So they pirated the act of piracy? What’s the law against that?

so you *did* mean it as an insult. you know? maybe you and nintendo are perfect for each other. enjoy your console, man

What I said in my last comment was >Nintendo benefitted financially from piracy and made no efforts to hide the fact that they obtained games through the exact same methods that pirates use. I'm not sure why this didn't satisfy your pedantry before, but maybe you didn't read it when you replied to it last time.

Law is a pedantic thing.

Ok, I see now. I was saying that they benefitted from other people pirating their games. You thought I meant that they benefitted from pirating their own games. I can see how what I wrote could be interpreted that way. But no, I meant that they benefitted from their games having been pirated in the past by pirates.

I think you misunderstand the root of the argument. You’re referencing Nintendo copying someone’s rip and that seems illogical - DRM circumvention is illegal under DMCA, right? Nintendo is a license owner for those things however so they can’t really circumvent anything and therefore there is no law against that. Nintendo can download Mario roms off the internet legally because they are the publisher and won’t sue themselves obviously.

No, I've understood this whole time that you're saying "Nintendo is legally allowed to do this with their own games". What I'm saying is "Nintendo benefitted from their game having been pirated because they sold the exact version of the game that someone illegally pirated". Nintendo didn't do anything illegal. Someone did something illegal, and Nintendo saved time and effort (and therefore money too) because of the illegal thing that someone did.

So you’re literally hung up on the fact that Nintendo used someone’s rip. Are there some scene rules to prevent that or what because I’m deeply confused.

In one important way they are consumer friendly in terms of keeping physical media alive. I doubt PS6 will have a disc drive and M$ have already confirmed any new consoles from them won't. Even these proposed "game key" carts can presumably be traded or sold so it isn't like a single use key for the online store.

What are you confused about? I don't understand what your angle is. It feels like you're really trying to win an argument, except you seem to be the only one arguing. I've been trying to sort out a misunderstanding, and it looks like you're trying to win something. The misunderstanding is sorted out. So, I guess you win, too?

I’m asking you to clearly formulate what it is that you’re accusing Nintendo of. I’m seeing lots of hand waving so far to cover that you just want to dunk on Nintendo for taking toys away, sorry. Also think this is pointless.

>I’m asking you to clearly formulate what it is that you’re accusing Nintendo of. For the third time... >>Nintendo benefitted financially from piracy and made no efforts to hide the fact that they obtained games through the exact same methods that pirates use. Which part is unclear to you? Lol [Source,](https://www.eurogamer.net/did-nintendo-download-a-mario-rom-and-sell-it-back-to-us) in case you're unfamiliar with this funny thing they did

You’re just trying to tire me out but I’m persistent. Nintendo download roms, never disputed. What is Nintendo guilty of? Please state rule even if it is a cracktro scene rule because at this point I’m certain you know there is none.

Why do you keep using words like "accuse" and "guilty"? Lol >>>Nintendo benefitted financially from piracy and made no efforts to hide the fact that they obtained games through the exact same methods that pirates use. This is what I'm saying. I'm not even sure why you seem to be trying to make this a fight or an argument or something. "Tire you out"? Lol

You keep coming back to this like it’s important in any shape. No laws were broken. Adult people who work at big companies chuckled at this happening. Damages were estimated at $0. It’s like you’re morally trying to convict Nintendo of something on a technicality but I’m still not sure what is that crime. Unless you have anything new to add that’s it for me.

>laws >Damages >guilty >morally convict >crime ...lol What are you going on about? The reason I kept showing you the same comment is because you said things like "I'm deeply confused" and asking me what I'm saying. I'm not even arguing with you. But you seem to be putting a lot of effort into reading an argument into what I'm saying. Is this how you enjoy spending your time on social media? Lol

How else do you need this explained? They stole someone else’s software and SOLD IT pretending it’s their own. If you did that, do you think that’s legal?

Which software is someone else’s here? If you think that’s illegal why nobody is suing?