Gary Bowser and gaming's most infamous piracy case(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Gary Bowser and gaming's most infamous piracy case
https://www.theguardian.com/games/2024/feb/01/the-man-who-owes-nintendo-14m-gary-bowser-and-gamings-most-infamous-piracy-case
120 comments
Criminal restitution cannot be discharged via bankruptcy (at least in the US, but I assume it works the same in Canada).
> This feels like "a crime" with the gravity and social harm of a non life-threatening misdemeanor (that indeed should be fined), punished with a life-sentence of hard labour.
Where did you get this from? The article says he served 14 months and was released. Maybe 14 months is too much, but its not a life sentence.
Where did you get this from? The article says he served 14 months and was released. Maybe 14 months is too much, but its not a life sentence.
It’s a metaphor.
Life sentence having to payback (for the rest of his days - he's barely earning enough for rent) the millions Nintendo "lost".
I think this is the main problem. The number is basically arbitrary and impossible to prove that Nintendo “lost” that money from his actions.
For the interested, Darknet Diaries did a great episode about that case:
https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/136/
https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/136/
Definitely check this podcast out. There is also one episode with the creator of the piratebay
Pure gold
Pure gold
TBH I feel like Nintendo should "forgive" the amount he owes to them.
- They are realistically never going to get all the money, only a fraction of it before he passes away.
- Even if they did get all the money, for a company the size of Nintendo it's not going to make a material difference.
- They would likely get a ton of press coverage for a move like this, and if they consider it a marketing campaign, could even turn a profit from forgiving him.
- They are realistically never going to get all the money, only a fraction of it before he passes away.
- Even if they did get all the money, for a company the size of Nintendo it's not going to make a material difference.
- They would likely get a ton of press coverage for a move like this, and if they consider it a marketing campaign, could even turn a profit from forgiving him.
The judge and Nintendo's lawyers openly discussed how to "make an example" out of Bowser during the case. They presumably feel the amount of money they make being harsh on Bowser far outweighs the amount made forgiving him.
[deleted]
The article is not clear.
He's a citizen of what country? Toronto is mentioned.
He was living in the Dominican Republic when he was arrested? By the US government?
He's a citizen of what country? Toronto is mentioned.
He was living in the Dominican Republic when he was arrested? By the US government?
Bowser is Canadian, so yeah he lives in Toronto.
He went on the run in 2008 after he got arrested by Toronto police for peddling fake DVDs through his computer repair shop and ended up in the Dominican Republic.
He went on the run in 2008 after he got arrested by Toronto police for peddling fake DVDs through his computer repair shop and ended up in the Dominican Republic.
Impressive whitewashing of Gary Bowser's reputation rears its head once more. Gary Bowser really isn't the saint articles like to depict him as. His old computer repair shop, OPA (his online nickname comes from this shop) had a bad reputation among computer enthusiasts in the 80s for not shipping parts for whatever reason[0].
Relatedly, the reason he left Canada (something conveniently glossed over) is not because he got in trouble with the housing crisis (which he has stated in other interviews) but rather because he got arrested peddling fake DVDs through his PC repair shop[1].
More recently, he got caught being involved with the new Switch flashcard; a reverse DNS lookup (that is, running the IP through a database of known web addresses and seeing what else is hosted there) revealed that the site is hosted on the same IP as his personal blog. (Bowser blamed a DNS poisoning attack, which strikes me as unlikely from what I know about DNS poisoning - that's basically alledging a conspiracy.)
He's likely just a patsy/fall guy though - the big cheese here is Max Louarn (also Canadian), who last I heard is hiding out in France (he has a French girlfriend) after he managed to slip out of the arrest made by the Dominican Republics authorities.
I get life sucks for him (and I do hope it gets better for him eventually). Just don't fall for the "innocent small criminal being preyed on by the big evil company" - Gary Bowser had a key part in an international piracy hardware manufacturing operation.
[0]: https://pdf.textfiles.com/zines/MICROPENDIUM/mp9501.max.pdf
[1]: https://www.toronto.com/life/pair-charged-over-counterfeit-d...
Relatedly, the reason he left Canada (something conveniently glossed over) is not because he got in trouble with the housing crisis (which he has stated in other interviews) but rather because he got arrested peddling fake DVDs through his PC repair shop[1].
More recently, he got caught being involved with the new Switch flashcard; a reverse DNS lookup (that is, running the IP through a database of known web addresses and seeing what else is hosted there) revealed that the site is hosted on the same IP as his personal blog. (Bowser blamed a DNS poisoning attack, which strikes me as unlikely from what I know about DNS poisoning - that's basically alledging a conspiracy.)
He's likely just a patsy/fall guy though - the big cheese here is Max Louarn (also Canadian), who last I heard is hiding out in France (he has a French girlfriend) after he managed to slip out of the arrest made by the Dominican Republics authorities.
I get life sucks for him (and I do hope it gets better for him eventually). Just don't fall for the "innocent small criminal being preyed on by the big evil company" - Gary Bowser had a key part in an international piracy hardware manufacturing operation.
[0]: https://pdf.textfiles.com/zines/MICROPENDIUM/mp9501.max.pdf
[1]: https://www.toronto.com/life/pair-charged-over-counterfeit-d...
What is this comment trying to prove? Having read the article, I don’t see anything in your comment that makes “small criminal being preyed on by the big evil company” any less accurate. It certainly doesn’t flatter Bowser or present him as an antihero, it’s just a sad tale of how cruel and unbalanced “justice” can be in these cases.
Gary profited considerably from his shenanigans - by his own admission in interviews shortly after release, he made ~300k USD a year from this operation.
The point is mostly that he's always been a sleazy car salesman kinda guy instead of some small hero standing up for the masses.
The point is mostly that he's always been a sleazy car salesman kinda guy instead of some small hero standing up for the masses.
So he was asked to pay the equivalent of ~50 years' worth of illegal income? How many companies get the same treatment? Break the law, pay 50 times the amount? How many companies are asked to pay without any harm ever being proven? How many executives go to prison after a company is found guilty of anything?
"Sleazy car salesman" is not an indictment worthy of 1-3 years in prison and 50 years' worth of the profits. Not unless we apply the same for any sleazy company. Are we? Then what is the case you're trying to make?
"Sleazy car salesman" is not an indictment worthy of 1-3 years in prison and 50 years' worth of the profits. Not unless we apply the same for any sleazy company. Are we? Then what is the case you're trying to make?
You won't hear me object to punishing executives harsher for crimes they've been directly responsible for.
One does not preclude the other.
One does not preclude the other.
>How many executives go to prison after a company is found guilty of anything?
There's a huge difference between sending an executive to jail for actions of subordinates (which is ludicrous, in my opinion), versus jailing the subordinates for the actual crimes, which apparently happens more than you know.
There's a huge difference between sending an executive to jail for actions of subordinates (which is ludicrous, in my opinion), versus jailing the subordinates for the actual crimes, which apparently happens more than you know.
> which apparently happens more than you know
There's not much I know everything about so I guess everything happens more than I know... You're right and it's exactly my point: laws are for the plebes. Anyone making the argument "criminal = any punishment is fair" even for relatively small time sleazy criminals chooses to do so selectively.
Regarding the fairness of sending a CEO to jail, CEO remuneration is literally hundreds of times that of the average employee. So they are treated as disproportionately responsible for the company's success. Why not its failures? Is failure all on the one employee? Was the company built so fragile that one employee is able to lead it astray? Disproportionate benefits vs. accountability for executives is again exactly what I'm flagging here as being almost the opposite of how a regular "sleazy small time criminal" gets.
What if the decision leading to the company breaking the law came explicitly from the executives? In all the cases Big Tech was fined by the EU in the past decades no executive was punished for what were explicit business decisions. The (still mostly unpaid) fines weren't 50 years' worth of the benefit. Elon Musk actually is a "sleazy car salesman" in every sense of the words. His decisions lead to laws being broken and losses for others, but no jail time, and barely any monetary punishment.
There's not much I know everything about so I guess everything happens more than I know... You're right and it's exactly my point: laws are for the plebes. Anyone making the argument "criminal = any punishment is fair" even for relatively small time sleazy criminals chooses to do so selectively.
Regarding the fairness of sending a CEO to jail, CEO remuneration is literally hundreds of times that of the average employee. So they are treated as disproportionately responsible for the company's success. Why not its failures? Is failure all on the one employee? Was the company built so fragile that one employee is able to lead it astray? Disproportionate benefits vs. accountability for executives is again exactly what I'm flagging here as being almost the opposite of how a regular "sleazy small time criminal" gets.
What if the decision leading to the company breaking the law came explicitly from the executives? In all the cases Big Tech was fined by the EU in the past decades no executive was punished for what were explicit business decisions. The (still mostly unpaid) fines weren't 50 years' worth of the benefit. Elon Musk actually is a "sleazy car salesman" in every sense of the words. His decisions lead to laws being broken and losses for others, but no jail time, and barely any monetary punishment.
If an executive makes 10-100x what their subordinates do AND has comprehensive control over the company, why SHOULDN'T they be the one bearing legal responsibility for the company's misdeeds? Whose responsibility is it?
"Oh it was just a couple bad employees doing things that aligned with our strategic executives, how could that have happened" and then the company keeps doing the same stuff after a few shmucks go to prison? Is that good?
"Oh it was just a couple bad employees doing things that aligned with our strategic executives, how could that have happened" and then the company keeps doing the same stuff after a few shmucks go to prison? Is that good?
But execs should be the ones going to jail. That they're not is the entire problem!
You could argue that the fine was too high (or that there should be no fine at all, and just a prison sentence); but the way this article reads is "poor mostly-innocent mostly-law-abiding citizen just ran a little website and now was huge punished for it", and that doesn't seem entirely true.
Whether companies do or don't get prosecuted sufficiently doesn't really matter here.
Whether companies do or don't get prosecuted sufficiently doesn't really matter here.
>What is this comment trying to prove? Having read the article, I don’t see anything in your comment that makes “small criminal being preyed on by the big evil company” any less accurate.
What makes him "small" and the company "evil"? The guy has been involved with and profiting from piracy for a long time, including multiple arrests.
What makes him "small" and the company "evil"? The guy has been involved with and profiting from piracy for a long time, including multiple arrests.
How much money has Nintendo made by prosecuting enthusiasts and individual pirates? How much money have they made? It’s obvious who is small here.
Apropos of anything else, Bowser had a history of actively commercial distributing pirate software/media (regardless of the opinions on that).
And then with this, the spin is "oh, I wasn't involved in anything, I just helped them update a website from time to time because they're not social people" really doesn't pass the smell test (and nor did it to anyone else).
And then with this, the spin is "oh, I wasn't involved in anything, I just helped them update a website from time to time because they're not social people" really doesn't pass the smell test (and nor did it to anyone else).
Regardless of the innocence or guilt of Bowser and how bad or good of a person he was leading up to this decision: I think a lot of the beef people have with this case is that it exemplifies how companies like Nintendo can just make up numbers of “losses” with no actual evidence and essentially force, with the blessing of the state, people into indentured servitude to the corporation from said “losses”. That sort of corporate power being enforced by the state should give anyone pause, regardless of whether the victims of this process are good people are not.
That, I'd certainly agree on.
One piece of pirated music, movie, or software does not equate to a lost sale.
One piece of pirated music, movie, or software does not equate to a lost sale.
To quote H.L. Mencken:
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
The way you describe him sounds like you come from someplace where regulatory capture is a good thing.
No, more just ~10+ years of familiarity with Gary's bullshit from the homebrew scene.
Unless you like piracy, there's very little to like about anything made by Xecuter or their previous name, GATEWAY. They just are the piracy option; anything they say about homebrew is just lip service to not get banned from the relevant internet forums.
All their modchips have always as their main focus had piracy. That recent flashcard that debranded TX has made literally can only be used for piracy, not homebrew.
Hell, these are the guys that DRMed their piracy software to password lock the Switch NAND if you tried to reverse engineer it (twice! They did the same thing on 3DS.)
Unless you like piracy, there's very little to like about anything made by Xecuter or their previous name, GATEWAY. They just are the piracy option; anything they say about homebrew is just lip service to not get banned from the relevant internet forums.
All their modchips have always as their main focus had piracy. That recent flashcard that debranded TX has made literally can only be used for piracy, not homebrew.
Hell, these are the guys that DRMed their piracy software to password lock the Switch NAND if you tried to reverse engineer it (twice! They did the same thing on 3DS.)
> No, more just ~10+ years of familiarity with Gary's bullshit from the homebrew scene.
Ah, so because you have a grudge you think corporate servitude is good and showing people the story that lead to it (which could lead to them drawing different conclusions) is "whitewashing".
Ah, so because you have a grudge you think corporate servitude is good and showing people the story that lead to it (which could lead to them drawing different conclusions) is "whitewashing".
> Hell, these are the guys that DRMed their piracy software to password lock the Switch NAND if you tried to reverse engineer it (twice! They did the same thing on 3DS.)
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
There's no reason to think the guy who's calling out this person's shenanigans is in favor of corporate servitude. Probably they just don't like how the article frames this guy as an agreeable martyr; it seems more nuanced than that.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
There's no reason to think the guy who's calling out this person's shenanigans is in favor of corporate servitude. Probably they just don't like how the article frames this guy as an agreeable martyr; it seems more nuanced than that.
Yeah - just so we're clear on this: I have problems with how Gary gets lionized by a lot of people but I don't think he should be in corporate servitude - he should just've been able to file for bankruptcy after he served his jailtime and that should've been it. Ideally it'd scare him straight and he could pick up his life again afterwards - maybe build up something to have a bit of a retirement again.
> he should just've been able to file for bankruptcy after he served his jailtime and that should've been it.
The purpose of criminal restitution is to punish you. You shouldn't be able to discharge a punishment.
The purpose of criminal restitution is to punish you. You shouldn't be able to discharge a punishment.
I am sure a lot of people in this thread would agree with this statement taken with no extra context. The problem that a lot of people have about this specific situation is that this should never have been a criminal punishment or restitution in the first place.
> international piracy hardware manufacturing operation
> peddling fake DVDs
> caught being involved with the new Switch flashcard
I'm OK with this. Literal non-crimes as far as I'm concerned. Literally nothing.
> His old computer repair shop had a bad reputation among computer enthusiasts in the 80s for not shipping parts
So he's guilty of running a shitty store.
> peddling fake DVDs
> caught being involved with the new Switch flashcard
I'm OK with this. Literal non-crimes as far as I'm concerned. Literally nothing.
> His old computer repair shop had a bad reputation among computer enthusiasts in the 80s for not shipping parts
So he's guilty of running a shitty store.
Would you consider wage theft of an employee by an employer a non-crime? After all, it's just their time and no physical goods are stolen.
Of course. It's not about tangible or intangible goods. It's about scarcity and whether it's artificial or real. Time is the most scarce resource there is. You can't copy time the way you can trivially copy bits.
"You can't copy time the way you can trivially copy bits."
It took time to arrange the bits in such a way that you desired to copy them.
Copying bits is not stealing. It's worse than stealing, it's counterfeiting.
When you steal a car, the car manufacturer can still sell cars at that value. When you counterfeit software (or anything digital), the original work is devalued over time, because as the counterfeit becomes more widespread, the value approaches $0.
It took time to arrange the bits in such a way that you desired to copy them.
Copying bits is not stealing. It's worse than stealing, it's counterfeiting.
When you steal a car, the car manufacturer can still sell cars at that value. When you counterfeit software (or anything digital), the original work is devalued over time, because as the counterfeit becomes more widespread, the value approaches $0.
That's a good point. By the same logic, actually, counterfeiting currency wouldn't be a crime either, as the scarcity is artificially sustained by the government, but the consequence of everyone being able to print their own currency is that cash would become worthless.
That's not a good point at all. Counterfeiting physical items is not the same as copying information. Physical items are naturally scarce, information is naturally abundant and artificially made scarce by force of law. Physical items actually exist in the real world, unlike information.
I don't think that applies to cash. Cash is artificially scarce. It's only kept scarce by the fact that it's illegal for anyone but the government to print it, and because printers refuse to print something if they detect a certain pattern that's present on bills. Otherwise, cash would only be worth the paper it's printed on.
It's naturally scarce. Even if it was easy to print dollar bills, they would not be infinite. You actually need physical material to make them. That puts hard limits to the scale of any counterfeiting operation. They could make it legal and it wouldn't have a fraction of the impact of fractional reserve banking which literally creates mountains of money out nowhere via the power of debt.
> It took time to arrange the bits in such a way that you desired to copy them.
Correct. It's that labor which is valuable. The labor of creation, of finding that interesting unique number in the sea of infinity. That's valuable.
Well at least it used to be anyway. AI is proving itself quite adept at finding interesting numbers.
> it's counterfeiting
No, it's copyright infringement. That's what they call it anyway. I don't consider it worse than literally anything. I consider it natural. People do it without even realizing that they're doing it. Every single day. At massive scales.
> the original work is devalued over time, because as the counterfeit becomes more widespread, the value approaches $0.
It doesn't approach zero, it is zero. It always was zero. Once created, information is infinitely copyable, it is infinitely abundant, supply is infinite.
That's the reason why they had to create an artificial scarcity system on top of it. Because it's not actually real.
It's this copyright nonsense that allowed people to delude themselves into thinking numbers could bought and sold. Maybe that was true once in the age of the printing press. It's not true in the 21st century, the age of information and globally networked pocket supercomputers. Copyright was over the second computers were invented.
It's time to let go. Creators need to find alternative business models where they get paid before the act of creating for the act of creating. Because it's that labor which is scarce and valuable. The end result is not.
Correct. It's that labor which is valuable. The labor of creation, of finding that interesting unique number in the sea of infinity. That's valuable.
Well at least it used to be anyway. AI is proving itself quite adept at finding interesting numbers.
> it's counterfeiting
No, it's copyright infringement. That's what they call it anyway. I don't consider it worse than literally anything. I consider it natural. People do it without even realizing that they're doing it. Every single day. At massive scales.
> the original work is devalued over time, because as the counterfeit becomes more widespread, the value approaches $0.
It doesn't approach zero, it is zero. It always was zero. Once created, information is infinitely copyable, it is infinitely abundant, supply is infinite.
That's the reason why they had to create an artificial scarcity system on top of it. Because it's not actually real.
It's this copyright nonsense that allowed people to delude themselves into thinking numbers could bought and sold. Maybe that was true once in the age of the printing press. It's not true in the 21st century, the age of information and globally networked pocket supercomputers. Copyright was over the second computers were invented.
It's time to let go. Creators need to find alternative business models where they get paid before the act of creating for the act of creating. Because it's that labor which is scarce and valuable. The end result is not.
Also omitted from this story is the fact that he repeatedly violated FOSS licenses by outright stealing from the Atmosphere project so he could turn around and resell the work of the community (who just wants to run their own code on their own devices) at a great personal profit. What tweaks he did make he ensured could not be reverse engineered by the FOSS community by making it brick devices running competing free software. Copyright sucks but this guy was a piece of work.
> Gary Bowser had a key part in an international piracy hardware manufacturing operation
Are you gonna cite this part or just the no-big-deal-really parts?
Are you gonna cite this part or just the no-big-deal-really parts?
Sorry - thought the article would be sufficient on that on its own. Xecuter was the international piracy operation.
They moved millions in terms of sold products over the years and had deals with Chinese factories to make that stuff "at scale" and had exchanges on how to get their devices past border controls; all this stuff is in the legal complaint he got jailed for.
They moved millions in terms of sold products over the years and had deals with Chinese factories to make that stuff "at scale" and had exchanges on how to get their devices past border controls; all this stuff is in the legal complaint he got jailed for.
Oh, yes, and Bowser was just ... "updating the website from time to time" because "the people actually doing all the manufacture and sales were not really social".
I don't buy that. Piracy operation has some semi-retired guy just "help out" with their website because he's more of a people person than they are, but other than that he had no idea what was really going on?
I don't buy that. Piracy operation has some semi-retired guy just "help out" with their website because he's more of a people person than they are, but other than that he had no idea what was really going on?
I don't believe they were selling copies of any games? Modchip operation.
Xecuter for some reason decided to also sell access to game dumps instead of just modchips/flash carts. IIRC it was never proven that Bowser was specifically involved in that part, but the group did it for sure.
The software their modchips used (called SX OS) took a lazy shortcut that also effectively means it embedded chunks of the Horizon operating system that the Switch uses (the filesystem module to be exact), combined with embedding gamecard headers in the software to trick the gamecard firmware.
It also embedded a massive chunk of the free CFW Atmosphere (which is GPL2.0-Only, with some modifications), and they obviously never open sourced it.
So yes, they were effectively selling their customers (modified) copies of Nintendo's software.
It also embedded a massive chunk of the free CFW Atmosphere (which is GPL2.0-Only, with some modifications), and they obviously never open sourced it.
So yes, they were effectively selling their customers (modified) copies of Nintendo's software.
Thanks for the extra information.
It seems like the subject of the article, no? What's not clear is that it's really such a bad thing. Sure, maybe it should be illegal and he should get some kind of fined for what he did, but 40 months and garnishing his wages for the rest of his life seems out of balance compared to the actual harm that was done.
Bowser was literally just a site admin. He was not involved in the creation or supply of those mods in any way.
The way you have typed your rant makes it seem you only want to throw a contrarian comment at the expense of a ruined life, which is pathetic.
The way you have typed your rant makes it seem you only want to throw a contrarian comment at the expense of a ruined life, which is pathetic.
"Gary Bowser had a key part in an international piracy hardware manufacturing operation."
So what? Why should that get him a $14 million fine? There's nothing morally wrong with what he did and it should not be illegal.
So what? Why should that get him a $14 million fine? There's nothing morally wrong with what he did and it should not be illegal.
“He was no angel. That’s why corporate servitude should be legal.”
Not only saddening, it is downright disgraceful how cruelly the Seattle district court has condemned this individual to a life of misery. My country's courts are an operational nightmare but I feel glad its judiciary is actually independent and not so morbidly corrupted as American courts are.
...How are the courts not independent in the US?
Gary Bowser was an unwitting website admin who was not involved in making or selling the Xecuter mods in any manner. But just for his connection, he was kidnapped by force from his home country and illegally detained for several months in God-knows-what conditions; then in a sham trial sentenced to $10M in fines, 40 months of prison and an additional $4.5M in restitution because the judge, in his own words, wanted to "make an example" out of him. To add to that, he can never declare bankruptcy and no matter where or how he is living, he is permanently bound to send 30% of his monthly income to Nintendo. He is in his 50s with deteriorating health and no viable career and his life is unambiguously ruined.
If you see this as the judgement of a fair and independent court I have no words for you. But the whole world is aware of the American judiciary's reputation of being a glorified bullying arm for megacorps and the rich.
If you see this as the judgement of a fair and independent court I have no words for you. But the whole world is aware of the American judiciary's reputation of being a glorified bullying arm for megacorps and the rich.
>In that regard, he doesn’t just share his surname with Mario’s reptilian foe; he also, improbably, shares it with Nintendo of America’s current president, Doug Bowser. Gary is certain that the executive can be found somewhere in his family tree, perhaps in a distant branch.
Nominative determinism!
Nominative determinism!
Honestly at his age he should just get back into piracy doing the same thing.
He doesn't have that long to live and it'd take forever to get caught again. No doubt he has learned how to better cover his tracks.
He doesn't have that long to live and it'd take forever to get caught again. No doubt he has learned how to better cover his tracks.
There's some evidence out there that he did get back into piracy. There's no other way for him to make the kind of money he needs to pay off his debts, anyway.
> There's some evidence out there that he did get back into piracy.
What evidence is out there?
What evidence is out there?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53ttoD8GYJE I said "some evidence" because I'm not convinced, but I can see why other people would be.
Maybe he has
Gary's work is what led me to buy a Switch in the first place. Now there's four of them in my house and a lot of games.
[deleted]
This is beyond messed up. Sure, fine him, but nuke his entire financial life? Nintendo can eat dirt, and this sort of thing is also why I refuse to buy their games/devices.
As another commenter mentioned, Bowser probably led to many sales of the consoles themselves. Nintendo's game pricing is very high, even for very old games, and they have a captive market with no other choice.
As another commenter mentioned, Bowser probably led to many sales of the consoles themselves. Nintendo's game pricing is very high, even for very old games, and they have a captive market with no other choice.
Even a fine is too much punishment for the benefit of monopolists like Nintendo and the wider copyright industry.
[deleted]
This must be a really dark glitch in the matrix, that the greatest(?) real life villain in Nintendo's History has the same name as the greatest fictional villain of Nintendo's most well known franchise. And on top of it, he is a Canadian, while Nintendo USA has also a High Ranking worker of the name Bowser, but he is a good guy. Which is very opposite to the usual fame of people from Canada and USA.
[deleted]
As always in piracy cases, there's never been a proof of a single dollar of loss anywhere here as well.
It's all in Nintendo's lawyers head.
Piracy is one of the rare cases where you can be convicted on imaginary damages which aren't required to be proven.
It's all in Nintendo's lawyers head.
Piracy is one of the rare cases where you can be convicted on imaginary damages which aren't required to be proven.
Copyright itself is imaginary property. Completely made up. It makes sense that any "damages" are completely made up too. Might as well apply completely arbitrary sentences, fines and punishments. Artificial scarcity generates artificial punishments.
Not all damages in the copyright system are imaginary like piracy, you could totally calculate real damages from counterfeit items in some cases, provided that they are sold the same way as the real products.
Piracy is a bit special, nobody could ever prove that the damages exist and no research has successfully demonstrated that they even exist at all.
Piracy is a bit special, nobody could ever prove that the damages exist and no research has successfully demonstrated that they even exist at all.
Counterfeits have nothing to do with copyright though. Counterfeiting necessarily refers to tangible products which exist in the real, physical world.
There is a huge difference between a genuine product and a counterfeit. There is no difference at all between the original data and copies of it, they are exactly the same. In fact, there is no such thing as an "original" piece of data, they are indistinguishable from one another. You can literally check the authenticity of data via cryptography. Doesn't matter if it came from an "official" source or some "counterfeit" website.
Their use of the word "counterfeiting" to describe copyright infringement is just like their constant attempts to equal it to "piracy". It's part of their propaganda. It's intended to give such "counterfeits" the connotation of being lower quality products.
Ironically, it's the corporations who peddle lower quality goods to paying customers while "pirates" get the high quality products. A 6 MB video game gets blown up into a 100 MB obfuscated mess due to SecuROM, then the "pirates" write an unpacker and release the small and optimized version without any DRM whatsoever. Streaming services send you shitty compressed video with artifacts everywhere, meanwhile "pirates" get uncensored blu-ray remuxes.
There is a huge difference between a genuine product and a counterfeit. There is no difference at all between the original data and copies of it, they are exactly the same. In fact, there is no such thing as an "original" piece of data, they are indistinguishable from one another. You can literally check the authenticity of data via cryptography. Doesn't matter if it came from an "official" source or some "counterfeit" website.
Their use of the word "counterfeiting" to describe copyright infringement is just like their constant attempts to equal it to "piracy". It's part of their propaganda. It's intended to give such "counterfeits" the connotation of being lower quality products.
Ironically, it's the corporations who peddle lower quality goods to paying customers while "pirates" get the high quality products. A 6 MB video game gets blown up into a 100 MB obfuscated mess due to SecuROM, then the "pirates" write an unpacker and release the small and optimized version without any DRM whatsoever. Streaming services send you shitty compressed video with artifacts everywhere, meanwhile "pirates" get uncensored blu-ray remuxes.
> "There is no difference at all between the original data and copies of it, they are exactly the same. In fact, there is no such thing as an "original" piece of data, they are indistinguishable from one another."
Sometimes there is a difference. Sometimes the copy is better than the original (in that the copy frequently has had anti-consumer garbage like DRM removed).
Sometimes there is a difference. Sometimes the copy is better than the original (in that the copy frequently has had anti-consumer garbage like DRM removed).
In those cases they're not really copies though, they're new derived data. Someone took the official release and modified it into a better version. The source is not destroyed by this process, in fact people go out of their way to preserve it so that they can repeat the derivation process as many times as they want.
Right, people who can afford to buy consoles and games generally just buy consoles and games. There are some occasional exceptions among people who are particularly greedy, lazy, or have atypical personal ethics. But for the most part I find it hard to believe that $14 million in damages were actually caused here.
Absolutely.
Always reminds me of this TED talk[1] that goes into the fantasy accounting in cases such as this.
1: https://youtube.com/watch?v=GZadCj8O1-0
1: https://youtube.com/watch?v=GZadCj8O1-0
[deleted]
So long Gary Bowser
[deleted]
This was probably the most I've laughed from any hn comment. Thanks
For those that don’t understand the joke: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/so-long-gay-bowser
My favorite question to ask myself in copyright cases: Who was victimized?
The policeman's grieving wife who opened her front door and was greeted by his old helmet on her doorstep. And then just as she makes peace with it as a comforting memento, it gets stolen again! Won't someone think of the victims!
Seriously, draconian travesties of the "justice system" like this are one of the main reasons why I feel it's actively immoral to give money to the imaginary property industry. The other being their pushing of technological totalitarianism (ie digital restrictions management) that is directly opposed to personal computing and communications freedom. If the playing field were level I could perhaps support something like a 10 year term copyright with violations limited to being misdemeanors. But as things stand, we've got to starve this corrupt regulatory capture cancer.
Seriously, draconian travesties of the "justice system" like this are one of the main reasons why I feel it's actively immoral to give money to the imaginary property industry. The other being their pushing of technological totalitarianism (ie digital restrictions management) that is directly opposed to personal computing and communications freedom. If the playing field were level I could perhaps support something like a 10 year term copyright with violations limited to being misdemeanors. But as things stand, we've got to starve this corrupt regulatory capture cancer.
"You wouldn't download a car" is such a clear and demonstrative example of just how authoritarian and deluded large IP holders are.
If you could get a car by downloading it off the internet, you would. More importantly, if anyone could get access to a car simply by downloading one, it would be so fucking unethical to punish people for doing that simply to prop up the profits of some business somewhere.
You SHOULD download a car!
If you could get a car by downloading it off the internet, you would. More importantly, if anyone could get access to a car simply by downloading one, it would be so fucking unethical to punish people for doing that simply to prop up the profits of some business somewhere.
You SHOULD download a car!
[deleted]
The copyright holder. They put work into creating the copyrighted thing. I think copyright that lasts 100+ years is ridiculous though.
Could it be both parties for different reasons?
Imagine updating a website and then becoming a serf for Nintendo USA for the rest of your life. So sad.
[deleted]
Honestly, the story is great inspiration to burn large corporations to the ground.
[deleted]
[deleted](1)
fish44(1)
Zambyte(1)
Seems like the Nintendo consoomer shills are in full swing here.
Will you clowns mind explaining what guidelines were violated by posts such as:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39215568
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39215304
Or have we progressed from “a downvote can equal disagreement” to a “a flag can equal diagreement”?
Will you clowns mind explaining what guidelines were violated by posts such as:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39215568
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39215304
Or have we progressed from “a downvote can equal disagreement” to a “a flag can equal diagreement”?
[deleted]
Well can't me this up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowser
If he is reincident, then the court should have ordered compulsory psychological treatment - this feels like outright cruelty.
Hasn't Canada signed modern Human Rights treaties?
And - can't he just declare bankruptcy (nevertheless still implies paying a few years of personal income) and reset his debt?
The story brings this to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debtors%27_prison