I realize that's not a digital download, but these titles were never offered as digital downloads, and Nintendo isn't obligated to use the exact format which suits your needs. (And while Nintendo isn't directly profiting from used sales, high prices on the secondary market make their new games seem like good investments.)
(If we were talking about WiiWare exclusively, I'd have a very different attitude.)
> Why is Nintendo obliged to provide older content, or otherwise allow emulation?
Provide older content, no, "allow" emulation, yes. It's not even "allow", Nintendo doesn't have the authority to allow or disallow anyone from making, distributing and running emulators.
They might not have the legal authority, but is their firm stance against emulators morally questionable? I may agree their methods are questionable, but I don't know if their stance is. Nintendo's stance against emulation seems consistent with their approach to game design and game management.
Is the question of whether a company's action is "morally questionable" dependant on that action being consistent with similar actions done by the same company in the past?
It doesn't give anyone the rights to anything. What it does though is provide a massive incentive for piracy. While I don't pirate myself, I can see many rational people do it for Nintendo products, and I don't have a good argument against it.
I view the morality around IP law as an implicit contract with society. Actual theft is wrong because I am depriving someone of something without their consent. Pirating is wrong because it disincentives the production of further work. If there's no option to pay, then piracy doesn't affect the incentive structure at all, except possibly sending a a signal that there's still demand there.
