• @narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    832 months ago

    Is it 100% confirmed now that the DMCA is from Nintendo themselves? I find it weird that they’d go after (initially small) forks when Ryujinx exists.

    The Suyu team also hosts their code under https://git.suyu.dev, so I wouldn’t exactly call it dead (yet).

    • 520
      link
      fedilink
      452 months ago

      There is no confirmation that this came from Nintendo, nor does it list the actual infringing parts like a normal takedown request should.

  • @WarmSoda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    572 months ago

    I mean, if you’re going to scream “I’m doing this!” as loud as you can, it’s not a surprise when you get noticed.

    • @OsrsNeedsF2P
      link
      English
      45
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      That was the intention. Even the name Suyu is to bring more eyes

        • @OsrsNeedsF2P
          link
          English
          32 months ago

          Nah it’s a real project that’s continuing Yuzu’s work, but only half their project is continuing the emulator. The other half is sticking the middle finger to Nintendo, and doing that requires being really obnoxious and loud.

          Suyu is a pun for “Sue you”, which Nintendo would love to do

  • RiQuY
    link
    fedilink
    English
    442 months ago

    Now I need to consider Gitea and Codeberg. Thanks for the reminder GitLab.

    • @rho50@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      742 months ago

      Don’t use Gitea, use Forgejo - it’s a hard fork of Gitea after Gitea became a for-profit venture (and started gating their features behind a paywall).

      Codeberg has switched to Forgejo as well.

      Also, there’s some promising progress being made towards ActivityPub federation in Forgejo! Imagine a world where you can comment on issues and send/receive pull requests on other people’s projects, all from the comfort of a small homeserver.

      • RiQuY
        link
        fedilink
        English
        232 months ago

        ActivityPub integration on git remote repos sounds very interesting. Thanks for sharing that, I’ll definetely take a look at Codeberg/Forgejo.

      • @Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        122 months ago

        Can’t wait for forge federation, it’s super annoying that I need an account for each individual instance just to report a bug

        • @rho50@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          52 months ago

          From here:

          • SAML
          • Branch protection for organizations
          • Dependency scanning (yes, there are other tools for this, but it’s still a feature the open source version doesn’t get).
          • Additional security controls for users (IP allowlisting, mandatory MFA)
          • Audit logging
        • bitwolf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          52 months ago

          None?

          If you need action runners you have to ask for them which is fair as it’s expensive.

          If you self host it’s all free.

            • bitwolf
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              I think we were talking about Forego, but now I’m not sure.

              To be clear Forego is what I was stating didn’t have pay walled features. I know Enterprise auth works, but I haven’t used the others yet.

              • @rho50@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                32 months ago

                Ohh, my bad! I thought the person you were replying to was asking about Gitea. Yeah, Forgejo seems truly free and also looks like it has a strong governance structure that is likely to keep things that way.

      • @zgasma@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 months ago

        radicle.xyz checks those boxes, but it’s gossip protocol, not activitypub.

        Still cool, though.

    • @conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      They’re required to take down content following a DMCA takedown request. It’s up to the uploader to counterclaim if they’re so inclined, at which point they’re able to put it back up.

  • NuraShiny [any]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    382 months ago

    What a useless gesture. It’s git code. So long as it remains on one machine, you can upload it to any git instance.

    No one should be surprised though that GitLab is protecting their business.

    • @TheMalWare
      link
      English
      242 months ago

      It was an anonymous DMCA takedown with spelling mistakes, they’re just being extra careful. Plus Suyu isn’t going anywhere, it’s run by junior devs with 0 experience. Sudachi is run by one guy and he’s made more tangible progress, just for reference.

      • NuraShiny [any]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 months ago

        Like I said, it’s an empty gesture. Unless Nintendo seizes the computers of all the devs, the code will live on and uploading it somewhere is very very easy.

  • bitwolf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    302 months ago

    Why TF would you put it on gitlab instead of hosting your own forejo instance?

    I swear, some people are just too eager to get in headlines rather than thinking things through.

  • @LazerDickMcCheese@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    27
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Just torrented it out of spite. I don’t even care about the system…I own one and I don’t play it because they got the A and B buttons backwards (that’s a joke)

    Edit: also, everyone should see this.

  • Hal-5700X
    link
    fedilink
    English
    162 months ago

    No one wants Nintendo’s wrath. Who can blame them.

    • @ahoy_me_boy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Another, even better way is IPFS.

      Regulators can take down your self hosted site. They cannot take it down if everyone has a piece of it (IPFS).

      Works just like torrents do. Spread it out, and no one can stop it.

      Still selfhosted, kind of, but by everyone.

  • insomniac_lemon
    link
    fedilink
    11
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    If someone needs the name of the next fork, I’d suggest “Yutu”. (or Ettu)

    • RiQuY
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 months ago

      I’ve been seeing for a while comments like yours that put a license link at the end of the comment. Can you explain to me the benefits of doing that or is it makes any difference? If I’m not mistaken the content posted on a Lemmy instace adheres to the license that the instance is using.

      • @onlinepersona@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 months ago

        It’s purely for commercial AI on my end. Researchers have gotten LLMs to spit out their training data: street addresses, medical data, entire comments, and of course licenses.
        Some countries are still deciding whether commercial LLMs are infringing on copyright by training on copyrighted material without approval, others have already decided. I think the major economical zones that will impact legality will be the USA, EU, and China.

        Until a decision has been made, I’ll continue adding the “free for all except commercial use” license.


        Also, copyright is very complicated. If you copy an entire article from a newspaper and paste it into a post on a lemmy instance, which license does it have? That of the newspaper or that of the lemmy instance? If it’s the former, then what’s the difference if it comes from your brain and not a newspaper? Would it make a difference if the comment were written first on a blog and then copied to lemmy? If it’s the latter, then what’s the point point of the newspaper or the author ever copyrighting it somewhere else if it can just be overridden?
        Next question regarding copyright, since comments are copied and stored on different servers, who would then own the copyright? The lemmy instance sending the comment or the one receiving it?

        I’m not a lawyer and probably things aren’t clear cut. Might be one in one country and a different thing in another.

        CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

        • @flamingarms@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 months ago

          My understanding of the Creative Commons licenses is that they are for providing permission to people to use something that they wouldn’t be able to otherwise, due to copyright or other issues. I don’t think the licenses are capable of limiting what people can do with something if it’s already the wild west, or do I have that wrong?

          • @onlinepersona@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -22 months ago

            You’re free to click the link 🙂 The terms are stated quite clearly.

            NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes .

            • @flamingarms@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              42 months ago

              Oh I clicked the link, mate, and read through a couple links deep. What I’m saying is that my understanding of the license is that it allows permissions for a restricted item, but it does not restrict an item with open permissions. You know what I mean? You need to be a rights holder of something that is protected by copyright or the like, and then you can use this license to open permissions in certain ways, in this case that the item can be used for non-commercial means. So this wouldn’t work with stuff on Lemmy, right?

              • @onlinepersona@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -12 months ago

                Yeah, that’s not how I understand it, mate. It’s a copyright license with “some rights reserved” instead of “all rights reserved”.

                Also text can be restricted. Just because a newpapers publishes an article to public without a paywall, doesn’t mean the text is without copyright. Additionally, it’s not necessary to be a registered, commercial entity in order to be a rights holder. Somebody who makes a video of an event has the right and ability to sell it to news broadcasters. It doesn’t have to a freelancer or a TV studio - any private person may do so.

                Of course, this all changes per jurisdiction and we’re on the internet, which makes things even more complicated.

                CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

                • @flamingarms@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  5
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  You say it’s a copyright license, and I think that’s exactly where I’m struggling with this. My understanding is that this is a license for something copyrighted or otherwise protected. Copyright protects things from their creation. A copyright license provides certain people action that would otherwise be denied by copyright. So are you saying that your understanding is that what we write here on Lemmy is copyrighted, with authors holding the rights? That would be helpful to know because that has not been my understanding of copyright (and I know country plays an important role here), so that would be interesting to look into.

        • RiQuY
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 months ago

          Are you adding it manually or do you have some sort of automation?

        • @WarmSoda@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          02 months ago

          You’re wasting your time, and you look stupid doing it. Absolutely no one cares about your little link or what it says. It won’t stop a single thing.