There's no precedent. Nintendo sues, the developer doesn't have money for lawyers to defend themselves so they remove it.

That's how it's been going for a long time.

On what grounds?

Stuff like this almost never happens due to the legal liability. They can't ensure that the authors aren't violating some other contract, like using some library unlicensed, or violating an employer's noncompete or something.

Why do you say that?

It's like being handed a MP3 player but being told you'll go to jail for playing music you ripped yourself.

Generally, ripping for personal use is not litigated, only distribution. It may technically be illegal in most places, but then, reproducing someone's work without compensation should be prohibited.

Let me know when Diddy Kong Racing's done. GOAT.

For making a port? A succulent Japanese port of a 30 year old game? Unhand me, sir!

Not really; The emulator doesn’t use any copyrighted code, but the ROM is copyrighted. That’s just basic IP law.

What is fucked up logic is Nintendo encrypting their ROMs, then providing decryption keys on the console. So the emulator itself is legal, but actually booting a ROM requires decrypting it, which requires keys from a legitimate console. Nintendo has argued that those keys are illegal to use in an emulator, even if the user rips them directly from the console that they own. So you have the keys. You own the console they’re stored on. But it’s illegal to use those keys anywhere except on the console they came on, because Nintendo said so.

like they like to do with fan games/projects/etc.

Cries while staring at the defunct AM2R project

Its Nintendo, do they need grounds?

There was a point in the 1980s where PC games fully allowed and encouraged you to copy your games for backup purposes. They even had some companies who gave detailed steps explaining how.

What ended up happening is you owned a PC, your buddy owned a PC. You made two backups of the game. One for you, and one for your buddy. Now between the two of you, you buy half the games, because you buy one, your buddy buys a different one. And now you both have two games.

Now multiply that by however many friends you knew who owned PCs. You might buy 1 game, but own 15 games.

By the 90s, PC game makers did a 180, and were now trying to prevent archiving of their games, but it was too late. Laws had been written to allow for backup of personal data. Yes, you WERE breaking the law by giving your buddy the backup, but they couldn't prevent you from creating the backup.

And in a pre-internet world, how would they ever even know you made a backup?

Nice try, diddy

Not just ultrawide support, but also interpolated frames for super smooth frame rate.

Problem here is Nintendo doesnt have much to sue them on. They were even pretty careful about how they named the project. Naming it Spaghetti Kart and making no references to Nintendo or even Mario Kart.

Because US DMCA law has provisions in it about copyright circumvention. Same thing led to the "you can't repair your own John Deere tractor" debacle.

This is Nintendo manifest!

HEY. Diddy Kong does not deserve that slander.

What is that?