Yeah, Ahoy is great.

It looks like the project is really careful not to include copyrighted materials in their distribution.

Source code automatically generated from copyrighted binary code is a derivative of copyrighted code, though. It’s like taking a copyrighted book and running it through Google Translate and then clean up the sentences manually. You could be lucky that a publisher might not care about a translation into Icelandic but if you were to auto-translate a French version of a book into English and try to distribute it in the US, you’d probably get in trouble even if you leave out all graphic artwork.

Nintendo has not taken action on the massively popular SM64 Decompilation and PC ports (and ironically switch ports) in the past what…3 years?

Nintendo hadn’t taken action against ROM sites for even more years (I was able to download NES, Game Boy, and SNES ROMs in the 1990s) and then decided to make an example of only one in 2019. Just because something is not on the radar of lawyers in Japan right now, doesn’t mean a law suit over millions could not come any day.

The code compiles 1:1 back into a unable ROM but isn’t made just using a source code leak. It is reverse-engineered just like the SM64 decomp

Decompilation means it’s still derived from copyrighted source code. It’s not a clean-room implementation where one person analyzes the engine, writes documentation about details of that engine, and a completely different person writes a new engine. It’s not even a grey area. The correct procedure is clear ever since back in the day “IBM compatible” were created.

If it were up to me, copyrights would work like patents: After 25 years they’re void and people would be completely in the clear to decompile, modify, and redistribute old games. Sadly that’s not the reality.

Emotional damage

This is not a separately distributed patch set as LAME was in the beginning. That’s GPL slapped on the combined work. Not really that hard to understand.

I’m not wrong. You cannot just slap the GPL on disassembled proprietary software. That’s a fact. Ask your lawyer.

Your changes can be gpl licensed, similar to how a rom hack can be licensed however you want.

Read the GPL and what it has to say about derivative works which this undeniably is.

Yes, fair use and such. But slapping the GPL on the result is not fair use and archival. That you cannot do.

So it’s not quite as clear cut as this.

You cannot change the license of a derivative work. That part is clear cut.

I cannot take a Harry Potter book, use Google Translate to translate it into another language, polish up the result by hand, and then claim it as my work at slap whatever license I like on it.