# Kid arrested for modding xboxes.



## pixthor (Aug 11, 2009)

Look at this. A kid gets arrested for modding xboxes. Do you think he should be arrested? He can't control what people do with their consoles. He shouldn't be arrested. What do you think?


http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...rm-for-Playing-with-Video-Games-52386872.html


----------



## Aurali (Aug 11, 2009)

He was doing it so others COULD do more to the console, it's like saying that you don't go to "freeMP3forme.com" to get free music...


----------



## Blaze Cheetah (Aug 11, 2009)

Uhh, him not being able to control what others do isn't really an issue here, from what I'm seeing, HE'S the one who modded all those consoles for the purposes of Piracy.  He simply got caught, is all.

Personally, when it comes to stupid stuff like this, I'm generally of the opinion that you're not being punished for what you did, you're being punished for getting caught.  I don't remember if it was a fictional story, or a real society in the distant past, but that was done with children when it came to stuff like thievery.  Train 'em to get better by punishing them for getting caught.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 11, 2009)

No wonder why the economy sucks. $250 billion thats a lot x.x


----------



## Nick (Aug 11, 2009)

Years ago when I was young and...really stupid, in this case...I called up Best Buy and asked them if they had a mod chip for a ps2. 

*shrug*  The guy I talked to actually gave me the name of another employee who worked there who could do it lol


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

The charge on which this kid was arrested is bullshit.  Pure and simple bullshit.  (There goes my no-cussing streak...)  Also, the agency that arrested him has no jurisdiction: Immigration and Customs Enforcement?  What in the world does customizing hardware domestically have to do with immigration?  This is a chilling effect on an area of life that has nothing at all to do with copyright infringement or copyright at all.

It's akin to the Border Patrol raiding an automotive paint and body shop in Kansas City, and arresting the owner, for tinting the car windows of their customers -- at customer request -- beyond what the law permits for street-legal cars.  (Before anyone says this example should happen as well, not a single trailer queen needs to be street-legal.)

Edit:





Adrianfolf said:


> No wonder why the economy sucks. $250 billion thats a lot x.x



That's only what they allege.  Ask any of them to back it up with evidence, and they'll either dodge the question or give further guesses as evidence.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 11, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> That's only what they allege. Ask any of them to back it up with evidence, and they'll either dodge the question or give further guesses as evidence.


 
They did say counter fitting and piracy.

So that would include knock off goods which is actually a HUGE industry.  Like 5% of the world's industry is counterfit merch.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> They did say counter fitting and piracy.
> 
> So that would include knock off goods which is actually a HUGE industry.  Like 5% of the world's industry is counterfit merch.



But the allegations don't involve knock-offs or counterfeit items.  The allegations are that modifying the hardware of genuine, non-counterfeit systems is illegal.  I know it is, and that's half of what I called bullshit on.  The charge is two counts of violating a law that should never have been on the books in the first place.

According to the story, the Feds admitted that it wasn't even the suspect committing piracy, but rather his customers.  This is a whole lot different than burning disks and printing keys for something like Microsoft Windows, which *is* an act of counterfeiting and piracy.


----------



## CryoScales (Aug 11, 2009)

Its a little obvious people are cracking down on piracy now. With the massive amount of laws being created toward that. This case is just them trying to set an example and strike fear into the hearts of those "Who would do bad"


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 11, 2009)

Uh-huh, you're allowed to mod something you bought and own.
That's fucking stupid.

This is just as bad as Tiger Woods being fined for complaining about a tournament, which broke tournament rules and thus he was sued for complaining. AND LOST $3000.

This is retarded court ruling, companies can't make laws. You can't make a rule for your product, then if they break it they get fined/charged. If I make a product and tell people they're not allowed to use it, and they do, do I have the right to charge them? No.

If you buy a product you're allowed to do whatever you want with it, even turn it into a barbecue for fuck sake.


----------



## CryoScales (Aug 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Uh-huh, you're allowed to mod something you bought and own.
> That's fucking stupid.



Are you really surprised? I'm not. Most of the legal system is bullshit nowadays


----------



## Irreverent (Aug 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> If you buy a product you're allowed to do whatever you want with it, even turn it into a barbecue for fuck sake.



You should be able to, but the tangled web of intellectual property laws around the world just about makes this impossible.  And enforcement is an issue too.

Kid probably wouldn't have been charged if he didn't trip someones threshold for the quantity he was selling.  I smell a sting.


----------



## Darkwing (Aug 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Uh-huh, you're allowed to mod something you bought and own.
> That's fucking stupid.
> 
> This is just as bad as Tiger Woods being fined for complaining about a tournament, which broke tournament rules and thus he was sued for complaining. AND LOST $3000.
> ...



Believe it or not, I agree.

I mean, when you mod your 360 in any shape or form, you get banned from xbox live. Look, if I was Bill Gates, I would be fucking impressed, I would go up to the kid's house, ring his doorbell, shake his hand, give him a copy of TES: IV Oblivion, and tell him to mod the fuck out of it.

'Nuff said, granted, I am not really for piracy, but the kid can do anything he wants with his 360, the government has no right to get involved with it.



NewfDraggie said:


> companies can't make laws.



Bill Gates can control the weather, he is not just an owner of a company, he is God on Earth, seriously, he makes this world his bitch, and he doesn't fuck around when someone fucks with his products, and most importantly, he doesn't afraid of anything.



NewfDraggie said:


> If you buy a product you're allowed to do whatever you want with it, even turn it into a barbecue for fuck sake.



Nice idea, my 360 has been collecting dust for a while and I was trying to find a way to make some use out of it.

*Police busts in.*

*Arrest*


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> Its a little obvious people are cracking down on piracy now. With the massive amount of laws being created toward that. This case is just them trying to set an example and strike fear into the hearts of those "Who would do bad"



A showcase, yes, but this one is a bit on the flimsy side.

If this story picks up more public attention, then what it will do is drive a wedge between the ignorant masses who are told nothing more than "this is bad, and pirates are bad, thus he's a pirate, trust us" and the true hackers, tinkerers, and innovators who now are that much more scared to fix what's broke and make anything new.

Or, if the EFF get their way (which I hope they do), the lunacy of this law will be given the spotlight it needs.

Edit:


Irreverent said:


> Kid probably wouldn't have been charged if he didn't trip someones threshold for the quantity he was selling.  I smell a sting.



Given the agency performing the arrest, there's no doubt this was a sting.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

Doing it to your own console? Legal grey area, even in the USA. Doing it to others' for a profit? We start falling a bit on the grey scale. Still, it's up to the person owning the console what they do with the modification - Are they going to be downloading games online now? Are they going to run software like chat programs, photo viewers, emulators, etc? Seems to me that providing the means doesn't necessarily mean that these things are going to result in "IP theft".

On that note, how do you quantify the loss in profit because of piracy versus other factors such as the product being less successful than projected, the economy going down the tubes, etc? Are they expecting the entire install base of a console to be at least one sale, and then counting the leftover copies that didn't sell to a console owner as lost profit? How does the music industry come up with its figures?

*It is silly*.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Uh-huh, you're allowed to mod something you bought and own.
> That's fucking stupid.
> 
> This is just as bad as Tiger Woods being fined for complaining about a tournament, which broke tournament rules and thus he was sued for complaining. AND LOST $3000.
> ...



Yes but he was modding and gaining profit from it thats why he was arrested


----------



## Darkwing (Aug 11, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Yes but he was modding and gaining profit from it thats why he was arrested



So? People gain profit for repairing xbox's.


----------



## Takun (Aug 11, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Yes but he was modding and gaining profit from it thats why he was arrested



And that is retarded.  People can't choose who work on their property now?  Since fucking when?


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 11, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Yes but he was modding and gaining profit from it thats why he was arrested


So? That's up to the owners of their consoles to decide, if they want to pay somebody else to play their 360 is that illegal too?
Go buy some construction materials and pay somebody to build your fence.


----------



## Darkwing (Aug 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> So? That's up to the owners of their consoles to decide, if they want to pay somebody else to play their 360 is that illegal too?
> Go buy some construction materials and pay somebody to build your fence.



Yeah, but my jaw literally dropped when I saw how many years in prison he had to serve. 10 years! 10 fucking years!


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

Darkwing said:


> Yeah, but my jaw literally dropped when I saw how many years in prison he had to serve. 10 years! 10 fucking years!



Especially considering that by and large this is a civil matter.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 11, 2009)

Oh well I put in my 2 cents


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

And two days later, it went beyond local: http://www.eff.org/press/mentions/2009/8/5-0 links to http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...inder-that-most-console-hacks-are-illegal.ars


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

> *The intent is meaningless*. Even if you simply want to modify an Xbox to use as a media center, you're breaking the law, since you've given the system the ability to run unsigned code.





> If you've simply modified a console, it's a civil matter. For criminal charges to be brought against you, you had to have *willfully and purposefully modded the systems to play pirated games*, and profited from the work.



...?


----------



## pixthor (Aug 11, 2009)

I know. This is fucking bullshit. If I were to buy a product from a company. I would mod it. Like I did with my PSP. So I take it it's illegal to mod something you bought? Damn. Today's economy is the reason why people pirate games. It's because of those damn companies raise the prices so fucking high. People can't afford it. That's why people pirate games, and other things. The damn CEOs of those damn companies are too damn greedy. That's also the reason why people are getting laid off of their jobs. Because the companies can give their CEOs bonus checks. I hope all CEOs like that will die.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 11, 2009)

Takumi_L said:


> And that is retarded.  People can't choose who work on their property now?  Since fucking when?



He wasn't repairing it though. There is a differance in modding and repairing.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> He wasn't repairing it though. There is a differance in modding and repairing.



Yes, and normally modification is fine - Except in this case, people believe that modding = PIRACY OMFG YOU ARE STEALING I WILL CUT OFF YOUR HANDS

Back in the day (at least in this part of the world), modding used to also be about being able to play imported games that you legally own (and that your legally-purchased console won't play because of draconian region lockout). It was a side-effect that you were also able to play CD-R recorded games as well, and that exploded into a big market; Eventually, import chips were made that disabled the region protection, but not the copy protection code - In other words, legitimate modification.

However, consoles have evolved past just playing games. They can be used for media, for web browsing, and in some cases even for running other programs on them (like the PS3 and its Install Other OS option); Modding these consoles is pretty much exposing the power and potential behind the system that's hidden by the default interface and enable the consoles to do far more than their original purpose was. This is the point behind my modding my PSP.

However, it's still black and white to these people, and the DMCA allows them the authority to take these matters into their own hands and strike down people who enable this kind of thing. This is one of the major reasons why I'm very much against anything remotely similar to the DMCA being introduced into Canadian law, and I'm not alone - Every attempt to introduce the bill, even to rush it in, has been met with widespread resistance both by the public and by our MP's. I hope it continues to happen.


----------



## Aurali (Aug 11, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Stuff


True.. but.


> The Cal State Fullerton student was arrested Monday on federal charges that he illegally modified Xbox, Playstation, Wii and other video game consoles to *enable the machines to play pirated video games.*



If this is true. then lock the kid up. :|


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

Eli said:


> If this is true. then lock the kid up. :|



Yeah, but that's the way they spun it. Then again, there's no doubt that was the real reason behind it, but even still, go after the people who are doing the pirating, not the guy who unlocked the console. I know it's easier to "attack the problem at the root", but seriously, there are tutorials all over the internet for any console that can really be modified, so it's not really a sound tactic.


----------



## Aurali (Aug 11, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Yeah, but that's the way they spun it. Then again, there's no doubt that was the real reason behind it, but even still, go after the people who are doing the pirating, not the guy who unlocked the console. I know it's easier to "attack the problem at the root", but seriously, there are tutorials all over the internet for any console that can really be modified, so it's not really a sound tactic.



I'd rather have something like the canadians do. Make a tax on all storage media :3


----------



## Tycho (Aug 11, 2009)

More about big media kicking and screaming about someone cutting into their profit margins.  Video games, music, movies, whatever.  Cry some moar fags.

You people already make good money on your software.  You've got plenty of idiots who wouldn't know a mod chip from a potato chip out there to buy stuff legit (at obscene prices sometimes).  And your overall game quality stinks, so I can imagine someone who dropped 50 bucks on a fucking coaster getting a little miffed.  Quit making sequels, reskins and shovelware.

EDIT: Also, the more you tighten your grasp, the more water escapes between your fingers.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

Eli said:


> I'd rather have something like the canadians do. Make a tax on all storage media :3



Yeah, that's all well and good, but they're trying to bring in a DMCA-esque bill - Actually, one that would revoke our rights to record TV shows, and have backups of our media, which we currently pay for via those levis on blank media (regardless of what your intent is, which means they've gotten a lot of money out of that). They actually taxed MP3 players when they were first brought out, too.

There have been multiple attempts at extremely draconian stuff where even Fair Use wouldn't exist, all of which have been shot down both by parliament and by the public, and the most recent seeks to re-incorporate the MP3 player tax, as well as providing anti-circumvention laws, ISP liability, etc etc.


----------



## Aurali (Aug 11, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Yeah, that's all well and good, but they're trying to bring in a DMCA-esque bill - Actually, one that would revoke our rights to record TV shows, and have backups of our media, which we currently pay for via those levis on blank media (regardless of what your intent is, which means they've gotten a lot of money out of that). They actually taxed MP3 players when they were first brought out, too.
> 
> There have been multiple attempts at extremely draconian stuff where even Fair Use wouldn't exist, all of which have been shot down both by parliament and by the public, and the most recent seeks to re-incorporate the MP3 player tax, as well as providing anti-circumvention laws, ISP liability, etc etc.



:/ Do they not realize that people will find a way to pirate their stuff no matter what? Only the really dumb actually get caught... Way to take an actual solution and shoot it in the foot Music industry...


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

Eli said:


> If this is true. then lock the kid up. :|



By the logic of "illegal enabling," all mature women should be locked up because they're enabled to be illegal prostitutes.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

Eli said:


> :/ Do they not realize that people will find a way to pirate their stuff no matter what? Only the really dumb actually get caught... Way to take an actual solution and shoot it in the foot Music industry...



Well, the music industry is calling Canada's legal system a laughing stock because we've shot it down and delayed it so many times, and they're pressuring parliament to just go ahead and ratify it to fulfil our WIPO responsibility. Because IP is creativity and innovation, and giving "creators" and "innovators" draconian means to "protect" said IP certainly promotes creativity and innovation, yes sir. Just look at the USA and all the patent trolls currently lurking there. So creative!


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Well, the music industry is calling Canada's legal system a laughing stock because we've shot it down and delayed it so many times, and they're pressuring parliament to just go ahead and ratify it to fulfil our WIPO responsibility. Because IP is creativity and innovation, and giving "creators" and "innovators" draconian means to "protect" said IP certainly promotes creativity and innovation, yes sir. Just look at the USA and all the patent trolls currently lurking there. So creative!



Let's not forget the USA's other shining example of IP protection worthy of world emulation, the very forward-looking protection law ensuring a millennium of digital creativity and digital innovation, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. :V


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

That is precisely what this is and what I am referring to. :V IT IS TRULY AN AMAZING PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND MAKES ME FEEL SAFER KNOWING THAT IT EXISTS *:V*


----------



## Tycho (Aug 11, 2009)

Gives me an e-hard-on every time I violate the fucking thing.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

Ridding the world of evil pirate scum, one grandmother, child, single mom, and tinkerer at a time!

America!


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 11, 2009)

Lets not forget imposing their law on other countries.

There's court cases that occur because companies try to fine people in other countries (where they have no jurisdiction and there's no law against pirating). This is equivalent to a country that doesn't allow -any- internet trying to fine every other country that uses internet.


----------



## pixthor (Aug 11, 2009)

The only reason why we have these laws. Is because of the companies try to get bills like that passed. They only want your money is all. I fucking hate those degenerate greedy rich bastards.


----------



## CryoScales (Aug 11, 2009)

pixthor said:


> The only reason why we have these laws. Is because of the companies try to get bills like that passed. They only want your money is all. I fucking hate those degenerate greedy rich bastards.



We live in Captialism. It is their JOB to take money away from you. Are you really that surprised that they are this good at it?


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 11, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> We live in Captialism. It is their JOB to take money away from you. Are you really that surprised that they are this good at it?


Shhh, obviousness has to be learned, not told.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 11, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> We live in Captialism. It is their JOB to take money away from you. Are you really that surprised that they are this good at it?



The surprise comes in when you realize that the government, which is supposed to monitor and mediate this sort of thing, joins forces with these assholes because it further lines their pockets and they can spread lies about how this sort of thing is stifling creativity and their newest draconian law enhances freedom.

I feel my freedom being enhanced with every waking breath.


----------



## Tycho (Aug 11, 2009)

Runefox said:


> The surprise comes in when you realize that the government, which is supposed to monitor and mediate this sort of thing, joins forces with these assholes because it further lines their pockets and they can spread lies about how this sort of thing is stifling creativity and their newest draconian law enhances freedom.
> 
> I feel my freedom being enhanced with every waking breath.



FREEDOM IS SLAVERY


----------



## pixthor (Aug 11, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> We live in Captialism. It is their JOB to take money away from you. Are you really that surprised that they are this good at it?


I already knew that to begin with. I'm not stupid. lol


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

Tycho said:


> FREEDOM IS SLAVERY



The Ministry of Digital Liberty officially supports this quote.


----------



## Aurali (Aug 11, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> By the logic of "illegal enabling," all mature women should be locked up because they're enabled to be illegal prostitutes.



Dude seriously. Why in hell would someone pay someone else to set up their System to play illegal games if they weren't gonna play illegal games?


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 11, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> By the logic of "illegal enabling," all mature women should be locked up because they're enabled to be illegal prostitutes.


 
More like locking up pimps.


----------



## Carenath (Aug 11, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Well, the music industry is calling Canada's legal system a laughing stock because we've shot it down and delayed it so many times, and they're pressuring parliament to just go ahead and ratify it to fulfil our WIPO responsibility. Because IP is creativity and innovation, and giving "creators" and "innovators" draconian means to "protect" said IP certainly promotes creativity and innovation, yes sir. Just look at the USA and all the patent trolls currently lurking there. So creative!





ArielMT said:


> Let's not forget the USA's other shining example of IP protection worthy of world emulation, the very forward-looking protection law ensuring a millennium of digital creativity and digital innovation, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. :V


I used to look up to Europe for standing up to the US's various lobbying attempts at getting this act brought in over here... until France ruined it for everyone. I'm sure France (along with the UK) is the reason we have the European Union Copyright Directive. France has been pushing hard here, with the Telecom Package, to try and force ISPs to disconnect their users after 3 warnings, based solely on evidence provided by the copyright owners record companies. They brought it into their own country, no surprise I suppose considering that Sarkozy's wife has ties to Vivendi Universal. France is also why we have IPRED, the law which Sweden brought in under intense US pressure.

Lets not also forget the US arresting a Russian national when he arrived in the US, because he wrote a tool that broke the encryption on Adobe's eBook format... or the time they pressured the Norwegians to arrest and prosecute one of their own, for writing DeCSS back in the day.

All and all, I am for copyright and patents, they ensure that people who produce creative works can earn money from their efforts and it supports a whole industry that employs thousands of people. Likewise patents allow for small temporary monopolies on tangable products in analogue to copyright on intangable ones.

However, I am in strong disagreement with the DMCA and its analogues and the bullshit arguments used by their proponants. Copyright lasts far too long, and in most cases the product that is protected, has a shorter shelf-life. Rather than encouraging innovation and creativity it is supporting a stifled, monopolistic and stale market in which one or two companies milk the system for their benifit without providing significant benifit to the consumers who purchase and use the products. Case in point being companies like Microsoft, Electronic Arts and Universal Records.
Patents are all well and good, but they should NEVER apply to software or other "computer implemented inventions".

The whole system needs an overhaul.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

Eli said:


> Dude seriously. Why in hell would someone pay someone else to set up their System to play illegal games if they weren't gonna play illegal games?



Who's to say it wasn't to play backup copies instead?  Disks get scratched and ruined, including disks that aren't on the market anymore.  Of course, under the current law, it's not illegal to possess backup copies of any media, but because of DRM and the DMCA's anti-defeating clause, it's quite illegal to make them.  Ethically speaking, that's irrelevant, anyway.  It requires private citizens to do the job of the police for them, by second-guessing the purpose of any customer request.

Should I stop providing Internet service to PC gamers?  After all, we all know that the only thing PC gamers do is download pirated games.  What business do I have policing my customers, and what business does the law have requiring me to be a police officer working for free?

"Enabling" is among the lamest charges to bust anyone on, and laws to that effect shouldn't be on the books.  I mean Tommy Chong Goes To Jail lame.  That's my point.

Edit:

@AshleyAshes: =p

@Carenath:  Very good points, especially with the examples of DVD Jon and of Dmitry's arrest.  There's also the matter of the recent trial of the Pirate Bay founders in Sweden brought by pressure of a famous cartel of US film corporations.


----------



## Carenath (Aug 11, 2009)

Eli said:


> Dude seriously. Why in hell would someone pay someone else to set up their System to play illegal games if they weren't gonna play illegal games?


Because people hack/chip/mod their consoles for the same reason people hacked their iPhones. To allow them to do what they like with the hardware they own. I used a hack, to unlock my iPhone and let me use a local US carrier when I came over, because locking the phone was an unfair and unwarrented restriction on what I could do with hardware that I paid for.
I want to watch BluRay movies and DVDs on my PS3 from outside the region it's locked to, I will have to wait till a suitable mod-chip is released to allow me to do this. Why should I be branded a pirate for this?


----------



## Aurali (Aug 11, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> Who's to say it wasn't to play backup copies instead?  Disks get scratched and ruined, including disks that aren't on the market anymore.  Of course, under the current law, it's not illegal to possess backup copies of any media, but because of DRM and the DMCA's anti-defeating clause, it's quite illegal to make them.  Ethically speaking, that's irrelevant, anyway.  It requires private citizens to do the job of the police for them, by second-guessing the purpose of any customer request.


 I really doubt he was advertising it as a backup service...




> Should I stop providing Internet service to PC gamers?  After all, we all know that the only thing PC gamers do is download pirated games.


 This example is holey at best... 



Carenath said:


> Because people hack/chip/mod their consoles for the same reason people hacked their iPhones. To allow them to do what they like with the hardware they own. I used a hack, to unlock my iPhone and let me use a local US carrier when I came over, because locking the phone was an unfair and unwarrented restriction on what I could do with hardware that I paid for.


 See what I said to Runefox. There is mods out there that will unlock extended content without letting people use pirated games (homebrew market is FULL of these)


----------



## CryoScales (Aug 11, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> Who's to say it wasn't to play backup copies instead?  Disks get scratched and ruined, including disks that aren't on the market anymore.



Amazon.com and Ebay are amazing utilities to find older games. 

Also I think this is why the 360 allows you to upload your games onto your harddrive now. Both because of reduced load time and reduced wear on your games



Eli said:


> I really doubt he was advertising it as a backup service...



Yeah I agree with that. It is a little hard for people to believe that ALL his customers were just looking to play backed up games


----------



## Aquin (Aug 11, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> The charge on which this kid was arrested is bullshit.  Pure and simple bullshit.  (There goes my no-cussing streak...)  Also, the agency that arrested him has no jurisdiction: Immigration and Customs Enforcement?  What in the world does customizing hardware domestically have to do with immigration?  This is a chilling effect on an area of life that has nothing at all to do with copyright infringement or copyright at all.
> 
> It's akin to the Border Patrol raiding an automotive paint and body shop in Kansas City, and arresting the owner, for tinting the car windows of their customers -- at customer request -- beyond what the law permits for street-legal cars.  (Before anyone says this example should happen as well, not a single trailer queen needs to be street-legal.)
> 
> ...



I have to second this, and this is why im majoring in criminal justice. A. So i can prove to people how stupid it is now, and B. So i can at least -attempt- to fix it, as impossible a task as it may be.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

Also, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, from the Department of Homeland Security (according to Wired's coverage of the story), performed the arrest and search-and-seizure for a charge that had nothing to do with immigration, customs, or homeland security.



Eli said:


> I really doubt he was advertising it as a backup service...



Regardless of the odds, it's still speculation.  If he can show in court that his mods had immediately apparent uses other than clear violations of the law, then he shows that the charges are bogus, and he plants the seed of reasonable doubt.



Eli said:


> This example is holey at best...



Please feel free to nit-pick it, if you think it doesn't in the least support my basic point.  I am humble enough to admit being wrong if I am.



CryoScales said:


> Amazon.com or Ebay is an amazing utility to find older games.



Good point.



CryoScales said:


> Also I think this is why the 360 allows you to upload your games onto your harddrive now. Both because of reduced load time and reduced wear on your games



This is a compromise between the DMCA and Fair Use.  It is admittedly a step in the right direction, though.


----------



## Aurali (Aug 11, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> Regardless of the odds, it's still speculation.  If he can show in court that his mods had immediately apparent uses other than clear violations of the law, then he shows that the charges are bogus, and he plants the seed of reasonable doubt.


 If he had other uses for the modifications, then I'm sure he can clear his charges quite easily. I just want to know how he was getting his customers, if not word of mouth.





> Please feel free to nit-pick it, if you think it doesn't in the least support my basic point.  I am humble enough to admit being wrong if I am.


 I can't even examine how that relates to any of this hun. Can you elaborate your point?


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 11, 2009)

You want a sticky situation?

Try having modded consoles for anime and gaming events, where you're using HDDs in PS2's and Xbox's to avoid disk swapping and people stealing games, then inviting Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo to run Kiosks at your event and realizing what a sticky situation that could cause.


----------



## TheResult (Aug 11, 2009)

I only want to ask this.

How many of you _actually_ believe he wasn't doing this to pirate games, and that he isn't guilty, at all, law or not? How many people believe _he had no ill intent when doing this_? Honestly?


----------



## Jiyiki (Aug 11, 2009)

Who would by a modded xbox?  Its honestly not that hard.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

Eli said:


> If he had other uses for the modifications, then I'm sure he can clear his charges quite easily. I just want to know how he was getting his customers, if not word of mouth.



Only the trial can tell, but it was apparently enough to tip off a private anti-piracy organization.



Eli said:


> I can't even examine how that relates to any of this hun. Can you elaborate your point?



The kid was busted on a lame excuse for a charge, as legal as the charge is under the letter of the law.  The charge boils down to enabling a tangible item to be used in ways its manufacturer didn't intend.  We're supposed to assume (without any real evidence, only the seriousness of the charge) that the only practical benefits of enabling are illegal uses: that dreaded action piracy.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 11, 2009)

Jiyiki said:


> Who would by a modded xbox? Its honestly not that hard.


 
Lots of people arn't technicly inclined and would rather have someone else make the effort. Of course there are lots of people who would say 'Who would hire a mechanic to change their oil? It's not hard.' yet... Lots of people do it because automotive work isn't their forte. 

Hell, just opening an the Xbox requires a Torx tool set which most people don't have in their home tool box. So at first try they gotta go out to the hardware store and get a screwdriver with 6 blades that the majority of people have NEVER heard of.

For those of you who have said that maybe he wasn't doing it for piracy.  There is currently almost no homebrew software for teh Xbox 360.  This is due to the hypervisor.  While the optical drive can be modified to allow DVDR games to be played back, the games still have to have their code signed by Microsoft.  There is almost no 360 homebrew scene.


----------



## CryoScales (Aug 11, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Hell, just opening an the Xbox requires a Torx tool set which most people don't have in their home tool box. So at first try they gotta go out to the hardware store and get a screwdriver with 6 blades that the majority of people have NEVER heard of.



Most people simply softmod Xbox Originals. Or were you talking about the 360?


----------



## Aurali (Aug 11, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> Most people simply softmod Xbox Originals. Or were you talking about the 360?



Same with the wii.


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 11, 2009)

TheResult said:


> I only want to ask this.
> 
> How many of you _actually_ believe he wasn't doing this to pirate games, and that he isn't guilty, at all, law or not? How many people believe _he had no ill intent when doing this_? Honestly?


This wasn't for him, this wasn't ill intent. He's doing what people ask of him, it wasn't even his hardware but it was other people's stuff.

You can't charge somebody for modifying something they own.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> You can't charge somebody for modifying something they own.



The United States has a Federal law that states otherwise.


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 11, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> The United States has a Federal law that states otherwise.


Which is ridiculous, still. :V


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> You can't charge somebody for modifying something they own.


 
Modify a semiautomatic weapon that you own to be automatic. See how that flies in Canada, Newf. :V

Just because you own something, doesn't mean you can do whatever the hell you want with it.


It's also important to note that he *did* violate copyright law himself.

The Xbox 360 is modded by taking the optical drive and flashing on a hacked version of it's firmware onto the drive. This hacked firmware effectively bypasses the security features built into the drive, making it send positive responses even when pirated material is inserted into the drive.

The firmware has to be altered to make this happen, that is a copyright violation, especially as he is *selling* this copyright infringing firmware to his customers.


----------



## TheResult (Aug 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> This wasn't for him, this wasn't ill intent. He's doing what people ask of him, it wasn't even his hardware but it was other people's stuff.
> 
> You can't charge somebody for modifying something they own.



Yeah, you can. There are laws all up and down that keep you from doing that to _several_ things, not just gaming systems. You need permits to own or carry certain things, even if you made them yourself; you need permits and licenses to practice certain things, even if you learned to do it yourself; and there are just some things you're not allowed to do or have, period.

 I don't honestly think this kid was innocent, though, even if he didn't break a specific law; I think he modded these systems with the full intent of having them play pirated games, whether it was for himself or for other people. I would be willing to bet that's the jive that went down when he advertised it too. "Hey man, I can totally mod your XBox so you don't have to pay for games and you can play them for free." 

And I wouldn't be surprised if "And it'll only cost you _blank_, which I don't know about you, but it would save me a lot of money on games" was part of it, too.


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 11, 2009)

> Yeah, you can. There are laws all up and down that keep you from doing that to several things, not just gaming systems. You need permits to own or carry certain things, even if you made them yourself; you need permits and licenses to practice certain things, even if you learned to do it yourself; and there are just some things you're not allowed to do or have, period


Modding != creating :\


> Modify a semiautomatic weapon that you own to be automatic. See how that flies in Canada, Newf.


Firearms require a license that specifically denies such actions/mods and you have agree to it.
When you purchase a 360 you don't need a license, anybody can do it and your agreement is simply purchasing one. This means anybody can create laws just by creating retail products.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 12, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Modding != creating :\
> 
> Firearms require a license that specifically denies such actions/mods and you have agree to it.
> When you purchase a 360 you don't need a license



EULA. However, that's far from a legally-binding document.



> Because people hack/chip/mod their consoles for the same reason people hacked their iPhones.


TO LAUNCH TERROR ATTACKS ON AMERICA'S MOBILE PHONE TOWERS AND HACK INTO THE NUKE SILOS AND *BLOW UP THE WORLD*.

At least, that's what Apple would officially have you (and the government) think.



> If he had other uses for the modifications, then I'm sure he can clear his charges quite easily


Refer to a previous post, quoting the article:


> The intent is meaningless. Even if you simply want to modify an Xbox to use as a media center, you're breaking the law, since you've given the system the ability to run unsigned code.





> How many of you actually believe he wasn't doing this to pirate games


Doesn't matter. Charge is bunk. Law is bunk.


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 12, 2009)

EULA is LAW! If you break a pack you make with a company they can not only remove you from their services they can PUT YOU IN JAIL FOR TEN YEARS. *:V*


----------



## pixthor (Aug 12, 2009)

Yeah well, it all comes down to companies wanting your money.


----------



## lilEmber (Aug 12, 2009)

pixthor said:


> Yeah well, it all comes down to companies wanting your money.


We got that...before this thread existed, but I guess beating it in doesn't hurt.


----------



## Aurali (Aug 12, 2009)

pixthor said:


> Yeah well, it all comes down to companies wanting your money.



I also want your money. And I'm willing to trade goods and services for it!
:3


----------



## TwilightV (Aug 12, 2009)

Eli said:


> I also want your money. And I'm willing to trade goods and services for it!
> :3



*Slams a $20 Bill on table*

Make me a sandwich. >:3

EDIT: HOLY CRAP @ Link Of The Day!


----------



## CryoScales (Aug 12, 2009)

pixthor said:


> Yeah well, it all comes down to companies wanting your money.



I still find it surprising you didn't know that. All companies only want money, they don't care about specific people. If it makes more money in the long run they will do it. Most of the world now runs on a Capitalist economy and it is their job to make as much money as possible


----------



## Stratelier (Aug 12, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Uh-huh, you're allowed to mod something you bought and own.


No, they just void the warranty.  Because the manufacturer isn't going to be responsible for any damage caused by an end user, such as mods.



> If you buy a product you're allowed to do whatever you want with it, even turn it into a barbecue for fuck sake.


Physically, yes.  But the firmware is another matter.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 12, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> Physically, yes. But the firmware is another matter.


 
Yup.  As I said before and everyoen else ignored it.  The firmware is copyrighted and you can't sell it and you sure as hell can't alter it and sell it, which is what has to be done to mod the Xbox 360.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 12, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Yup.  As I said before and everyoen else ignored it.  The firmware is copyrighted and you can't sell it and you sure as hell can't alter it and sell it, which is what has to be done to mod the Xbox 360.



I guess I can't alter and sell anything that has a copyright on it.  Such as notes-littered and highlighter-ridden textbooks.

Where is the line drawn, and why?

The only difference here is the use of DRM code in the Xbox firmware.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 12, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> I guess I can't alter and sell anything that has a copyright on it. Such as notes-littered and highlighter-ridden textbooks.


 
Gonna guess you never looked at the part of the text book where it tells you not to photopcopy it, huh?


----------



## Carenath (Aug 12, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Just because you own something, doesn't mean you can do whatever the hell you want with it.


I think that's exactly the point they were trying to make, you *should* be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with what you own/



NewfDraggie said:


> EULA is LAW! If you break a pack you make with a company they can not only remove you from their services they can PUT YOU IN JAIL FOR TEN YEARS. *:V*


EULA's are covered under 'contract law' since the EULA is a contract between you and the copyright owner to use the copyrighted software under the their terms. The iffy part, is weither or not, such a contract is legally binding because of the circumstances around it.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 12, 2009)

Carenath said:


> I think that's exactly the point they were trying to make, you *should* be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with what you own


 
Except, as stated before, he's selling off modified copyrighted code with this goods.

It would be different if that wasn't the case.

Of course there really arn't many mods for any system that doesn't involve hacking up the bios firmware.  Even many modchips basicly bypass the systems firmware and act as the firmware themselves, using stolen code produced by the hardware manufacturer.

In this case there is no denying that he was selling modified copyrighted firmware code as part of his service.


----------



## TheResult (Aug 12, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Doesn't matter. Charge is bunk. Law is bunk.



That is not at all what I asked.
Answer is bunk.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 12, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Gonna guess you never looked at the part of the text book where it tells you not to photopcopy it, huh?



I thought we were discussing altering originals, not copying them.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 12, 2009)

See, that's fine, but even if he weren't selling it and were modifying it for his own purposes, he would still be just as guilty under the DMCA for circumvention of digital copy protection, which is bat-shit insane.



> That is not at all what I asked.


I realize this, which is why I said it doesn't matter. Even if he weren't doing it for piracy, he'd still have gotten arrested and charged for the same thing, not to mention that the entire reasoning behind the law and his arrest is flawed, since the whole idea is that intention has nothing to do with the charges - So in the case you were doing such a thing without any financial gain, you would also be charged similarly under the DMCA. So, too, are cited figures for losses flawed due to piracy for any market, because you can't ever really know how many of a group who do pirate would have purchased the game/software/music/video in the first place, nor do you have any figures on the number of people who did pirate who turned around and purchased the product afterwards.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 12, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> I thought we were discussing altering originals, not copying them.


 
It's software.  This scenario would be more akin to me taking a text book, altering, and then selling copies of it to students as the 'Special Ashley Edition'.  Copyright infringement up the wazoo.


----------



## TheResult (Aug 12, 2009)

Runefox said:


> I realize this, which is why I said it doesn't matter. Even if he weren't doing it for piracy..



I didn't ask if it mattered. It's obvious that it doesn't matter.
We're arguing over a forum. It _never_ mattered. Your answer didn't matter, either.

All I was asking was over principle, which matters as much as _anything else_ said here.


----------



## Carenath (Aug 12, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Except, as stated before, he's selling off modified copyrighted code with this goods.
> 
> It would be different if that wasn't the case.
> 
> ...


That in itself is debatable. Suppose I bought 10 iPhones for $500 each. Applied the jail-break and unlock hacks, which require you to patch the existing firmware on the device, charged $25 for the service, and sold the now modified phones for $525, making a $25 profit on each phone. But I am only charging for the phone, and the actual unlocking procedure, not the unlocking software itself which is free to download online, as is the existing device firmware.

The difference between this, and me doing the same thing with a PS3.. the PS3 is now enabled to play pirated games, so although by your measure, I'm breaking the law by hacking my own iPhone to bypass the SIM Lock, yet what I have done, isnt illegal and wont be cracked down on. But if I was to modify consoles for friends, or sell pre-modified units, I'll end up like this guy.

The issue here, isnt that the guy was 'selling' patched firmware (software piracy) it was that he bypassed the copyright-protection measures employed by the consoles which is a violation of the DMCA. The DMCA and this protection of copyright-protection measures, is what Runefox, ArielMT and myself have the issues with, because they take away the rights you would otherwise have under Fair Use and existing copyright law.



AshleyAshes said:


> It's software.  This scenario would be more akin to me taking a text book, altering, and then selling copies of it to students as the 'Special Ashley Edition'.  Copyright infringement up the wazoo.


No, it would be more like, you buying a bunch of text-books, adding in a few pages of notes for students, and then reselling them to students for slightly more than you paid for.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 12, 2009)

Carenath said:


> No, it would be more like, you buying a bunch of text-books, adding in a few pages of notes for students, and then reselling them to students for slightly more than you paid for.


 
Yeah, still copyright infringement.  You've taken a work, have modified it and are selling it on your own as a seperate product for profit.

Same deal, you can't buy 10 000 copies of The Phantom Menace, replace them with copies of The Phantom Edit (A version of the movie which tries to 'fix' the film by removing things like Jar Jar and changing the editing of the film) and do it legally.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 12, 2009)

Where's the line between tangible hardware (which isn't protected by copyright law) and intangible content (which is)?

Now where *should* that line be, and why?

Finally, forget legality or lack thereof for a moment.  Regardless of any circumstances, it's clear that the law the kid is charged with breaking is actually on the books.  Explain why it's moral or immoral to modify your own hardware in certain ways, and why it's moral or immoral to modify someone else's hardware -- at the owner's request -- in certain ways.  The answers tie directly into whether the law broken is a just or unjust law.


----------



## hitokage (Aug 12, 2009)

Eli said:


> I'd rather have something like the canadians do. Make a tax on all storage media :3


We do have one, but computer media is excluded. It's built into the price, which is why most people in the U.S. don't know about it. So CD-Rs sold for your PC - no added tax, but CD-R sold for music (i.e. for a CD recorder that only handles audio) - added tax.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 12, 2009)

hitokage said:


> We do have one, but computer media is excluded. It's built into the price, which is why most people in the U.S. don't know about it. *So CD-Rs sold for your PC - no added tax, but CD-R sold for music (i.e. for a CD recorder that only handles audio) - added tax.*


Actually, this is incorrect; Any CD-R/DVD-R or other recordable media has the added tax, since there isn't any distinction of purpose and CD-R's that only hold audio data or just plain data do not exist.


----------



## Stratelier (Aug 12, 2009)

> Same deal, you can't buy 10 000 copies of The Phantom Menace, replace them with copies of The Phantom Edit (A version of the movie which tries to 'fix' the film by removing things like Jar Jar and changing the editing of the film) and do it legally.


CleanFlicks got shut down in 2006 for the exact same reason, despite that they nonetheless purchased a legal copy of the original movie for every edited version they turned out.



Carenath said:


> I think that's exactly the point they were trying to make, you *should* be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with what you own/


At the risk of sounding like a former president, that depends on exactly what the "what" is.

It's hard to find a good analogy for video games and their hardware, but consider this:

When you buy a novel from a bookstore, exactly WHAT do you own?

You own _the book_.  You can do whatever you want with it.  You can make notes in it, highlight or dog-ear pages, you could mark out offensive language (if there is any), rip out nonessential advertising, heck even burn it.  What you do with that _book_ is up to you.  You do not, however, own the words that are printed within its pages.  You do not own the setting, the plot, or the characters that comprise the novel.  Those still belong to the author who created them, and nobody would argue the matter.

You purchased the _book_, you did not purchase the _story_ inside of it.  If you make edits to that book in ways that change the interpretation of the _story_, then you are essentially changing the story itself, and infringing on the author's rights by creating a derivative work from their original.

Analogue back to hardware/software.  If you're hacking the firmware, the machine's very programming, that programming is the property of another owner and you are meddling in it without their permission.  Even when it's only in trivial ways, even if your changes are beneficial to the end user, you're still infringing.

Homebrew can be a dangerous game because of what it takes to actually create a homebrew environment.  If you want to legitimately write games for the console, you've got to pay your respects first. 

Pun intended, sadly.


----------



## hitokage (Aug 12, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Actually, this is incorrect; Any CD-R/DVD-R or other recordable media has the added tax, since there isn't any distinction of purpose and CD-R's that only hold audio data or just plain data do not exist.


While it is true that the media will hold either music/audio or computer data, there are discs *sold specifically for the purpose* of recording audio or video and those are what are taxed. In other words if they are taxed or not depends on if they were sold specifically to record music or for general computer use. Music is covered under the Audio Home Recording Act - see here, Specifically Â§1001(4). As far as DVDs I'm not sure the specifics at the moment, but is very likely a similar situation.


----------



## Lazydabear (Aug 13, 2009)

I will tell you a story some jerks on Xbox Live I was playing with, these gentlemen brag about how intelligent they are and acted very immature one of them brag they played a Pirated copy of Gears of War and bragging about it on Xbox live where everyone plays you don't know who they are.


----------



## Skittle (Aug 13, 2009)

Does this mean I will go to jail if someone tips them I has teh HBC on my Wii?

Wtf. It is bullshit. A lot of people do this mod so they can play back-ups too. I know a couple people who copy games and videos they buy not to illegally sell them but in the event they lose the original somehow, they have a back-up so they don't have to spend up to $60 on a game they already had.

Oh wait, then the game companies are losing monies! OH NOOOOOOOOES


----------



## Stratelier (Aug 13, 2009)

skittle said:


> Does this mean I will go to jail if someone tips them I has teh HBC on my Wii?


In essence, yes, not because of the HBC itself, but because of what you had to do to make your console capable of it.

Almost like the handling of child pornography, where it's not that the photo itself is criminal, it's that the photo means that X probably, actually happened (and that's what is criminal).



> Wtf. It is bullshit. A lot of people do this mod so they can play back-ups too. I know a couple people who copy games and videos they buy not to illegally sell them but in the event they lose the original somehow, they have a back-up so they don't have to spend up to $60 on a game they already had.



You may have missed that part of your EULAs specifically citing that they do not authorize "back-up" copies of any software.  Just because you don't like it doesn't make it bullshit.

Back-up copies are copyright infringement (by definition), the key difference being that they are commonly considered fair use.  "Fair Use" doesn't mean it's not an infringement, in fact it's quite the opposite, it means that it *is* an infringement *but* it's done for a good enough reason that there is no sense for punishing it.  Whether or not one can wager a "fair use" defense is evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on the circumstances surrounding the copy or infringement.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 13, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> You may have missed that part of your EULAs specifically citing that they do not authorize "back-up" copies of any software.  Just because you don't like it doesn't make it bullshit.
> 
> Back-up copies are copyright infringement (by definition), the key difference being that they are commonly considered fair use.  "Fair Use" doesn't mean it's not an infringement, in fact it's quite the opposite, it means that it *is* an infringement *but* it's done for a good enough reason that there is no sense for punishing it.  Whether or not one can wager a "fair use" defense is evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on the circumstances surrounding the copy or infringement.



But 17 USC 117 very explicitly authorizes the existence of back-up copies of computer programs, including firmware and game disks/cartridges, and that such copies for the purpose of back-up is not an infringement of copyright, no matter what any EULA claims.

It's 17 USC 1201 that's bullshit.  This is the section of Federal law that defines cracking DRM systems as a crime.  What this means is that, although we have the *right* to make back-up copies, we don't have the right to *exercise* our right under the law.


----------



## CryoScales (Aug 13, 2009)

skittle said:


> Oh wait, then the game companies are losing monies! OH NOOOOOOOOES



I noticed a LOT of people here are trying to defend the person's actions for selling modded xbox consoles but I mean come on. Piracy does have drawbacks.

If you look at the PSP, people barely even buy games for it now. This was a problem for Sony Bend. Who created Resistance Retribution. Apparently a kickass game, that was also one of the more pirated games on the PSP. There were way more people playing online then there were sold copies (the game apparently did not break even with it's budget). Piracy buys more PSPs, but it doesn't buy more games and as such the developer, Sony Bend is facing liquidation.

Game companies with more money means more possibilities for more games. If we don't actually buy what they sell, they are that much less motivated to continue a specific franchise.

Its a simple fact that game companies are capitalist, they live off money. But if they don't get enough money it reduces the potential to make more games. I'll give you an example. Say you live next to a neighbor and he has a business selling apples. So you hop his fence and steal some of his apples every so often. Then you get it into your head to share your apples with your friends. You prevent your neighbor from selling his apples and soon he goes out of business. Sure the kid didn't deserve to spend ten years in prison. But this is all to set an example so people actually reduce the amount of piracy they do.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 13, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> But 17 USC 117 very explicitly authorizes the existence of back-up copies of computer programs, including firmware and game disks/cartridges, and that such copies for the purpose of back-up is not an infringement of copyright, no matter what any EULA claims.


 
Yes but how many people make ligitimate 'backups'?  Certianly some do but not all.

I use HDDs in PS2s and Xboxs and dump lots of games on them, but all we have ligitimate copies of (Admittidly, not the import only titles, those I pirated the shit out of).  I do this mainly to let me have multiple games in one machine for gaming events and also to prevent theft of the far more valuable originals.  We keep the originals on site but kept away to prove that we ligitimately own the rights to the software.

However how many people are actually 'backing up' their games when they use 'backups'?  They're just torrenting stuff to get it for free.


----------



## Tycho (Aug 13, 2009)

You know what, the fact of the matter is that pirates and hackers are still in the fucking minority of the gamer demographic.  They're still raking in money hand over fist selling overpriced shite like Bioshock to retailers who overprice it even further (FIFTY FIVE BUCKS? Drop dead, motherfucker).

I'd stuff a 20 into Bay 12 Games' garter before I'd give it to EA and Electronics Boutique or whatever for a game with less gameplay, less replay value, obscene hardware requirements, lousy story, bugs and glitches out the wazoo, tired and unoriginal gameplay mechanics and invasive/absurd DRM measures.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 13, 2009)

Tycho said:


> You know what, the fact of the matter is that pirates and hackers are still in the fucking minority of the gamer demographic. They're still raking in money hand over fist selling overpriced shite like Bioshock to retailers who overprice it even further (FIFTY FIVE BUCKS? Drop dead, motherfucker).
> 
> I'd stuff a 20 into Bay 12 Games' garter before I'd give it to EA and Electronics Boutique or whatever for a game with less gameplay, less replay value, obscene hardware requirements, lousy story, bugs and glitches out the wazoo, tired and unoriginal gameplay mechanics and invasive/absurd DRM measures.


 
Or you could wait 3-4 months untill the game dropsto 35%-50% of it's original price. Less if you get it used. It's not the company's fault that the consumers are stupid with their money, it's the consumer's fault.

If someone can produce, with what you see as undervalued, overpriced software, and charge full price for it, AND MAKE MONEY doing that, well hell, that's just capitalisim and consumerism working.


----------



## Tycho (Aug 13, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Or you could wait 3-4 months untill the game dropsto 35%-50% of it's original price. Less if you get it used. It's not the company's fault that the consumers are stupid with their money, it's the consumer's fault.
> 
> If someone can produce, with what you see as undervalued, overpriced software, and charge full price for it, AND MAKE MONEY doing that, well hell, that's just capitalisim and consumerism working.



Fucking STUPID consumers.

Anyone who tries to say that consumers as a whole aren't stupid really needs to look at movie, TV show, literature and video game trends and progress.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 13, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Yes but how many people make ligitimate 'backups'?  Certianly some do but not all.



Irrelevant.

Prosecuting those who produce copies in violation of another's rights under the law is one thing.  But this kid wasn't even accused of that.  The Feds even admitted as much.  Prosecuting those who *enable* abilities which can have realistic purposes legal and otherwise, however, is something else entirely.

The fact that some use this technology to commit perfectly legal acts, completely regardless of how many use it to commit illegal acts, makes all the difference.

The DMCA is a bad law precisely because it criminalizes what the very same law (US copyright law) expressly says should be perfectly legal, along with acts that were already defined in at least one previous act (Copyright Act of 1976) as crimes.



AshleyAshes said:


> I use HDDs in PS2s and Xboxs and dump lots of games on them, but all we have ligitimate copies of (Admittidly, not the import only titles, those I pirated the shit out of).  I do this mainly to let me have multiple games in one machine for gaming events and also to prevent theft of the far more valuable originals.  We keep the originals on site but kept away to prove that we ligitimately own the rights to the software.



There goes the argument that I should have to buy used copies of my games if my copies should be damaged.  Also, what if the hard drive I back my games up to gives up the ghost?  Whoops, I can legally have only one backup, and both original and backup got toasted.  Tough luck, Ariel.  So sorry, now pay again for what you already own.



AshleyAshes said:


> However how many people are actually 'backing up' their games when they use 'backups'?  They're just torrenting stuff to get it for free.



Then prosecute *them*, not this kid.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 13, 2009)

Tycho said:


> Fucking STUPID consumers.
> 
> Anyone who tries to say that consumers as a whole aren't stupid really needs to look at movie, TV show, literature and video game trends and progress.


 
Good.  We're agreed.  It's the *gamers* who are wrong.


----------



## RocketxKnighter (Aug 13, 2009)

I'm glad I sold my 360 (yes it was modded) this is piracy so you will get into bullshit for this if your caught and what is even more bullshit is that people have to get charged a fuck load of money of this. I hate microsoft and their xbox 360 its nothing but bullshit I feel sorry for people who own a 360 its a scam for microsoft to take more money from you for paying not only the Xbox live service is the problem, same they are also showing us a bunch of crap like movies, DLC, that crappy xbox live experience shit.

But the biggest problem with that greedy company is if you plan to keep your xbox 360 longer than your warrenty or if it needs to be sent in for repair obviously you will have to pay if your warrenty has expired but this means you have to wait a stupid amount of days for the crappy console to return so we can get the red ring of death in the next day.

my friend has been moding consoles for years and he hasn't been caught and he does a very good job to. But come on man if someone buys a console mods it and plays copied games on it then that shouldn't be an arrestable offense its how the world should be unless your dealing copied games ok I can see thats a bad thing but I still say this utter bullshit the guy doesn't deserve this imo, he should be spared!

btw if you do get caught with a modded console you can get banned from xbox live I think this happened to my previous live account before but I never got arrested, I only play PC live games like SFVI and Team fortress 2 thats all I need.


----------



## Tycho (Aug 13, 2009)

Oh, they don't go after ALL the pirates this hard, they pick a few out every now and then to make examples of with obscene lawsuits.  "GRRR.  WE'RE BIG AND WE HAVE LAWYERS, WE'LL DESTROY YOUR LIFE!"


----------



## Takun (Aug 13, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> *Or you could wait 3-4 months untill the game dropsto 35%-50%* of it's original price. Less if you get it used. It's not the company's fault that the consumers are stupid with their money, it's the consumer's fault.
> 
> If someone can produce, with what you see as undervalued, overpriced software, and charge full price for it, AND MAKE MONEY doing that, well hell, that's just capitalisim and consumerism working.



A few games do that, certainly not all.


----------



## Lazydabear (Aug 13, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> I noticed a LOT of people here are trying to defend the person's actions for selling modded xbox consoles but I mean come on. Piracy does have drawbacks.
> 
> If you look at the PSP, people barely even buy games for it now. This was a problem for Sony Bend. Who created Resistance Retribution. Apparently a kickass game, that was also one of the more pirated games on the PSP. There were way more people playing online then there were sold copies (the game apparently did not break even with it's budget). Piracy buys more PSPs, but it doesn't buy more games and as such the developer, Sony Bend is facing liquidation.
> 
> ...


 

Blizzard had that same problem with Diablio 1 and 2 and they started cracking down on Priacy gamers and after that they made a lot of money untill they merg with another game company and became Activision Blizzard.


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 13, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> Ridding the world of evil pirate scum, one grandmother, child, single mom, and tinkerer at a time!
> 
> America!



You forgot to add corpses to the list. Yes, the RIAA have tried suing dead people before.


----------



## CryoScales (Aug 13, 2009)

Takumi_L said:


> A few games do that, certainly not all.



*COUGH*HALO3COD4*COUGH*


----------



## Stratelier (Aug 13, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> It's 17 USC 1201 that's bullshit.  This is the section of Federal law that defines cracking DRM systems as a crime.  What this means is that, although we have the *right* to make back-up copies, we don't have the right to *exercise* our right under the law.


Was that added by the DMCA?  Yeah, it's pretty silly, but like it or not until it's challenged or overturned in court, rules are rules. 



			
				CryoScales said:
			
		

> Piracy buys more PSPs, but it doesn't buy more games...


And Sony, like Microsoft, makes a habit of selling their hardware below cost.



> We keep the originals on site but kept away to prove that we ligitimately own the rights to the software...


... in its _complete and unaltered_ form (e.g: the game disc).


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 13, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> Was that added by the DMCA?  Yeah, it's pretty silly, but like it or not until it's challenged or overturned in court, rules are rules.



Yup, it was, and it is silly.  The EFF isn't the only organization trying to challenge it, though.

Edit: For completeness, Chapters 12 and 13 in their entirety were added to Title 17 of the US Code by the DMCA, along with other amendments to that title.


----------

