money invested in the product isn’t what you normally do. But pirates can (and do) reject large number of products (just like ordinary users do). This rejection pattern isn’t available if you create the product yourself.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9

Nintendo literally owns the source code for the N64; that it can’t create a functional emulator for the N64 that is at least on par with the best non-Nintendo emulators is less an indictment of…whatever gobbledygook you just said and more an indictment of Nintendo perpetually half-assing its approach to handling older games. Piracy isn’t an excuse for that.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:10 Re:

can’t create a functional emulator for the N64 that is at least on par with the best non-Nintendo emulators

Who are you to demand that they offer "best" quality for their product? Maybe customers are not willing to pay real money for that feature, so the product vendors are not willng to invest their hard-earned cash to create "best" product in the world. Cheap products are never going to be the best products in the world, whether you like it or not.

It is within nntendo’s right to DMCA those emulators and rom sites which are designed for pirated roms. The pirates simply have no right to use nintendo’s intellectual property to compete against nintendo. Why cant they build their own games and make them successful and then build emulators?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:11 Re:

Who are you to demand that they offer "best" quality for their product?

People paying US$30 extra, for starters.

Maybe customers are not willing to pay real money for that feature, so the product vendors are not willng to invest their hard-earned cash to create "best" product in the world. Cheap products are never going to be the best products in the world, whether you like it or not.

Good point. That’s why I haven’t purchased Nintendo Switch Online Plus and I assume a lot of other people have not either.

It is within nntendo’s right to DMCA those emulators and rom sites which are designed for pirated roms.

I don’t think anyone here suggested otherwise. They just think it’s a bad idea that hurts Nintendo long-term and causes ill-will towards them.

Why cant they build their own games and make them successful and then build emulators?

You’re acting like people don’t do this already, such as Toby Fox or every creator of a Legend of Zelda clone or a Metroidvania, among many, many others. Not only that, some developers make games that are similar to Nintendo games and then Nintendo licenses them on their own system!

It’s just that Nintendo’s constant litigation against their fans and then delivering a substandard product is a PR nightmare, to put it lightly.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

It’s just that Nintendo’s constant litigation against their fans and then delivering a substandard product is a PR nightmare, to put it lightly.

PR catastrophy is the only way nintendo can get the message across to young people that a new product s available for purchase. The kids will forget the whole spectacle after forcing their parents to purchase the product. Large amount of discussion about how evil nintendo is on the marketplace is just large marketng operation designed to make kids realize that there’s a product available.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

You’re acting like people don’t do this already, such as Toby Fox or every creator of a Legend of Zelda clone

When you’re dealing with this, you cannot jump from one person to another with the evaluation. RomUniverse authors need to do these "games" themselves. Author of a Legend of Zelda (or even clones) is not creating RomUniverse. Basically this jumping from one entity to another needs to stop. Nintendo can demand these people to create their own games instead of ripping off nintendos intellectual property.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:13

Nintendo usually does exactly that: When someone uses Nintendo IP for their own games, Nintendo shuts that shit down. Exceptions exist⁠—primarily ROM hacks, including randomizers for games like Super Metroid⁠—but anyone making a standalone game using Nintendo IP tends to get stomped on like a Goomba more often than not. The most enterprising creators can (and sometimes do) pivot to using original IP after getting stomped.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:11

Maybe customers are not willing to pay real money for that feature, so the product vendors are not willng to invest their hard-earned cash to create "best" product in the world.

That’s…sort of the complaint about Nintendo’s N64 emulation: It isn’t willing to put in the work for the sake of making a quality emulator⁠—even though it could⁠—but it’s also asking people to pay real money for that feature. The fact that Nintendo owns the source code to the Switch and the N64 makes the failure to craft a quality emulator all the more ridiculous.

The pirates simply have no right to use nintendo’s intellectual property to compete against nintendo.

Piracy wouldn’t be nearly as big an issue if Nintendo would release more of its classic library to the Switch. When the only way to legally play Metroid Fusion (the direct predecessor to Metroid Dread) is to find a Game Boy Advance and a physical copy of the game, piracy begins to look a lot more enticing.

Why cant they build their own games and make them successful and then build emulators?

If they’re building their own games, they don’t need to build emulators for them. Please seek professional medical help for your early onset dementia.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

If they’re building their own games, they don’t need to build emulators for them

This basically is an admission that emulators do not have legal use-cases available, and all of them should be illegal to develop or distribute on internet.

The main point countering this admission was that homebrew games could be developed for the emulators. But this doesn’t seem to be the case, given that emulator is not required at all, if you write your own game. So long for that argument and we can get back to the real issue, i.e. building and distributing emulators is actually illegal activity.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:13

This basically is an admission that emulators do not have legal use-cases available

No, it isn’t.

this doesn’t seem to be the case, given that emulator is not required at all, if you write your own game

The point of making a “homebrew” game for a specific system is to work within the limits of that system, regardless of the reason why one does that. Sure, such games could be made to work as standalone applications (as the NES homebrew game Micro Mages was). But part of the fun of making such games work on a given system is how people can play it on the actual native hardware (e.g., Micro Mages was released on a physical NES cart that works with an actual NES). Emulators can also have filters such as scanline/CRT filters that emulate the look of old-school TV screens, which is important when considering how pre-HDTV 2D games were originally made with scanlines in mind.

Emulators have a legal use case. You have no room for a proper counterargument.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14 Re:

> This basically is an admission that emulators do not have legal use-cases available

No, it isn’t.

Yes it is. The logic goes like this:
1) developing a game does not need emulator
2) Thus the only reason why emulator exist is to run existing copyrighted games illegally
3) instead of running homebrew games, the key element in emulator ecosystem is the pirated game roms
4) given that the emulators were designed for piracy, they’re illegal to develop or distribute over internet.

This logic is watertight. It all stems from your admission that game developers do not need the emulator at all.

Note that there are emulators which are legal. But those do not have large collection of pirate games available as rom files which emulator enables users to play.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:15 Re:

This logic is watertight.

Note that meshpage/gameapi builder is struggling with the same problem, given that .obj and .gltf files are standard file format which could possibly enable pirated 3d objects to be used with the tooling. But we’ve decided that the piracy ecosystem with .obj files isn’t significant enough (and it isn’t the only alternative source of models) that it’s still legal to develop the technology. But if the situation changes, we might need to change our position of supporting those file formats.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:16

the only reason why emulator exist is to run existing copyrighted games

Format-shifting is legal in my neck of the woods (so far as I know), so if someone has the tech to dump the ROM of an NES game they own to their computer, they can use an emulator to play that legally obtained ROM. That the vast majority of people use emulators to play illegally obtained games is irrelevant. Even if I were to grant that format-shifting is or should be illegal (and I don’t), emulation and ROM distribution is still the best way of keeping alive thousands of games from decades past.

given that the emulators were designed for piracy, they’re illegal to develop or distribute over internet

A tool can have uses both legal and illegal, but those illegal uses don’t make the tool itself illegal per se. Someone can use a DVD/Blu-ray ripper, which technically has to break copy protection for the sake of ripping content, to legally format shift the content of a given disc into a digital form for storage in a non-distributed personal media collection. A hammer can be used to hammer nails or people’s skulls; that people use it as a weapon doesn’t invalidate its use as a tool for carpentry/furniture assembly.

game developers do not need the emulator at all

If they’re developing a game for an older system or a ROM hack for an older game, they do need an emulator. (ROM hacks are questionably legal, but I’d argue that they fall under either the parody or criticism/critique exceptions of Fair Use.) I wouldn’t be surprised if the Micro Mages crew used an NES emulator to make sure their game would work within all the limitations of the NES before they tested the game on an actual NES.

Note that there are emulators which are legal. But those do not have large collection of pirate games available as rom files which emulator enables users to play.

No emulator does. Unless they’re distributed with ROM packs, emulators don’t come pre-loaded or pre-packaged with ROM collections regardless of the system. RetroArch, for example, is a front-end for multiple emulators⁠—but it doesn’t come with, and doesn’t have an option to help people find, actual ROMs for any of the systems it can emulate.

meshpage/gameapi builder is struggling with the same problem, given that .obj and .gltf files are standard file format which could possibly enable pirated 3d objects to be used with the tooling

It already did, in your case. Or do you not remember how you ripped off someone who ripped off Scott Cawthon’s work, despite your insistence that your program would prevent all infringement and you yourself were so opposed to infringement that you would prevent all input to your program to prevent any possible infringement?

[I]’ve decided that the piracy ecosystem with .obj files isn’t significant enough (and it isn’t the only alternative source of models) that it’s still legal to develop the technology

So, what you’re saying is that even though the tool has an illegal use case, it also has a legal use case that justifies its continued existence? ????

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:17 Re:

That the vast majority of people use emulators to play illegally obtained games is irrelevant…

[Citation needed]
I don’t think that’s accurate. Even if limited to game emulators.

But mind you just a few posts up I pointed out how to use TPs application to build a weapon of war. And I don’t need the source code to do it.

Just because you can do something bad doesn’t override the good.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:19 Re:

Well, no. In general emulation is used to allow one operating systems to run on another. Allowing for the forward use of older and/or incompatible programs.

In terms of video games? Well, homebrew is a big one.
And playing your own games on new equipment. Via either legally acquired/dumped Rome or yes, someone else’s dump.
Or with a cartridge reader to play original cartridge or card on modern systems.

Piracy is just one aspect of emulators.
And a valid use outweighs the criminal aspect.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:20 Re:

And a valid use outweighs the criminal aspect.

Our position is that the criminal aspect needs to be removed completely by product vendors. It is always technically possible, and thus its just about whether the tech developer wants to support piracy ecosystem or not. Thus tech devs can be sued when there is proof of illegal activity happening anywhere in their systems.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:21

It is always technically possible

No. No, it isn’t.

Let’s say I purchase and legally download a PDF copy of an ebook that has no DRM. Now let’s say I download an illicit copy of the same ebook in the same format. How can a computer magically know which copy is legal if both copies are the exact same file and neither copy has any DRM?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:23

Again: How could a computer know, absent any DRM attached to either file, which file is the legal copy? You’re doing that thing again where your solution to copyright infringement is “intentionally sabotage all legal uses of technology so no one can infringe upon anything ever, not even by accident”⁠—and that isn’t a viable strategy for anyone. Find a different strategy or shut the fuck up.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:24 Re:

Mind you removing drm is in most countries illegal, but not impossible.

And again I showed hi I could youse your, TP, program to not just make a copy of a film, or other copyright issue, but how to make a weapon of war.
You didn’t intend it but you supplied the tool to do so.

With no programming at all: I could still pull it off with your software. Just using screen shot saves.
I use your software to render a model. Save the screenshots. Send them to the printer.
Sure I need another program to make the measurements. Sure I need a full CAP/CAM facility.
But you gave me the tools to do it.

So what: add AI to censor out anything that may be illegal?
Because we all know just how reliable AI content moderation is. I mean, tumbler took down a photo of a statue of Libertana. A Roman Demigod(dess)!
You know, it’s not the breast, it’s the nipple.
We’ll ignore the fact that her nipple wore off like 1000 years ago. The shadow is still there. Or whatever.

You’re fighting a battle you lost when you picked up your sword.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

tp (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:24 Re:

which file is the legal copy?

There’s a solution called "web server", which only allows transferring the file to specially marked browser sandbox. Then your client-side web browser implements sandbox and marks it with some key. Then server verifies the key before sending the file to the sandbox, and the allowed sandbox keeps the files tightly locked inside that sandbox, never giving a copy of the file to the user.

This is exactly what youtube does with youtube videos. And then youtube-dl which can bypass this process and give copies of the files to the user’s control, can be sued out of existence.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:25

One problem with your “solution”: When the server dies, the content dies with it⁠—and people don’t generally like being told they don’t own things they’ve purchased with the intent of owning.

Your solution also doesn’t account for files downloaded from, say, a USB thumb drive. So again, I ask: Without resorting to supernatural magic, technological self-sabotage, or other such wishful thinking, how could a computer possibly know which one of two files was downloaded illicitly if neither file has DRM and both files are exactly the same?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:27 Re:

"Sure, but now you can’t claim that there isn’t any technical solutions that are able to solve the problem"

I can because I have visited your shitshow of a site and I can verify that it does nothing that you claim it to do. Since it also doesn’t do anything else of value, your claims can be ignored.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:28 Re:

Well, you didn’t download it.
He can start by fixing his memory leak.
I’m so done.

Good luck out there. You’ve got a bit of a mess.

Have you done anything in the 6 years since your first YouTube video upload?
I understand what your trying to do, and that’s your right. All power to you for following your beliefs with dedication. But even so, you’ve got a long way to go before it becomes something usable.