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).
There is no confirmation that this came from Nintendo, nor does it list the actual infringing parts like a normal takedown request should.
I'm glad Suyu wants to carry on the legacy of Yuzu. Many forks are just reuploads of yuzu with no new commits.
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.
That was the intention. Even the name Suyu is to bring more eyes
So it was all for show?
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
Now I need to consider Gitea and Codeberg. Thanks for the reminder GitLab.
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.
ActivityPub integration on git remote repos sounds very interesting. Thanks for sharing that, I'll definetely take a look at Codeberg/Forgejo.
Can't wait for forge federation, it's super annoying that I need an account for each individual instance just to report a bug
What features are paywalled?
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.
This sadly isn't true anymore - they now have Gitea Enterprise, which contains additional features not available in the open source version.
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.
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.
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
radicle.xyz checks those boxes, but it's gossip protocol, not activitypub.
Still cool, though.
doesnt have issue tracker
It does, but it's a little obtuse to use.
oh it must of benn a new update
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.
codeberg also removes piracy related projects... gitea is certainly an option tho
That's great, it seems like Suyu is taking this seriously and actually wants to continue development of the emulator. Many forks of yuzu just look like reuploads of the original repo with no new commits.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I wonder why they didn't selfhost GitLab. It and sourcehut are the ones that aren't ugly
if you put it on gitlab, you're not the one getting sued when they take it down
I am more saying it's not surprising Gitlab would take it down.
For example. With yt-dl /github they immediately went to a self hosted Gitlab instance. It wasn't simply a hasty move to the public Gitlab instance.
For all the free publicity when it gets taken down. They were probably hosting it six different ways already
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)
I have permanent Xbox brain, so I'd say they made an oopsie daisy even though I grew up on SNES
I don't know about this one, I have ps/xbox brain as well, but putting confirm on the right side somehow always made more sense to me, even though my muscle memory doesn't agree.
FWIW, the PlayStation was meant to have the Nintendo button layout too. In Japan, O is synonymous with “yes/good” sort of like a check mark (✅) and X means “no/bad”. So the X and O buttons were meant to be used in that way. But western game devs didn’t know that, and designed their games with X as confirm and O as decline.
That is so interesting, thanks!
Still, its a weird situation right?
Definitely, good thing button mapping is becoming more mainstream.
What is arguably even more egregious is having X/Y backwards. On a graph, X is the horizontal axis, Y is the vertical axis. Xbox got it right.
Yeah! You sure showed them!
Codeberg next?
They already have their own Forgejo instance at git.suyu.dev
No one wants Nintendo's wrath. Who can blame them.
Not too surprising but still disappointing regardless. Self-hosting is the only way to go for this.
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.
If someone needs the name of the next fork, I'd suggest "Yutu". (or Ettu)
Still mad it isn't named 2zu
At least it seems suyu has devs now though
SuYu is a way better name given why it was created in the first place.
"sue-you". Suyu. it's a clever wordplay. i love it.
The readme file, gitmodules file, and other links within that repo all still reference the now-dead gitlab links. The builds don't seem to be present at all.
That will all probably be fixed soon enough but right now that mirror which seems to have just been pushed as-is isn't entirely usable.
Oh, must have clicked a link in the repo
that's not gitlab
Yea, I was wrong lmao
another one will rise no doubt, either they use a platform that doesn't care for DMCA's or they play the whack-a-mole game with the enforcers
ironically suyu is still up on github
and of course ryujinx hasn't received any legal threats yet
We need android ryunjinx
i heard that's already in development, so it probably will come sooner or later
They will have to self-host their own Git instance.
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.
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.
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?
You're free to click the link 🙂 The terms are stated quite clearly.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes .
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?
People have been telling them that for months.
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.
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.
So are you saying that your understanding is that what we write here on Lemmy is copyrighted, with authors holding the rights?
Yes, that's exactly it.
Services often do have:
you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, distribute, and display such user content
But, I don't know how that plays out in different jurisdictions, which license those services redistribute the content as, and so on. That's for the copyright lawyers to figure out.
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).
There is no confirmation that this came from Nintendo, nor does it list the actual infringing parts like a normal takedown request should.
I'm glad Suyu wants to carry on the legacy of Yuzu. Many forks are just reuploads of yuzu with no new commits.
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.
That was the intention. Even the name Suyu is to bring more eyes
So it was all for show?
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
Now I need to consider Gitea and Codeberg. Thanks for the reminder GitLab.
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.
ActivityPub integration on git remote repos sounds very interesting. Thanks for sharing that, I'll definetely take a look at Codeberg/Forgejo.
Can't wait for forge federation, it's super annoying that I need an account for each individual instance just to report a bug
What features are paywalled?
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.
This sadly isn't true anymore - they now have Gitea Enterprise, which contains additional features not available in the open source version.
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.
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.
From here:
radicle.xyz checks those boxes, but it's gossip protocol, not activitypub.
Still cool, though.
doesnt have issue tracker
It does, but it's a little obtuse to use.
oh it must of benn a new update
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.
codeberg also removes piracy related projects... gitea is certainly an option tho
Self-hosting Forgejo is a way to go.
seems like that's what suyu did
That's great, it seems like Suyu is taking this seriously and actually wants to continue development of the emulator. Many forks of yuzu just look like reuploads of the original repo with no new commits.
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.
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.
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.
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.
They did. https://git.suyu.dev/suyu/suyu
I wonder why they didn't selfhost GitLab. It and sourcehut are the ones that aren't ugly
if you put it on gitlab, you're not the one getting sued when they take it down
I am more saying it's not surprising Gitlab would take it down.
For example. With yt-dl /github they immediately went to a self hosted Gitlab instance. It wasn't simply a hasty move to the public Gitlab instance.
For all the free publicity when it gets taken down. They were probably hosting it six different ways already
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.
I can't tell if you're joking or what
I have permanent Xbox brain, so I'd say they made an oopsie daisy even though I grew up on SNES
I don't know about this one, I have ps/xbox brain as well, but putting confirm on the right side somehow always made more sense to me, even though my muscle memory doesn't agree.
FWIW, the PlayStation was meant to have the Nintendo button layout too. In Japan, O is synonymous with “yes/good” sort of like a check mark (✅) and X means “no/bad”. So the X and O buttons were meant to be used in that way. But western game devs didn’t know that, and designed their games with X as confirm and O as decline.
That is so interesting, thanks!
Still, its a weird situation right?
Definitely, good thing button mapping is becoming more mainstream.
What is arguably even more egregious is having X/Y backwards. On a graph, X is the horizontal axis, Y is the vertical axis. Xbox got it right.
Yeah! You sure showed them!
Codeberg next?
They already have their own Forgejo instance at git.suyu.dev
No one wants Nintendo's wrath. Who can blame them.
Not too surprising but still disappointing regardless. Self-hosting is the only way to go for this.
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.
If someone needs the name of the next fork, I'd suggest "Yutu". (or Ettu)
Still mad it isn't named 2zu
At least it seems suyu has devs now though
SuYu is a way better name given why it was created in the first place.
"sue-you". Suyu. it's a clever wordplay. i love it.
So uhhh, what now
https://git.suyu.dev/suyu/suyu
That links to gitlab
No. Thays links to a self hosted Forgejo.
The readme file, gitmodules file, and other links within that repo all still reference the now-dead gitlab links. The builds don't seem to be present at all.
That will all probably be fixed soon enough but right now that mirror which seems to have just been pushed as-is isn't entirely usable.
Oh, must have clicked a link in the repo
that's not gitlab
Yea, I was wrong lmao
another one will rise no doubt, either they use a platform that doesn't care for DMCA's or they play the whack-a-mole game with the enforcers
ironically suyu is still up on github
and of course ryujinx hasn't received any legal threats yet
We need android ryunjinx
i heard that's already in development, so it probably will come sooner or later
They will have to self-host their own Git instance.
it's hosted elsewhere
Hail hydra
We need federation of sourceforges FFS.
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
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.
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
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?
You're free to click the link 🙂 The terms are stated quite clearly.
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?
People have been telling them that for months.
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
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.
Yes, that's exactly it.
Services often do have:
But, I don't know how that plays out in different jurisdictions, which license those services redistribute the content as, and so on. That's for the copyright lawyers to figure out.
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Dude you are living in a dream world. You have the same thought process as sovereign citizens.
Ah gotcha; that's helpful. That's not been my understanding of this content, so I'll have to look into that, thanks.
I may be wrong as I'm not a lawyer, but that's just my understanding 🙂 Who knows. Have a good day!
Likewise!
Are you adding it manually or do you have some sort of automation?
I have a keyboard shortcut that inserts it. So, kinda manually. Would be great if it were like on the old bb forums with signatures.
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Dude thinks he's defeating reality with Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V
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.
Aren't there any git services hosted in countries like Russia?
Isn't gitlab owned by M$?
GitHub is, Gitlab isn't
Alright understood 👍👍
They aren't you're thinking of Github, though Gitlab is far from immune to corporate corruption.