We're going to be seeing a lot of these. Until people decide on which fork gets to be 2zu, don't expect anything from these.
inb4 a new fork called 2zu shows up lmao
At least one of these does need active testers and devs, tho.
True, at the very least, the sheer amount of them means that more people will be able to get yuzu while development is at a standstill.
Since all these forks are based of yuzu souce code and the developers admitted it was primarily for piracy, doesn't this make these all an easy target to take down? I think this might prevent a true successor with active development from emerging.
Just because they said it doesn't mean the new use of the code has the same purpose. Perhaps this fork can claim to be for homebrew apps, for example.
No. Their statement as part of a settlement has no bearing on unrelated parties. It's not precedent.
And the code is already open source, so anyone and everyone has full rights to do anything they want within the license. No one is capable of DMCAing it (or rather, anyone is, but the author can trivially point to the license giving them the full right to modify and redistribute in a counterclaim).
I don't get why people are down-voting you. It's a perfectly legit question that I'm thinking about myself. I'm not a lawyer but there would be ways to shield yourself legally I'm sure.
Yeah but if they're smart they will work on this anonymously. You can't force someone to show up to court if their identity is secret
We're going to be seeing a lot of these. Until people decide on which fork gets to be 2zu, don't expect anything from these.
inb4 a new fork called 2zu shows up lmao
At least one of these does need active testers and devs, tho.
True, at the very least, the sheer amount of them means that more people will be able to get yuzu while development is at a standstill.
Since all these forks are based of yuzu souce code and the developers admitted it was primarily for piracy, doesn't this make these all an easy target to take down? I think this might prevent a true successor with active development from emerging.
Just because they said it doesn't mean the new use of the code has the same purpose. Perhaps this fork can claim to be for homebrew apps, for example.
No. Their statement as part of a settlement has no bearing on unrelated parties. It's not precedent.
And the code is already open source, so anyone and everyone has full rights to do anything they want within the license. No one is capable of DMCAing it (or rather, anyone is, but the author can trivially point to the license giving them the full right to modify and redistribute in a counterclaim).
I don't get why people are down-voting you. It's a perfectly legit question that I'm thinking about myself. I'm not a lawyer but there would be ways to shield yourself legally I'm sure.
Yeah but if they're smart they will work on this anonymously. You can't force someone to show up to court if their identity is secret