"Showing a man playing Super Mario World on his cell like it's no big deal is a pretty stupid move." <-- I did wish, though, that it wasn't really a big deal after all.

I know I'm probably going to get crap for this, but why do developers even bother trying to stop pirating? It's never going to happen. If anything, pirating is only going to become more and more common as more people become aware of it. The people who are pirating games clearly have no moral objection to it, and they're always going to find ways to do it.

It's like trying to stop people from doing drugs by making drugs illegal. It doesn't work. People who are going to do drugs are going to do it whether it's legal or not. The same goes for pirating games.

@mrplow8 I agree with you completely and really hope society figures this out. I'm not condoning piracy or anything but it's definitely not going to stop and people need to accept that and just move on.

isn't nokia conversations(the sub-site where the video was) a community-geared site? That would explain a lot.
Also I have such a lust for that phone I'll ruin my pants when I'll get my hands on it

@Jon B Did you read the article? This made the news because it was being promoted in a Nokia cellphone commercial, not just because it exists. That makes all the difference.

@Hack3r It doesn't matter. Emulation is 100% legal. The problem comes with showing Super mario world, when they don't have the rights to show it.

Via ESA http://www.theesa.com/policy/antipiracy_faq.asp#3

"U.S. Copyright laws permit making a "backup" copy of computer programs for archival purposes. However, the right to make backup copies of computer programs for archival purposes, as embodied in 17 U.S.C. Section 117(2), does not in any way authorize the owner of a copy of a video or computer game to post or download a copy of that game to or from the Internet or make such copy available to other people for their use. Section 117(2) only gives the owner of the copy a right to make an archival copy of the actual copy that he/she legally possesses, not to make a copy of the ROM that someone else legally possesses, nor to post an archival copy of his/her original copy for distribution. The law clearly does NOT provide any right to sell "backup" copies. In fact, Section 117 is quite explicit in stating that any archival copy prepared under Section 117(2) can only be transferred to another person if, and only if: A) The original copy is also transferred, and only with the authorization of the copyright owner, and B) The transfer is part of the sale of all rights in the program."

Also Emulators are legal as long as the emulators do not contain the bios and such. I hold there is no problem with the promotion of emulation, but the use of the video game super mario bros.

@GamesAreArt The only problem I have here is that you know damn well almost nobody owns a copy original who downloads a rom. In that sense it is illegal.

In fact you have the reason why they allow up on websites and such wrong it doesn't follow any of this legal code. In fact, "Section 117(2) only gives the owner of the copy a right to make an archival copy of the actual copy that he/she legally possesses, not to make a copy of the ROM that someone else legally possesses, nor to post an archival copy of his/her original copy for distribution."

Right there is your flaw. The Emulation is not legal because of this, but because of engineering laws, you can legally test and rework software/hardware for a period of one week (i think) or some such period as part of experimentation and teaching purposes. Most emulation websites will post this up as the reason why it is up, for teaching purposes. If you download a rom or an emulator your expected to delete it within a certain period of time.

However none of these laws make it legal to download the files without the original for extended period of times. Nokia can say they had the file for experimentation if it was filmed in the US, however we really don't even know where this was filmed. It doesn't appear to be a broadcasted advert but a internet advert. So the laws here are iffy.

what GamesAreArt said

Ha, whoa. Bravo, Nokia. Say goodbye to your money.

Emulation isn't 100% legal.

The concept sure is, but depending on the machine in question, depending on what encryption algorithms are broken, depending on what software licensing, depending on what national or state/provincial laws are for software licensing are, etc. See, Sony vs. Connectix concerning Sony's copy-protection schema.

It's a really sticky topic, nor should the fine details of the legal battle really bother the average gamer. Sony, Nintendo, or Microsoft is not going to go after YOU specifically if you're engaging in emulation. If you're developing an emulator(which isn't likely to get you in trouble, but it *could*, again, depending on your particular legal situation), but if you're *selling* an emulator, that's a different story all together. Again, see Sony v. Connectix

It's hilarious that people want to get mad over this. I mean the biz side of me thinks this is good for nintendo brand. I mean aren't you
more likely to buy a wii for new
smb if you played the rom? I mean say I'm wrong.

Well, it's no wonder Nintendo would want to put the kibosh on this. The only reason I ever justified downloading ROMs illegally was that there was no way for me to give Nintendo money for a new copy of one of the old games I wanted to play. Let's just say since the Wii came out, Ninty has made a tidy sum selling me VC games. And I love it - they play perfectly, I abandoned my crappy PC gamepad, and all is well in the world. So yeah, Nintendo will want to protect this revenue stream any way they can, even if the average gamer out there isn't as honest as me about paying for what they want to play.