The Super Game Boy has received a significant upgrade with the introduction of the Super Game Boy Plus, an unofficial enhancement developed by @BucketMouseBite. This new version addresses several limitations of the original Super Game Boy, which allowed Game Boy games to be played on the SNES but had a faster clock speed than the original Game Boy, affecting gameplay and compatibility with link cables.

  • Omega@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Is it illegal to rip a game that you own onto a device that you own? My understanding is that’s 100% legal, not gray area at all. The only issue would be if you distributed it.

    • xyzzy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      Your understanding is incorrect if copying involves circumventing encryption or other means of protecting the data. That said, it’s not an issue for the Game Boy or Super NES.

    • Bobby Turkalino@lemmy.yachts
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      That’s what I’m getting at, Nintendo only needs the argument “this could be used to rip a game onto the cartridge, then distribute it” and US courts will bend over and grant them the DMCA strike

      • v1605@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        This argument would outlaw a USB flash drive, “Your Honor, this device can store the contents of this 30 old game, it needs to be outlawed to protect all intellectual property”

      • Omega@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        So you’re saying, because it would rip straight to another cartridge, it could be argued it’s streamlining distribution?

        I would hope that a court would see through that argument. There’s a pretty good track record of allowing personal use of personal property. But I wouldn’t be surprised either if they convinced a court that this was explicitly for distribution purposes.