No Freedom To Tinker: Arrested For Modding Legally Purchased Game Consoles
from the no-innovation-allowed dept
This is hardly a new issue, but it's still troubling every time we hear a story like this. For years, there's been a fight over whether or not it should be legal to modify a legally purchased game console. Those in favor of the right point out that if you've legally bought something, you should always be free to tinker with it. That's just common sense. Those against it say that modifying a gaming console is done mainly to play pirated games or to cheat, which can cause problems for legit players. I find the latter responses unpersuasive, as those are technological or business model issues that can be solved in other ways, rather than a legal issue. But, thanks to that good old DMCA, that's now how the law works.Instead, we get stories about students getting arrested for "jailbreaking" a video game console. It's interesting to see the use of the word "jailbreaking" here, as that's more commonly been applied to iPhones -- where it's common. Usually, this action has been referred to as "modding" or "modchipping" when it came to consoles. But the basic fact is that the actions are effectively the same -- and both should be perfectly legal. Modifying legally purchased hardware should never be against the law. It's possible that you could then use that modified hardware to break the law -- and no one's saying that's okay. But the act itself of modifying the devices should never be against the law -- especially where it could lead to a ten-year prison sentence, as in this case.
This particular case involves a student who would modify game consoles to let people make use of backup copies of their own games on the consoles. Making a backup copy, by itself, has been well established as being perfectly legal. The problem here (once again) is the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause, which makes it illegal to circumvent any kind of DRM, even if it's for a totally legal purpose. It's difficult to see how that's constitutional. Making it illegal to do something that's perfectly legal, just because someone puts any kind of DRM in the middle doesn't make any sense at all. It's a ridiculous scenario that this kid is now facing 10 years in jail for making video game consoles more useful, allowing people to use perfectly legal backup copies of their games. But, such is the state of the DMCA and copyright laws these days.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: arrest, copyright, dmca, game consoles, modding, video games
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
talking head.
* the guy was selling his modchip services
* the guy is 27 years old. he's not some 14 year old who doesn't know anything about anything.
* the US attorney said in one of the many interviews that the guy advertised his services so you could just copy games you rent/borrow. if the guy doesn't plea out, i'm sure they'll prove it.
nothing like leaving out pertinent facts or anything. but you don't have to present both sides of the story when you're a talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: talking head.
How does that change things. You can pay someone to mod your car too. What difference does it make?
* the guy is 27 years old. he's not some 14 year old who doesn't know anything about anything.
Again, I'm struggling to understand how that's possibly pertinent.
* the US attorney said in one of the many interviews that the guy advertised his services so you could just copy games you rent/borrow. if the guy doesn't plea out, i'm sure they'll prove it.
Yes, and if people did that *they* would be liable. But not the guy doing the modding.
Modded cars can break the speedlimit too, but we don't throw the mechanics in jail.
nothing like leaving out pertinent facts or anything.
Nothing like trying to pretend these totally irrelevant points are pertinent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: talking head.
"Very disappointing to this longtime reader.
Fair enough. Message heard. I'll try to keep it in mind in future posts and conversations."
Do you maybe want to restate your post?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: talking head.
If that were the case, then PAPER would be illegal because it's theoretically conceivable that someone could use a piece of paper to commit murder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: talking head.
And since it's impossible to predict the future with absolute certainty, that would eliminate all willful negligence.
But if you're just talking about it *probably* leading to others breaking the law, then I'd argue that that certainly applies to automobile dealers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: talking head.
I agree that these DMCA provisions are over-zealous, put the burden on the consumer and need to be revised. But your comparison to modifying cars is really off-point. Firstly, few cars need to be modded to break the speed limit. Secondly, there ARE limitations (emissions, materials, etc.) on the mods that can be made to a car, some of which DO carry criminal penalties, depending on state law. These limits are typically for environmental or safety reasons, not protecting the manufacturers' rights, I'll grant you.
As for your choice of terms and how you are "struggling to understand how [using the term Student]'s possibly pertinent." I would contend that the fact that he is some kind of student is itself not at all pertinent...student felon, adult felon, both are felons. Wired referred to him as a "man" in the first paragraph, and quoted his age in the second. They, too, chose to use the hook of "student" in their headline, and I assume you just picked that up, then choosing to emphasize it by repeating it twice times in the body of your post. You write a LOT, Mike, and know very well that student carriers commonly held connotations - youth, lack of knowledge, perhaps event innocence via lack of experience. It does look like you (and Wired) selected that term specifically to soften the apparent reality that this guy is a brutish late twenty-something. Yes, it doesn't change his quilt or innocence, just your coloring of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: talking head.
The student thing makes for a great headline, and if nothing else, Techdirt is all about SEO friendly headlines.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: talking head.
I don't believe you're sorry. I think you just lie.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: talking head.
There is no "market price" in a monopoly, because there is no competition. In fact, if the monopoly on games were removed, you'd be lucky to get $5 for a game, I'd bet. (The cost of shipment, packaging, and blank media)
Furthermore, for entirely digital transactions (with no packaging, shipping, or media costs) infringing is actually to pay market price. (aka, $0)
Knowing is half the Battle. Not being a douche is the other half. You're now halfway there. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: talking head.
Another example (maybe not so perfect): prostitution (sex for money) is *not* illegal in Canada. However, soliciting for prostitution and being in a "bawdy" house are illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: talking head.
Now, I would assume that most car shops would request a medical note first, but I'm not sure how the law works in this circumstance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: talking head.
Maybe you should go back to kindergarten and take reading comprehension 101.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: talking head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is crap
The console then becomes a lot more useful, I have a wii which i have put homebrew on, and now I can load games without the need to put the discs in the drive, but straight from ISO's - so when I resell my games (Which I will) they are in good condition and keep their value.
Sure this allows me to copy games and do illegal activity, but that doesn't mean I will. I do like that with Homebrew there's a bunch more things you can do with your console.... Perhaps those anti should look into it rather than just assume everyone is a criminal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apparently the law forgets...
A: I DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nobody else owns that item. If I buy a pair of pliers, take them apart and improve upon their efficiency, I am not committing a crime. If that particular improvement :::::COULD:::::: make it easier to break into someone's house, did I break the law? NO!!!!!
EVERY SINGLE AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURER MAKES CARS THAT :::CAN::: BREAK THE SPEED LIMIT!! Are they breaking the law? NO!!!!!
See the pattern yet, people?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Apparently the law forgets...
The difference here DJ is that Software doesn't follow the same rules as Hardware. When you buy hardware, yes you own it. When you buy software you DONT own it, well you do and you don't. You own the media it is on, and you have the right to use the software, but you don't have the right to reproduce it or make it better (unless it is GPL).
Certain types of radio hardware is also illegal to modify because of the risk of radio interference.
This also goes for the software which is part of the hardware (firmware). You cannot modify the software, however the hardware you are free to do whatever you want with it.
The issue here is simple, if you mod the pliers, you don't automatically get a copy of the pliers that you can sell which cost you nothing.
When people mod video game consoles, the intent usually is to copy software. You can say you are making a backup, but if you sell the backup you are in big trouble.
I also agree that these video game companies are really cashing in on their new consoles. $60 - $70 for a game now a days is ridiculous. Sure there will always be a small percentage of the population that figures out the copy protection and uses it for financial gain, the software companies know this and usually don't worry about it.
What they are trying to prevent is the large scale pirate operations that happen mainly out of China where millions of units change hands without royalties being paid to software companies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Apparently the law forgets...
That's the problem. The software industry want's to have it both ways, depending upon the situation and what works out to be most in their favor.
You own the media it is on, and you have the right to use the software, but you don't have the right to reproduce it or make it better (unless it is GPL).
That's kind of like a book, isn't it? So should it be illegal to modify a book by making notes in it or even tearing pages out of it?
The issue here is simple, if you mod the pliers, you don't automatically get a copy of the pliers that you can sell which cost you nothing.
But this case isn't about selling illegally copied software, so please quit try to pretend that it is.
When people mod video game consoles, the intent usually is to copy software.
Not all copying is illegal. Give that, it makes eve less sense to put people in prison for merely making copying *possible*. If you're going to imprison people for making it possible to do something that might possibly be a crime, then you might as well put everyone in prison.
You can say you are making a backup, but if you sell the backup you are in big trouble.
Again, this guy wasn't charged with selling backups of programs. Why do you keep repeating such straw men?
What they are trying to prevent is the large scale pirate operations that happen mainly out of China where millions of units change hands without royalties being paid to software companies.
First, that's no excuse. Second, this guy wasn't a large scale pirate operating out of China either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Apparently the law forgets...
That's kind of like a book, isn't it? So should it be illegal to modify a book by making notes in it or even tearing pages out of it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Apparently the law forgets...
Except there's no difference because we ARE talking about hardware here.
"The issue here is simple, if you mod the pliers, you don't automatically get a copy of the pliers that you can sell which cost you nothing."
And when you mod a game console, you don't automatically get a copy of a game console that you can sell.
"When people mod video game consoles, the intent usually is to copy software. You can say you are making a backup, but if you sell the backup you are in big trouble."
He's not selling backups. He's selling a service to modify rightfully-owned hardware so that it is more useful for the owner. For example, I do not use my modded XBOX to play games I don't own. I DO use it to run free homebrew software, like Xbox Media Center. (Actually, XBMC is pretty much all I use it for.) It is my hardware, and I choose to use it as a cheap HTPC rather than a game console. How is that not my right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Apparently the law forgets...
Not according to the RIAA. They've sued people for unlawful trespass to property and unlawful acces to a computer system. When the defendants asked which computer system they trespassed upon, the response was "your own".
Apparently Big Software and Big Copyright doesn't just believe you don't own the software you buy, they believe that your hardware isn't really yours, either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Make an inventory
If you own anything that :::COULD::: be used to commit a crime, then by your own logic, you MUST be convicted of murder!!!! Why? because pretty much everything in your house :::COULD::: be used to kill someone.
MURDERER!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It all comes down to property rights.
We don't own the land we buy, the software we buy, the music we purchase, or the books we download.
When you can be told you have to sell the land you own to the government for the price they set you don't own it.
When you can buy a book for your Kindle and they can, without notice delete them you don't own those either.
When your legal copy of Vista can be disabled because of software that you were tricked in to downloading because the company that sold you the copy says it's a "Critical Security Update" you don't own it.
When you buy and download a song and but are told you can listen to it in this way or on this device you don't own it.
The truth is we as consumers and voters have slowly allowed our right to own what we buy fade.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It all comes down to property rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It all comes down to property rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It all comes down to property rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah, but c'mon...
The unique problem with video game consoles is that unless you're Nintendo, your systems are sold at a loss. The only way they recoup costs and make a profit is if they sell video games.
If you want to get crack off the street, you don't go after the users. There are too many of them and your resources are too limited to fix the problem at that level. Instead, you go after the guy that's making money off it. This MAN is making a profit on the hard work of others. He didn't just mod his own console so he could run Linux off it like a good geek. He's modding consoles which he knows, 100%, will be used to pirate games.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
Hypothetical: You're a mechanic, I come up to you and say: "My vehicle is electronically speed limited at 55mph from the manufacturer. I routinely drive on highways that have a higher speed limit than that, could you please use your expertise and equipment to remove that restriction from my car's computer?" You say to yourself, sure why not? There are plenty of highways with a speed limit of 65 or 75mph.
Now I drive away and go 75mph on a highway limited at 55mph. BOOM! You get arrested and go to jail because you were caught "modding" cars to do something their manufacturers said they shouldn't do and made profit doing it you evil bastard!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
Look, I agree that DMCA is overly board, benefits business at the expense of the consumer, and doesn't clearly allow for reasonable things like personal backups. But until it is changed or found in whole or part to be unconstitutional.
Section 1201e(2) of DMCA says "No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that--
`(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
`(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
`(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
So, the WHY for the reason for the circumvention is not important. Circumventing (or providing, importing or manufacturing the means to circumvent) is on its face illegal.
Section 1204(a) says "Any person who violates section 1201 or 1202 willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain" is subject to the penalties outlined. The motivation or intent is not a factor in this if he was taking money to do it. So in this case, as I read the law (and I am not an attorney), he is subject to criminal penalties for the circumvention modifications because they was done for commercial purposes (to make money) regardless of whether anyone used them to play pirated content. Which, naturally, I'd venture a guess that a majority of folks who would pursue this type of mod would at some point. Don't flame me for that assertion, I'm open to being proven wrong.
Again, I am not saying the DMCA is RIGHT with a capital R, just that it is the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
The whole point of Mike's article was an examination of whether the DMCA is justified. No one is arguing whether it exists, so you're just knocking down a straw man there. Sheesh, way to go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
I understand that many comments are about what SHOULD BE. But many other comments are about what people erroneously think IS TODAY.
Since, of late, Mike does not seem all that interested in providing context to some of his posts, I thought I'd take the liberty. Not because Mike isn't cool or in command, I just thought it was relevant, since it is the piece of the law in question here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
A "goodly number"? Tell ya what then, list the flattened-view comment numbers that you were responding to that claimed otherwise. Otherwise, I'm calling you out for straw man trolling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
BTW, you over and mis-use straw man.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
If they are a wee bit internet savvy, they will find what they need on the internet. If they are not internet savvy, the will likely toss the content and move on.
The only people benefiting from the DMCA are the lawyers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
I'm really annoyed at this attitude when it comes to unjust laws.
How do you think getting a law changed *really* works? Do people quietly obey an unjust law until their representative changes it for them? No, of course not. People ignore the law until it becomes ridiculous to attempt to enforce it (because doing so would criminalize the majority of the population) and THEN it is changed.
If a law is clearly unjust, I feel that we, as citizens, have a duty to ignore the law until it can be changed to reflect the demands of the population.
So, yes there is something wrong with many laws, and we shouldn't stand for it, regardless of what those in control have written on paper.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
The fact is that the vast majority of people in the US are likely not engaged in activities explicitly criminalized by DMCA. The uproar - rightly so, in my book - is among those who are engaged in lots of electronic content consumption and manipulation. I know that reading TechDirt all the time makes it *seem* like "everyone" is doing the same thing and is outraged, but I don't think the actual numbers from the complete real world prove that out. Of the millions of XBoxes and Wii's sold in the US, I'd bet (and am open to stats if anyone has them) that the number of modded devices is in the tens of thousands or less. So the percentages done axiomatically lead to public uproar.
What I do react to is folks who seem to be saying "the government can't do that" or "poor innocent modder" when yes, under the current law, the government CAN do that, and, in this case, it wasn't a guy just tinkering with his own equipment, but a guy who created a micro-economy for himself in modding for others for the (allegedly) express purpose of defeating legally enforceable protection. Civil disobedience is one thing, but creating an enterprise to knowingly break the law for financial gain is another entirely. As I read the law, if he had been doing it for no gain - free - the case would be much weaker, if not disintegrate altogether. But I am not an attorney.
I want individual consumers to be able to backup and transfer their purchased content within their equipment with impunity, and I want to be able to watch, listen and consume that purchased content ubiquitously on any equipment I chose. DMCA doesn't allow for that so I do want to see it changed. My path (certainly not the only one) is to engage my Congressional representatives...suggest others might want to do the same if you haven't already.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
I didn't mean attitude as in "Oh no he didn't! Aw, snap!" I meant the attitude as in "Well, someone wrote it on paper and told me I have to do it, and even though I know it's broken, I'm going to do it anyway." Aka, "Baa.."
Civil disobedience is one thing, but creating an enterprise to knowingly break the law for financial gain is another entirely.
..how?
the number of modded devices is in the tens of thousands or less
The wonderful thing about living in a republic is that the minority is protected from the majority. Furthermore, a law that is unjust but only applies to a few is not less unjust. A law that said you, Bob, were not allowed to mod your xbox would not be less unjust.
My path (certainly not the only one) is to engage my Congressional representatives
Call me jaded, but I've written off any help from my "representatives". I just don't have the kind of cash required to get their attention.
Oh, and just to be clear: When I type "I'm really annoyed at this attitude when it comes to unjust laws" I don't mean you, specifically, I mean anyone with that attitude. Yours just happened to be the comment I replied to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
""Well, someone wrote it on paper and told me I have to do it..." This isn't a chore that mom wrote on the wall for you to do, it's the law. I agree (for the umpteenth time) that DMCA needs to be changed, but until it is, breaking it is at your own peril.
As for the difference between civil disobedience and a criminal enterprise...if you can't see that, I'm at a loss. Again, the profit motive in this case is key, as it is in the DMCA legislation.
"Furthermore, a law that is unjust but only applies to a few is not less unjust" I'm confused because in your earlier post you said that the law would be effectively unenforceable "because doing so would criminalize the majority of the population." So is it a few (hint: the answer is yes) or is it a majority who are impacted? Of course the law protects equally, whether one is affected or 100 million.
And on "I don't mean you, specifically, I mean anyone with that attitude." Okay, fair enough. But you are still completely misreading my "attitude."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
This is the attitude I was initally complaining about:
A man gets nailed by the DCMA for up to 10 years for modding his (and others) gaming console for money. Your response: Well, he *did* break the law-- that's what he gets.
So, sitting on the jury of this guys trial, you'd say "guilty" because he broke a bad law? I'd go for jury nullification, myself. That's the difference in our attitudes.
So, am I misreading your attitude? If so, sorry for wasting your time, because besides that, we appear to agree.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
And I do agree that, otherwise, we seem to be in violent agreement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
You're missing the point. If the guy was selling pirated games to the people whose consoles he modded, THEN I could see him being liable. But if he was just providing a service - the ability to solder surface mount technology - then I don't see how he can be liable for other people's violations of the law. Maybe if he encouraged them to pirate then perhaps "conspiracy to commit DRM circumvention"...
For what it's worth, I soft-modded my PlayStation 2. Soft mods enabled me to do many things that didn't involve pirating software. It's possible to turn the PS2 into a media player that can play videos from a thumb drive. It's also possible to get saves on and off the memory cards. I can even run my games off of a hard drive, reducing load times.
Same thing with the Xbox. I bet there are people who, to this day, are using an original Xbox not to play games (pirated or otherwise), but as a media server.
People assume all owners who chip their console pirate games, but maybe more people would chip their consoles if they knew the vast array of legal things you could do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
Most guns are NEVER used to kill anyone.
Get a grip.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
Yep. That's all I use my hard-modded original Xbox for. It's the only console I use, and I don't even play my legally-purchased games on it, anymore. I just don't have time to spend on gaming now, but I do listen to music or sit down for an hour or two to watch a movie sometimes, and it's nice to have access to my whole library through an easily-browsed, indexed, and "eye-candied" media-streaming client. It is impossible to purchase a media product with anywhere near the diversity and ease of use as a modded Xbox with XBMC. If it dies, I'll buy another old Xbox to mod, and I won't feel bad about messing with MY hardware.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
One reason someone is liable is because the act itself was made illegal. There's no need to utilize aiding/abetting and conspiracy laws. Often when a otherwise harmless act is so closely, exclusively or so commonly related to another act that is to be regulated the corresponding act become regulated as well. Aiding and conspiracy laws are designed to regulate conduct with is in furternce of other illegal acts but is so differing in the ways it can be done that it can't be made illegal by itself. The overwhelmingly common reason that consoles are modified is to circumvent DRM systems. Since there was a desire to prevent the circumvention, the common means of doing so was also regulated.
Your argument can't realistically be against "how" such a law can exist, but WHETHER it should. Which, in this instance, should include whether circumvention itself should be illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yeah, but c'mon...
You know, if I could get a gov't monopoly so that I was the only one allowed to fix cars, I think I could get rich with little actual "hard work".
Your argument is full of unsupportable assumptions.
Well then, why don't you just point point them out along with your evidence?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grrr
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Xbox mod --> xbox 360
One of the latest updates to the 360 is the ability to copy the game to your HD.
Its been said here many times competition fosters inovation. Of course to the majority who read this site its just basically preaching to the choir
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Xbox mod --> xbox 360
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Innovation hell its called a competitive market, where's the FTC talking about artificial limiting competition now?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Something is very strange here
2) dept homeland security, immigration and customes enforcement branch arrests the guy for "breaching the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998"
3) Prosecutor says it could carry "a maximum 10-year prison term"
What does this have to do with security? And whose security are they protecting? Does this mean he is a terrorist?
What does this have to do with immigration or customs? Is possesion of mod chips a crime?
This whole thing is rather strange.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Something is very strange here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Something is very strange here
Not at all. Rather, this is what should be expected in a corporatocracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Makes no sense
I whole heartedly agree that modding a console in any way should NOT be illegal. Here's an idea, instead of going after the modder, how about you go after the companies that sell the modification tools?? You're going after the middleman which makes no sense.
I.Company selling modding tools
II.Guy buys tools to mod
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Makes no sense
II.Guy buys tools to mod"
One problem. Company selling modding tools uses ads like "Steal all the games you want" "copy your friends games for free!". It goes back to intent. They aren't just selling pieces, they are cooperating in the theft / infringement of software services.
Gun dealers don't have signs out front that say "kill your pesky neighbor today!" and "Make your next drug transaction safer!", do they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Makes no sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Makes no sense
Gun dealers don't have signs out front that say "kill your pesky neighbor today!" and "Make your next drug transaction safer!", do they?
Ummm, I think your post is moronic in that I have never seen an advertisement such as what you posted here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Makes no sense
FYI
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Makes no sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Contributory infringement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That would be really funny since he's the one who signed it into law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps it's no bad thing...
No, what is needed is for someone - preferably a sympathetic defendant, but anyone will do - to be found guilty and sentenced, preferably to jail time, so the case can be appealed and a judicial ruling made on the constitutionality of the law. If it makes its way to the Supreme Court, so much the better. I'm sure the EFF and ACLU are just waiting for it to happen, and I'm equally sure that the sponsors of the law are dreading the day. So, do your duty, Prosecutor Krause. You have the proof - don't let this Crippen get away with it on some lame plea bargain. Shoulders back, chin up, don't weaken - press on to a verdict no matter what people say. Ram the reality of the DMCA into the face of every household in Middle America that owns a region-free DVD player, or any kind of open-source DVD viewing software. I can't wait to see the fallout when the implications finally sink in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What constitutes a mod?
Admittedly I am not a law-speaking person but at what point is a console modded?
What is the definition of console? What items are in scope for this judgement?
Is my console modded ‘cos I dropped it and it’s got a cracked facia, or is it modded ‘cos I added some lights?
Should I be concerned that I have circumvented paying for additional stuff from Microsoft by taking parts out of broken consoles and repairing others with them, should my garbage man be worried that if he crushes an old console he is now a modder too?
Should I be concerned that I modded my console to include built in wireless?
A popcorn eating public need to know
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What constitutes a mod?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
modification of console by adding "modchip"
as:
modification of "modchip" by adding console as "addon" ... Would it be legal or is also not allowed ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
modded xbox
I would contend that console innovation is driven by the modding community. Most of the features created by the modding community became features of the retail version of the subsequent system.
The questions people should be asking are:
1) Why did the neighbor turn him in? There isn't enough info about the initial snitch.
2) Why did ICE respond? Does the agency not have enough to do? If so, cut the funding. If not, focus on security priorities. This isn't an issue with human, narcotics or weapons smuggling or importation of hazardous materials. There is no security risk to persons or property and no national security implication. Why get involved?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wake up and grow a pair people....
Our new president (at the Univ I work at, not the US Pres) had a great quote about his view of the role of university staff, "The role of the staff is to advance the university within existing rules and to lobby on behalf of the university to change the rules that make it difficult for the institution to achieve it's mission. The goal is not to constrain progress, but rather to facilitate it."
For the first time in many years I actually have a small glimmer of hope that things may actually get better around here (they are going to get worse first, but that's just life, we all deal with it). If only this attitude would catch on a little more, I mean it's not like our country was founded by individuals who rejected the heavy handed laws of the time or anything, right?
Oh wait, that's right we as a nation started out as a group of people who rejected the laws we didn't agree with and so we set out to make things better.... where oh where did we get so far off the mark?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if they dont want people doing this, they need to drop the price of games to $20-$30, $60 is rediculous. for $32.99 i can get FIFTY BLANK XBOX360 DISCS!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All this
Since the beginning of time people have been trying to legal get that free lunch. That's what has caused all of the "ridiculous" laws. Now we all suffer.
BTW - I have no problem with making a backup copy of any intellectual property. its the en mass sale and distribution I have the issue with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
no cheats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
no cheats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]