The existence of NetherSX2 raises a complex ethical and legal debate. The core of this debate revolves around the concept of open-source software and a developer's right to their own creation. AetherSX2 was not open-source; its source code was not publicly available, which technically means that forking the project was a violation of copyright.
The developers of NetherSX2 did not have permission from Tahlreth to modify and redistribute his work. From a purely legal standpoint, their actions could be considered copyright infringement.However, many in the community argued that the situation was more nuanced.
They believed that Tahlreth's final update, with its disruptive "timebomb" and ads, was an act of "digital vandalism" that harmed the very community he had built. In their eyes, NetherSX2 was a necessary act of preservation, a way to save a vital piece of software from being rendered unusable. They saw it as a response to a developer who had turned on his user base, and that their actions, while technically illegal, were ethically justifiable.
This perspective highlights the tension between a developer's legal rights to their intellectual property and the expectations of a community that has invested time and energy into a project.The debate also touches on the ethics of emulation itself. Emulators like AetherSX2 and NetherSX2 are not illegal, but the process of obtaining the games ("ROMs") to play on them is a legal gray area.
Most users obtain these ROMs from illegal websites, which is a violation of copyright law. The existence of an emulator, even a legally created one, can facilitate piracy. In this context, the debate over NetherSX2's legitimacy becomes even more complex, as the entire ecosystem it operates within is fraught with legal and ethical challenges.