>>11971456
Look, I know kids can be stupid, but most weren't THAT stupid that if they plug in a device they know can mess with games, toss in random shit (By the way, the gamegenie codes were encoded and had a checksum, it would not accept just any random garbage), and then the game acts funny they would think the game is broken and that it's Nintendo's fault. Even I knew better than that when I was still a young child with my NES.
They weren't suing because they were worried about such an absurdly made up scenario.
>>11971528
Correct, this would be like if Compaq claimed that IBM infringed on their hardware/software, filed a lawsuit, got documents from IBM detailing exactly how their computer works, and then use those documents to make their own computer that is essentially a copy. There is no reverse engineering happening here, you are basically getting all the design docs and following the instructions to make one.
IIRC I think an old documentary called "Triumph of the Nerds" (Yeah yeah, I know, stupid title) had at one point an interview with the person who was in charge of this who explained how he hired a lawyer who told him exactly how he could do it in a just barely legal way through loopholes.