Slashdot Mirror
Sony Crushes UK PS2 Mod Chip Developers
SukebePanda! writes "UK mod chip developer Channel
Techonology finally had their day in court with Sony, and lost big time. This judgement could have far reaching implications, with the judge implying that even playing original imports was illegal. This
also wipes out any chances of seeing home brewed software on the Playstation 2 anytime soon, as well. "
That's right, Sony... alienate those customers of yours who are most enthusiastic about your product... that'll make you irrelevant faster than anything else.
So why is PS2 letting us fiddle with Linux based PS2's if no one is allowed to modify the normal PS2? Who is it hurting if I purchase one extra game from overseas and play it with a mod chip attached to my US PS2? Oh that's right, it makes baby DMCA cry.
What's worst is when big business manages to keep the balance, stopping the general public from using their fair rights without causing much of an outcry. It helps if they overshoot, this way people realize what is taken away from them and how they are milked by separating the world into regions for consumers while opening it for the big players.
. . . guess I just won't buy one. Or any other piece of hardware, software, or media made by Sony.
Another proud carrier of the $rtbl flag
The technical reason for the decision being based upon the fact that a game that is run without permission makes a copy of copyright material in memory, this copy is 'infringing' because it is an unauthorized copy argued Sony. Basically, this 'controversial' statement made it illegal to play games purchased from abroad.
Nice try, but unlike United Kingdom copyright law, United States copyright law would consider this a fair use of the copyrighted work. According to 17 USC 117:
This paragraph was passed specifically to reject copyright owners' "Copying the program into RAM is infringing; therefore, EULAs are binding" argument.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I'm not too familiar with how the mod chip works on the PS2 -- I have a mod chip on my original PS1.
Does the mod chip on the PS2 have any effect on the DVD region code? Are you able to play DVD's from different regions than the one for which the PS2 was set? If so, then I'm sure it would have far-reaching implications for the mod chip developers.
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
but when does the linux kit arrive to ps2 in uk?
I can't see this as being good for PS2 sales - fortunately they've sold a lot of consoles already - as some customers enjoy being able to play games that were not designed for their world region, or which did not have enough of an appeal in a specific market to warrant a full distribution. A sad day for nipponophile PS2 gamers.
Reminder: find a new sig
They recently had my friend's dorm-connection yanked by the power's that be because he downloaded a Michael Jackson song from a file sharing network. He already owned the CD.
Sony: A finger in every pie, and an entire fist up the arsehole of the consumer.
Why can't I legally play an imported PS2 game (which I probably paid a goodly premium for) on a modded PS2? I've voided my warranty if I mod the PS2, Sony still gets their money from the original software sale, the reseller gets their money from the sale to me, and I get to try to decipher the hirigana and kanjii in a vain attempt to understand just what the heck it is I've bought. Seems like everyone gets what they want in this circumstance.
Now, modding my PS2 to play CD-R games is a bit of a different matter. Most of the games are coming out on DVDs these days, anyways, so I don't know how big of an impact this would have.
I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
This is too bad, another victory against democracy.
PayStation 2?
or PainStation 2?
The technical reason for the decision being based upon the fact that a game that is run without permission makes a copy of copyright material in memory, this copy is 'infringing' because it is an unauthorized copy argued Sony.
By this logic, then, we're not even allowed to make a physical backup CD of software we legally bought, since there will be a copy in memory whenever it's run on the computer/console/etc.
The NEO hex code has been on the internet for months. It's not the latest NEO4 code, (I think it's the NEO2), but couldn't some company in Hong Kong use this code and work on it to get a better chip?
Can't they just relocate to a more libral country?
nohup rm -rf ~/. >& zen &
Modchips and Homebrew will never die, this is just a minor setback.
-motardo
I spoke w/ a few Sony representatives about their products (Sepcifically a PS2) a few months back. Officially - to them, their stance was once you put a mod chip in their product, it is no longer a Sony product. This being the case, I don't understand what their problem is :) I am still going to buy Sony licensed games for my now non-Sony product ;)
all my ps2 does now is play dvds.
I had a mod chip in it, but it would only play ps1 backups and ps2 and ps1 original CDs.
One day games just stopped working. Dvds will still play. I took the mod chip out but no luck.
What's going on here?
This actually sounds quite bad for importing DVDs. It states that imported PS2 games are illegal to play in the UK. It claims this as it makes an unauthorised copy of the game in memory. I'm sure that if you really wanted this could be stretched to include DVDs (as the article says). As IANAL, I am wondering if this ruling could be taken as legal precedent? Hopefully this bit can be overturned soon.
Another thing I'm wondering about it copying data to memory can be considered "illegal copying". If this is the case for imported games, I do not see how this would make it "not illegal" (for lack of a better phrase) to load PS2 games of your home region (as it is still copying). As "copying" is an integral function of all consoles, I'm wondering what unexpected side-effects there will be. I think the whole thing is a minefield, and the sooner we get a knowledgable expert posting here the better. The whole thing about licensing only for a certain region bothers me - I really can't see why we're not allowed to play import games (or DVDs). OK, its their technology, but still there is "fair use". Hopefully the EU can check into this as well when it's doing its investigation of the legality of DVD regions.
It's a typical judgement for the UK courts to rule to the absolute letter in cases such as this. Problem is, the judges don't appear to have a firm grasp of the implications caused by these rulings. Most law has always been one step behind technology, but the problem we have now is that tech is a truly global market.
Marketing suits have been trying for years to stifle shopping internationally, in case people begin to realise that their countries are being screwed in comparison to others. This case affects games importing (because we aren't allowed to buy what we want say the suits) but DVDs as well (because it would absolutely *crush* the movie sector, say the suits) and anything else the marketing guys want to stifle. It's not like dealing contraband, it's off-the-shelf products.
My worry is that this trend will continue, even though it, in some cases, directly contravenes law. Here in the UK, our car prices are drastically higher than on the continent, and certain car manufacturers make it very difficult to buy your car abroad. This is despite the face the EU trade laws explicitely say otherwise. If companies are flauting the *law*, how exactly can we stop them?
Sony still gets their money from the original software sale
Sony of Japan Inc does. Sony of America Inc doesn't.
Most of the games are coming out on DVDs these days, anyways, so I don't know how big of an impact this would have.
Stripping away the movies helps shrink most games down to under 700 MB.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Okay the judge said that backups are legal and useful, but then said because backups can be distributed that piracy is the main concern. huh? I'm sure when that law was made that they knew that backups could lead to piracy, but at that time they decieded the rights of consumers where more important. Now I see a horrible shift as the rights of companys are outwieghing our rights.
I'm not saying Sony can't protect their assets, but at the same time by saying that I can't make a backup of my games/dvds/whatever they are saying that I can't protect mine.
It's not because these companies have a pathological hatred of software developers or are control freaks. It's simply about money.
Recently, Tesco, a UK retailer, lost a case in the European Court about importing "grey market" jeans - it's just the same. The jean manufacturers want to control the supply of products in Europe so they can control the price.
The suppliers - and lets face it there are only three big game machine makers - charge different prices for their games in different markets. Europeans and East Asians pay more than Americans.
Allowing Europeans to buy cheaper games and DVDs from abroad will depress profits.
Those who complain should face facts - they are arguing for a restriction on the 'rights' of capital. This is not freeing capitalism, it is controlling it by forcing capitalists to offer better services at the expoense of reduced profits.
And it's about time...
If I buy a PS2 game (or CD, DVD, whatever), and it is illegal for me to make a backup copy, shouldn't I be allowed to get the disc replaced for free if/when it becomes scratched to the point of being unusable?
After all, if I buy a license for a piece of software, I retain the rights use that software for an unlimited amount of time.
According to this link, Australia is moving in the opposite direction. No, it isn't about mod chips -- it is about the legality of region encoding DVDs. This would have interesting implications as legislators were talking about "zoned" DVD players being illegal. I don't know how it turned out.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
[blockquote]DAMAGES: £15,000 (on the basis of supplied upgrades)[/quote]
That's about $21,000 - if a game costs about $40 then they are assuming only 500 people copied games and used the Neo chip to play them? That sounds very low - it's a popular mod chip. I would have expected the damaged to run into millions if Sony won.
It is very sad to see them go, I was really looking forward to downloading and using all those ps2 games and use them with no swap :/
By this logic, then, we're not even allowed to make a physical backup CD of software we legally bought, since there will be a copy in memory whenever it's run on the computer/console/etc.
This precedent cannot extend to the United States. See also my earlier comment.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Why can't I legally play an imported PS2 game (which I probably paid a goodly premium for) on a modded PS2? I've voided my warranty if I mod the PS2,
If any of you actually bothered to read the article, you would see that the judge acknowledge that there were plenty of legal things this chip allowed you to do, but because it also allowed the illegal playing of pirated games this outweighed the good points and THAT IS WHY SONY WON THE CASE. RTFM!!!
The Messiah defeated the Copy-Protection mechanism, and this part of the design SPECIFICALLY was dealing with the use of backup material as a function. The judge acknowledged that indeed it may be useful to have a backup of software as allowed under the CDPA 1988, and there could possibly be cases of 'where necessary', but also the aspect of 'swapping' of backup disks between people would be uncontrollable, and damaging to Sony as nobody would obviously pay £25-45 for a game, therefore 'piracy' becomes the main factor for consideration above all other.
Therefore on this basis alone, Judge Jacob awarded the Summary Judgment to Sony
"...a game that is run without permission makes a copy of copyright material in memory, this copy is 'infringing' because it is an unauthorized..."
While I understand the intention behind this statement, isn't it flawed? This statement is given to explain why software licensed in one area is illegal when run in another.
IANAL, but as I see it the truth is this: The license agreement is a (supposedly) legally-binding contract that defines the conditions by which you use the material you've bought. If the license says you can only use it between noon and 3pm then that's what you should, in theory, do. So if a license says "This software is licensed for use in the UK only" then that's the only place the software is legal. Whether we like it or not, that's the law.
The judge's statement tries to find some alternative justification for what should just be a black-and-white case - the law says it's illegal to cross-region, end of story. What Jacob says implies that a non-permanent, volatile copy of data used solely during the active "life" of a media's playback is subject to copyright.
So - as an example - the "copy" of a CD's audio content as it passes from the disc to the speakers by means of decoding and amplification circuitry. Is that a copy of the music? It's as permanent as the data stored in RAM during the execution of software and is no more useful. You can't duplicate the game from the content of the PS's RAM; you'd be lucky to reconstruct all the data & program files from what passes through memory during an execution.
The law says it's wrong. Whether it's to our liking or not, it's black-and-white, as defined in the license. So why try to justify the decision in this way?
There are further-reaching consequences of this ruling, including those applying to other electronic media, that should be considered. The ruling may be right, but the wording is still important.
By this logic, then, we're not even allowed to make a physical backup CD of software we legally bought, since there will be a copy in memory whenever it's run on the computer/console/etc.
If any of you actually bothered to read the article, you would see that the judge acknowledged that there were plenty of legal things this chip allowed you to do, but because it also allowed the illegal playing of pirated games this outweighed the good points and THAT IS WHY SONY WON THE CASE. RTFM!!!
The Messiah defeated the Copy-Protection mechanism, and this part of the design SPECIFICALLY was dealing with the use of backup material as a function. The judge acknowledged that indeed it may be useful to have a backup of software as allowed under the CDPA 1988, and there could possibly be cases of 'where necessary', but also the aspect of 'swapping' of backup disks between people would be uncontrollable, and damaging to Sony as nobody would obviously pay £25-45 for a game, therefore 'piracy' becomes the main factor for consideration above all other.
Therefore on this basis alone, Judge Jacob awarded the Summary Judgment to Sony
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns9 99 91783
Stop, stop, stop. While I believe there are people who legitimately want to play Japanese games and backups using their mod chips, this isn't what the overwhelming majority of people intend to do with it. The real reason these devices are popular is because people want to play some mediocre game, but don't want to shell out $50 for it. Considering that Sony DOES make a profit on the console, mod chips are a great way to keep pumping the numbers of PS2s out there. MS has already tipped their hand with the HomeStation. It's not about games anymore, it's about whose hardware is in the most homes. If successful, they could end up driving PS2 sales down.
The technical reason for the decision being based upon the fact that a game that is run without permission makes a copy of copyright material in memory, this copy is 'infringing' because it is an unauthorized copy argued Sony.
Does anyone have a license agreement from a Sony game that specifically allows the "copy in memory"? I've certainly never seen that on other software license agreements. This is a great argument for not letting judges who know nothing about technology sit on tech cases, because it's too easy for companies to hoodwink them into believing something ridiculous.
A "copy" should be defined as something that someone else could take and use on another system, not the loading of the code into memory on the same system. By that argument, proxy servers and browser caches are illegal too.
Hmmm strange that this happens in the UK.
I could imagine that an american court ruled like this.
Why? Well here in Europe the majority of software/hardware producers go by the good spirit of "If you buy it's yours, if you modify/brake it it's your problem"
What is a PS/2 good for if can't modify it to my needs?
If enough people think like this Sony just cut it's own flesh...
I can't read minds. This to me looks like the Judge actually favours the rights of end consumers to use purchased goods any way they like. Granted the judgement in this case goes the other way, but the judge is hampered by existing laws and must rule as they say. This is an overly strict reading of the laws and most of us are cringing. I think that is what the judge wanted.
It looks like a T-ball setup for a great public outcry and movement to get the politicians off their buts and give back some rights to end users. Or maybe just a great appeal case to go up the judiciary path. The quicker this judge makes his ruling the quicker it gets up the appeal path.
I plan on moving a few times in the next few years (not just different cities, different continents) and I was thinking about this whole DVD/game console mess. Without mod chips it's impractical to invest in these devices.
What's the official line on this? Am I supposed to buy a new console for each continent?
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
Another thing I'm wondering about it copying data to memory can be considered "illegal copying".
I don't know about the UK, but in the USA, copying programs from a legit copy to RAM in order to run them is perfectly lawful. See my earlier comment.
Will I retire or break 10K?
it's funny how we have laws that provide for fair use and allow us to make back-up copies of software, CD's, DVD's, etc. but when it comes down to the courts actually upholding our right to do so, they typically fall towards the company that creates technology to prevent us from using these backups.
"yes, you have the right to make backups of Playstation games, but no, you do not have the right to play them since Sony has technology to prevent you from doing so."
seems like there really isn't any fair use anymore.
i'm wondering if i could purchase a Playstation CD and return it to the company that made it for a replacement in the event that it got scratched/damaged. has anyone done this? i mean, they say they don't want to let us make copies, but i should only have to pay for the game once. i'd be more than happy to pay for the replacement media and shipping. i'm just betting that they'd charge me $45 for a $50 game. now, what does that tell about how much the actual game is worth?
OK. So let me see how this thing works. I guess now Sony will be The Great Satan in the Slashdot Hivemind, right up to the point they release a cool game, at which point the Slashdot Hivemind will heartily recommend it.
Well, that's how it runs with other things...
And to think Slashdot portrays Bill Gates as the Borg!
"Information wants to be paid"
That seems to me like trying to outlaw a broadband connection on the grounds that it *could* be used for downloading pirated software. Or, hell...banning anything that may enable piracy: cd burners, hiew (and windasm, and softice, and whatever other software the kids these days use), hard drives, computers, blah blah blah. Just because it *can* be used for piracy, doesn't mean it will be. Seems to me that right now the cost of dvd burners and media is too prohibitive to make it worthwhile to be pirating ps2 games. And if the original intent of the modchip is stated to be for playing import games and one's own personal backups, how can the court tell me "we know you'll use it for illegal purposes, so you can't have it"? Sounds kinda unfair to me.
do not read this line twice.
If a game being loaded into RAM counts as copyright infringement... then you're commiting copyright violation every time you boot up any game, no matter how legal your posession is.
keeping people from playing games, it's about keeping people from illegally pirating games. True, many people in the Slashdot community have the respect for the artists and companies involved in video game production to pay for the games they play, and curcumvention devices such as mod chips are used as GOD intended, to view the work in it's original Japenes, etc.
Unfortunately, illegal copyiers force companies like SONY to take these steps to protect the profits of their company and the artisits that produce games. I am unahppy that this action was necassary, but untill the piracy stops SONY and others will take steps like this to keep it to a minimum.
Just my 2 cents.
Sony has its hands in just about everything.
So why would you buy it in Japan? Because the game is:
A) Not availible at all in America
B) It won't be availible in America for ages, but you're willing to pay for the privilidge of playing it early.
C) You happened to *be* in Japan when buying it (I got a bunch of DVDs I can't play on any Region 1 DVD player if I decide to go a year to America.
D) The local version is a cripple (As was/is often the case with DVDs, with bad format (two sides), no extras etc.)
E) Artifical pricing - actually very rare case to make up for shipping and customs, trouble with returns/replacements and so on.
A) - No loss whatsoever
B) - They could sell it to you for a premium, they just don't.
C) - Pisses off those it concerns, for no return, I still won't buy them twice.
D) - Pure incompetence, we need competitive protection from our other divisions.
E) - Wow they might actually lose some money.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
People, you all are not realizing this one important fact: That the PS2 architechture is Sony's closed architechture, and that other companies( mod chip companies) DO NOT have any legal right to make modifications to Sony's PS2 architechture without legal consent fron Sony. How hard is this for you people to understand?? If you were Sony, how would you like it if some other company modified you computer architechture without your consent? I would be pretty upset. Also, realize that the main goal behind this law suit against PS2 mod developers is to stop the piracy of games, and the ability to play copied PS2 games, whether on CD-R, CD-RW, or DVD-RW, on the PS2. If you purchase forign games and need a moded US PS2, to bad. You suffer because the main reason people mod their PS2's are to play copied games. If you don't know by now, COMPANIES loose massive amounts of money on copied software. How hard is this to understand. Also, if you want to develope on your PS2, just try to obtain a PS2 Linux Kit like me. It is comming to the US and Europe also. No need to mod and void your warrenty. I hope that Sony works extremely hard at preventing people from modding PS3 when it comes out. With PSX, there was the development PSX, a.k.a Net Yaroze. With PS2, there is PS2 Linux. With PS3, Sony will continue their trend and release some form of hobby development for PS3. Relax.
That you dont actually need a modchip to play imports, but it does make it a little nicer. Plus the code and schematics are readily available on the internet for those people who are technically inclined.
This wont effect Homebrew software since they are still going to make the Linux Kit available. Even though it is going to cost an arm and a leg.
So really the only people this effects are the people profiting from the sale of the modchips.
They'd better make pencils and paper illegal...I might write down copyrighted material with them, and piracy is the main factor for consideration above all other, right?
from the website: 'Judge Jacob stated that Sony licensed games for the territory that they were issued, the licensing of these games did not allow for their use in other territories, therefore whether they were imported for private and domestic use by personal purchase for instance via the internet, or purchased abroad on holiday, they were not allowed by Sony to be played outside of the licensed territory, this argument should be upheld.' Ok, so now I am not allowed to leave where I live and play my games where I travel to? I don't understand this. Maybe I am just being dense, but could someone please show me where it says you aren't allowed to move somewhere and play your game? Also, how big are these territories he's talking about? Anyone? Bueler?
Sent from your iPad.
ummmm. seems like we'll be needing to ban pen and paper soon
Is it a copyright violation if I make a copy of my DNA inside Katie or Amanada?
Hopefully they are codefree.
Does anyone have a license agreement from a Sony game that specifically allows the "copy in memory"? I've certainly never seen that on other software license agreements.
I don't know about UK law, but you haven't seen it on American software because US copyright law automatically grants that right to the owner of a legitimate copy. See my earlier comment.
By that argument, proxy servers and browser caches are illegal too.
No, the DMCA made those legal, at least in the USA. Seriously. Look at page 10 of this PDF from the Library of Congress.
Will I retire or break 10K?
This also wipes out any chances of seeing home brewed software on the Playstation 2 anytime soon, as well.
PS1 has the largest installed userbase of any console in the world, besides game boy.
Mod chips for the PS1 cost almost nothing, are widely available, and are installed in many units.
The Yaroze was released in the US by Sony- essentially a PS1SDK.
There are countless emulators for the PS1, allowing you to play burned and/or copied software on your computer
Despite all this, I don't think I've ever seen a homebrew PS1 game, ever. Has anyone else?
Just because it *can* be used for piracy, doesn't mean it will be
Whilst I broadly agree with your point, I don't believe you, nor the manufacturer of the chip, nor sony, nor the judge in the case, really truly believes that most of the people buying the chip aren't solely doing it so they can pirate games.
To take your argument further, guns have legal uses right, but here in the UK, very few people are allowed them because it is pretty unlikely you have a valid need for one. This infringes on the rights of a minority who may need one, but not the majority who don't want little punks running round shooting everyone (which isn't to say this *never* happens, just rarely with a legally owned gun).
The mod chip defeats copy protection, therefore breaking copyright law. Broadband connections, "cd burners, hiew (and windasm, and softice, and whatever other software the kids these days use), hard drives, computers, blah blah blah" do not.
You are legally allowed to make and keep backups of your software. Right or wrong, the hardware manuf. is not legally obligated to allow you to use the backups, though.
sig: sauer
I could imagine that an american court ruled like this.
I couldn't.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The real question should be - if he owned the CD why was he downloading the song?
Because what he owned wasn't even a CD.
Or because he has a Lite-On CD-ROM, which fucks up the last two seconds of a track when extracting audio or even when playing it normally. (I have one of those; I use my burner to rip CDs.)
Will I retire or break 10K?
Thankfully with most pieces of hardware we purchase the hardware, not a license to use the hardware ... of course companies being companies they dont want us to own anything anymore (including the clothes on our backs if at all possible). With software the battle for ownership has pretty much been fought, and we dont own diddly squat anymore. Now its on to hardware.
All your arguements go for any piece of hardware, will you uphold their rights to tell you what you can and cant do with your car when your beemer can only run on BMW petrol?
I don't think so. Even if they did, everyone and their brother would still be allowed to make modifications to it. Second, just because the main reason people use a device is to do something illegal, it doesn't make it illegal, as long as the device has other uses.
Sure they can void your warrenty if you apply a mod to your PS2, but they can't sue you, or the person who made the modification.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
If you're going to all the trouble to import games, why not just import the console? I realize it could be a bit more expensive, but it's really the best way to play foreign games without tangling with legal issues, or soldering.
As for the mod-chip allowing home-brewed games: While that's certainly noble, it also allows ease in pirating games. I'm sure it's great to create your own games for consoles, but until the console maker decides that there is some legal way for you to do that (without alienating their licensees, who pay money to be allowed to write for the console), I'm afraid mod-chip makers don't have much of a moral imperative, let alone a legal imperative.
Jack Valenti and the MPAA are to technology as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone
a majority of second generation (aka, worth buying) PS2 games are released on dvds. now, dvd-r's are a fairly new technology, not very cheap (unless you go the imac route :) ) and the media isn't exactly cheap.
while granted, within a year, it'll halve, for the short term, it's really not worth the time imho for a person to copy a game. i'm sure there's already a shop in singapore cranking out 300+ dubs an hour, but even my frugal self wouldn't buy from them.
i won't claim to know the first thing about imported/pirated console software. all i know is the modchip for my saturn (29.95) allowed me to buy radiant silvergun (85.00) from ebay and play it. that's good enough for me.
your jesus is another mans xebu. chew on that hypocrites.
Cmder, one is curious. Are you actually Klerck? If so, why have I not seen you post as Klerck in ages - has your account been silenced for good?
If you are not Klerck, but a Klerc-a-like, can you (or anyone) enlighten me as to the fate of dearest Klerck?
You are only missing one little point in your logic. Broadband was designed to allow people to surf the web faster. Mod chips were specifically designed to override copyright protection of the Play Station. When you go to ModChip sites and the first thing you see is a flashing red banner that says, "Play any copied PlayStation game for the cost of a $19 USD chip and .50 cent CD" it is obvious what the intended use of the device is. If you don't believe me, try opening a gun store called A$$hole Removal Systems, LLC. and see how long it remains open.
Should someone create a chip that checked the copyright bit of the CD and the checksum and if these were true THEN still did not allow the CD to play but allowed home-grown CD's to play, I bet that chip would at least have a chance in standing up in court.
The documentation I was able to find on how to make home grown PlayStation games was very rare and horribly sketchy (sketchy = ModChip sites didn't have it in their FAQ or HOWTO). I was able to get the Psnes emulator with some NES ROMS burned onto a CD and playable in my Playstation, so it *is* possible to make homegrown games.
As for the backup issue, most companies that produce playstation games claim that if you send them your scratched, shattered, melted or otherwise expired CD, they will send you a replacement copy. I think we can all agree this is BS, and as games age, and as companies that produce them fold, merge, and otherwise, it is impossible to be assured that you will get a replacement. Only way to fight this is to file a class action suit that claims infringement of personal rights because they do take away your backup rights, claim to provide replacements and do not do so in a timely or reasonable manner.
In all, create a ModChip that allows home grown Playstation games to work but not copyrighted ones, then have your friend (or wait two weeks), create an application that changes the copyright bit and checksum on the CD to *fool* your ModChip into thinking it is not copyrighted. Then you can sell them in every drug store around the country risk free.
No, [moving to Hong Kong to produce region busters] would be in violation of international copyright laws.
"International law" does not exist except in the implementation of treaties by contracting states. There's no treaty (except possibly a stretched interpretation of the WIPO Copyright Treaty) that prohibits circumventing region lockouts. The anti-circumvention language of the WIPO treaty is also apparently a bit weaker than that of 17 USC 1201.
In fact, New Zealand has already outlawed region coding as an unfair restraint of trade, and Australia is moving in that direction.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The judge's ruling basicly outlaws games bought overseas. There are lots of good games that probably never get released in the UK. Australia has ruled that region coding of DVD's is illegal because we only get 1/4 of the dvds released. And yet there are plans to include global positioning devices in electronics to stop cheap good bought overseas from playing in other countries. what gives?
I buy a game online which I have to download, as I am downloading the game its contents are copied into memory in various caches and routers along the route, what's the situation then....
The DMCA had a rider that made such ephemeral copies explicitly lawful in the USA.
Will I retire or break 10K?
THe whole reason for this is to prevent free trade.
If you can partitian a market, to the level of world regions, countries, states, cities, or even individuals, then you can always charge more.
These artificial price distinctions allow 'value based pricing', where the price paid for a good is the same as its percieved value. As there is (at least some) free trade, producers of goods cannot do that. They must sell at a uniform price, for otherwise, people will just ship the goods from where they are cheap to where they are artificially expensive. This makes economic sense, because it insures that goods will be sold closer to their marginal costs of production.
Thats the real reason for region coding, to artificially partitian the world market so-as to sell goods for inflated prices.
Its also the reason that manufactures don't liked used goods. Because used goods also threaten those artificially inflated prices. Because 'the new economy is different', they've managed to shut down used software.
Every mod chip that allows goods to cross these partitians is an attack on their artificially inflated prices. And thus they at least wish for that to be illegal.
the PS2 architechture is Sony's closed architechture, and that other companies( mod chip companies) DO NOT have any legal right to make modifications to Sony's PS2 architechture without legal consent fron Sony.
Under what law? Point me to the statute. URL?
Also, if you want to develope on your PS2, just try to obtain a PS2 Linux Kit like me. It is comming to the US and Europe also.
That's what Nintendo said about the 64DD Bulky Drive (a disk drive for Nintendo 64), but it stayed in Japan. Allow for the possibility that Sony might go back on its word.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I strongly advise against copying PS2 games with pen and paper. Better use an infinite amount of monkeys with typewriters.
Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
When I buy a book, a CD, a DVD, or a program, I have bought a set of data. I own it. It is mine. I can sell it. I can loan it to my friends. If it is covered under copyright and I don't have a license to cover that then the law doesn't allow me to make copies and distribute those copies or perform public reinactments. But that is the only right that I don't have.
I am sick and tired of all these butt pirate corporate executives and the judges they bend over the podium taking away my fair use rights to the software that I personally own. I'm not like the judges in these cases, I don't like taking it up the ass for the media companies.
I don't own a license to any of the software I have. I never agreed to any license. If I have agreed to a license, then show me the signed contract. Click through doesn't count. I left my computer unattended, the cat must have accidently pressed the mouse button. If you have a witness that proves it was me that installed software on my computer, then produce that witness.
I actually own that copy of the software, outright. Just like I own a book or a magazine. If I want to buy japanese DVD's and play them in my American DVD player, I should be allowed to do so. If I want to rip my CD's into ogg's and play on my computer, then that is my business. If I want to rip the content of a DVD that I own and turn it into a DIVX CDR so that I can watch it on my laptop, again, that's my business.
If I want to read the dialog off the DVD and play it audibly as juicy ass farts, again, that is nobodies concern but my own. And believe me, if I started doing that, I would definately be concerned.
The media outlets want to limit our rights and divide us into smaller and smaller markets, which they maintain a full monopoly on. They want to make it so we can't see anything without paying them royalties on it. And they want a royalty everytime we do so.
They are just losing any goodwill they had with the consumers. They tend to forget just how valuable goodwill is. It can make or break the richest of companies. Beware and bewarned media conglomerates, it is almost time for us to pay you back for all those abuses you have been heaping on us lately. And payback is a bitch. It'll start with judges that don't stay bought and go downhill from there.
-- Never make a general statement.
My PlayStation2 seems to have some kind of hardware bug prohibiting it from playing PlayStation2 games - when I buy one from the US or Japan the console cannot run them, even though it clearly states on the machine packaging that it can play software marked PS2. Well it can't. Maybe Sony could replace it with a version of the machine that actually works.
I just own a Japanese PS2 and play only Japanese games anyway ;)
The Yaroze was released in the US by Sony- essentially a PS1SDK.
Except Sony didn't make near enough Yaroze units. It sold out quickly. Heck, they're so sold out that I can't even find them on eBay.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The technical reason for the decision being based upon the fact that a game that is run without permission makes a copy of copyright material in memory, this copy is 'infringing' because it is an unauthorized copy argued Sony.
So its ok to have the imported game, but the act of loading the game into the PS2's RAM is where the actual illeagal copying occurs. So I can make n copys and distribute them to all my friends, but the "real" copying (and infringement) doesn't occur until the disc is copied once more, but this time into the RAM of the PS2. Isn't this just semantics. This doesn't make sense.
Yes but every time I try to see it your way, I get a headache.
Never seen it so far. Infact you usually pay 30% plus, excluding tax and p&p on an imported game.
But this means only 'hard core' gamers buy them, fairynuff, offer me a great game 6 months early but charge me twice as much and its my decission.
I feel sorry for the Yanks who will never get Shenmue II released on Dreamcast (still best console/games) and must (now) ilegally import it from Europe or wait for (he he he) X-Box (ha ha ha) launch.
I want the choice !!
ERR 411[Max number of witty sigs reached]
Sony makes no profit on the PS2 hardware. They never have. Only on the games they make a profit. They dont want mod chips to take away from that.
I have been using Linux for about 2-3 years now yet 3D never worked out of the box. Once I got it to work fine with Voodoo 3 and XF86 3.3.6, but then XF86 people decided to make this major update to 4.x.x that would make everything SO much better. Ever since 4.x.x I was not able to get my 3D working. Few months ago I just gave up, at least with Windows all my 3D games always worked. I have downloaded Red Hat 7.2 last week, just to see if anything changed. It setup my 3D automatically during install with my Voodoo 5. 3D worked, but it was screwed up. Every 3D object was making a dozen of "shadows", so games were not playbable. I have tried the 3D game that is included with Red Hat (I forgot what it's called) and OpenGL screen savers, and all of them had those "shadows."
I have tried all major Linux distros during my 2-3 years with Linux. I have started with Redhat, used SuSE for a while and then switched do Slackware 8. Half of the time I bought Linux and half of the time I downloaded it, but I'm not going to buy anything anymore that I can't get to work.
I mean, 3D (OpenGL, Glide, Direct3D) should work right with Linux always out of the box. Just like my network card, or sound card works with Linux without a problem when it is setup automatically during installation.
So Channel Technology's Messiah Mod will not come out. It really doesn't matter since "The Device" is out and does the same thing the "Messiah" did/does. All the court rullings do is just push the PS2 Mod scene a little deeper underground.
Also, people, stop with these STUPID car examples. You CANNOT compare modifications of a car to a Computer, such as PS2. If a mod chip could not allow people to play copied PS2 games, and only officlal PS2 imports, Sony probably would not have this problem with mod chips. Also, to the FOOL who wants to know: Sony owns the rights to PS2's architechture and has a patent on PS2's architechture. Why is it all of you fail to see the validity of my topic?? Are you all really that closed minded and ignorant? Goodness. This is a pretty pathetic bunch.
Such licence-restrictions are so absurd they should be declard illegal or void.
Does the Xbox have the same region nonsense built-in like Sony's products, or can you actually play games from around the world without having to add mod chips? I was all for getting a PS2 until reading about this; now there is just a bad taste in my mouth.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
The manufacturer of a device, is telling me what I can, and cannot do in my own home, with software I purchased for it?
wait a minute, this sounds familiar.
Oh right, it was that blockhead who's the head of the MPAA. Jack Valenti. Once again, another company wants to set rules on private use of their product. What if I do want to use a fork to brush my hair? Maybe that butter knife actually is a screwdriver! (sorry mom)
How the fuck can the place of purchase of an item, used in your own home, make it illegal being used on the product it was designed to be used with?
Aslong as I paid for the product, $MANUFACTURER of both $DEVICE and $PRODUCT shouldn't give a damn.
da w00t. mtfnpy?
Zounds. The irony. Yes, the circumvention of the copy protection mechanism which allowed you to play pirated games was sufficient for the case to be awarded to Sony. However, the judge also ruled that playing imported games was illegal unless you have permission from the copyright holder. You should conceivably read the article again yourself.
Er...just kidding.
Is it me, or does there need to be a mass re-education amoung most of the judges in both UK and US courts? Most of these guys are middle-aged to senior people, and I have yet to see one have a good grasp on the concept of technology.
Got this from Gary (aka Gazza) before ruling:
Due to recent legal proceedings by Sony towards our sale of the 'M' chip we have decided to remove it, and all Sony related devices from the website.
We were eager to promote this device, which arguably had a legal side (we may still yet have to fight on this, depending on their actions). Our main argument (which is received from reading court actions of something similar), was to be that the 'M' could in fact play imported games, this is a GOOD argument, and although we possibly should have been more restricted in advertising it's other capabilities. The rest of the argument is that because our eastern colleagues do not have access to (and SONY would never give) their patented media-authoring technology, they could not make something that could decipher the media. Therefore, if the original imports played, everything else played... it was just part and parcel of the design. You know, there was even an exerted effort to make sure the Playstation 2 logo remained running on the console when loading games. It was thought this was a 'complimentary feature' and the developers actually wrote code that ensured the logo remained intact, although other modchip developers had blatently completely removed it !
To clarify the statement about the control system above, here's an explanation:
Sony have a system running in the PS2 console that detects when a media is both non-licensed, and also which country it arises from. In the case of their licensed media (territorial lockout, and in the PSX known as the SCEA WIZ Code). It is currently unknown by ourselves as to what this system is called in the PS2. There are some interesting things to look at with this system, because of some factors:
A) Sony do not allow anyone to use this system, and therefore because it is patented, the use of the detection technology is unlawful. In the case of Bleem (emulator software) that won legal standing, it appears that they could not implement region or copy protection control into their software, because Sony did not allow them to use the patented technology. Therefore, Bleem software actually ran copied software and imported games because it had no control system used to stop this. So where is the circumvention (which is exactly what it is in basis) in context ? inside the machine, outside the machine, in the electronic guts of the console, or on the disks themselves ?
Looking closely:
It becomes obvious that the territorial and licensed media information is actually on the game disks themselves (otherwise the console will not be able to recognize the difference between disks), so if a software is allowing the import, and non-licensed versions to run, then the system on the disk MUST have been defeated ?
B) In the case of manufacturing a modchip device to play imported games, the fact that the region / copy control is defeated in the same case, it is not possible to have one without the other. Therefore, similar to the case of Bleem, the technology to control this system is not available, and even if were available, is not possible to use due to patent laws and Sony holding this close to their chest. So end result = same as Bleem, the whole kit and kaboodle must play, because you are 1) not allowed to use the technology, or 2) you use a workaround the patented control, but then lose the ability to define any control parameters.
C) To look a little closer:
Datel & Gameshark produces software that runs on the PS2. When this software runs, it produces a disclaimer of the following: 'this product is not licensed blah blah blah' (cannot remember exactly what !). Anyway, this is unlicensed software running on the console, so how is it done ?
If it is running, then it must have defeated the consoles control system ? (this time within the console), it certainly is not licensed, therefore does it break rules, or simply bend them ?
We know EXACTLY how Datel fools the console, and make it think it's software is a 'legal' media ('legal' as in a technical form, 'illegal' being one that is not allowed). Sony have tried to counter-act the loading of Datel disks on subsequent releases of their console models, but Datel have reverse engineered this and usually within a few weeks have produced a 'compatible' version.
Now look at all that has been written above, and start to analyze what you find:
A) Bleem plays imported and unlicensed software, therefore it defeats (or shall we say 'ignores') the control system implemented within the disks from Sony.
B) Datel & Gameshark disks play on the PS2 console (and are unlicensed), therefore they defeat (or shall we say 'ignores') the control system implemented within the console from sony.
So, we must now look at the 'M' and take into context with the information given above (we'll call it 'C')
C) Messiah plays licensed and unlicensed software, therefore it defeats (or shall we say 'ignores') the control system implemented within the disks from Sony, OR it defeats (or shall we say 'ignores') the control system implemented within the console from Sony ?
When you start to try to get your brain wrapped around what's written above, it can become completely confusing, but there are grey area's of legal matter that must be answered:
Does the 'M' actually defeat BOTH systems?, and IF NOT, does it then become any more illegal (or legal) than those products stated above ?
THE ANSWER IS: NO !
'M' defeats ONLY the consoles control systems, therefore it can be deemed to be akin to the Datel / Gameshark in its way of working. Of course, he Datel / Gameshark disk are the ONLY disks that load directly from the defeat (lucky them), so it appears that this defeat of the system can be 'overlooked' conveniently !
technically, the ways of owrking are completely different, but in context with the 'end reasult', we are merely stating that the 'M' fools the console, and so does the Datel and Gameshark to attain it's desired results, and this 'foooling' is the requirement of defeating the control system. (or protection).
(But its interesting to see that these disk from Datel / Gameshark are quite easily 'upgraded' to provide the necessary functions with such as simple item as a paperclip, knife or a credit card): some interesting links given below:
http://www.ps2ownz.com/cardswap.htm
http://www.ps2ownz.com/paperclipswap.html
http://www.ps2ownz.com/cogswap.html
The above methods used by those that seek an expanded result from the defeated control system.
It should be noted, that with all the above, the control system on the game disks from Sony still remains intact.
It's interesting to think on a few matters:
Channel Technology have NEVER sold a pic-type modchip of the type such as for instance (take a NEO 2) for the PS2. This by far is probably the most popular brand of modchip, and sites all over the internet sell them without hinderance. There must be millions of these devices sold throughout the world, and the software for such devices (hex code), is freely available for download. (their purposes clearly explained where Subsequently, the sale of Datel & Gameshark Software rocketed because of the public's knowledge of their unison.
(using a pic-mod with Datel software = Interesting results). The end result of this unison is of course, playback of unlicensed media. Although there are 'millions' of these devices on sale, and we never sold any of them, we are apparently deemed 'more culperable' because our version did not need a disk-swap.
SHEESH !!!
Is not the end result exactly the same thing ?
We could understand a little more if the unison between these two products allowed Imported Games to play, but they DO NOT... FACT, therefore, the ONLY use of a PIC-BASED modchip, is to play Unlicensed Media.. this is a BIG FULL STOP !
It's interesting to note how a 'level of Technology' now comes into play with the onslaught of Sony against Channel Technology. Although Channel Technology NEVER contributed ONE single pic-based modchip to the millions in use on PS2 consoles throughout the world, the one Professional design in the world that allowed legal playing of Imported Original games, and gave improvements such as full screen playback on these, and also took care to leave the copyrighted logo in place in the machine, is the one that stirs the mighty wrath of the giant Sony Corporation to see an end to it even before release, and will probably end the Channel Technology business.
Is it a fair world we live in ?
As proprietor of Channel Technology, I have to say a big NO to that question. I sat by here and NEVER became involved in the mass sales of these crappy 'pic-based' mods that were being advertised as 'play your CDR backups' and were flooding the world etc. and watched the world go by without becoming a part of this. If we were to bring forward a design, it would be a technically CORRECT design, that MUST play original imported games. (Our BM3 design was capable of playing imported PSX titles (a first on PS2), but the PS2 titles capabilities were not to come until developed by our eastern colleagues).
Moving on to a slightly altered topic, let's look at the scenario of someone who has a modified 'M' machine, and compare it to someone who has a modified NEO 2 Machine, with a Datel Action Replay disk, and these people are going to 'possibly' break the law by running pirated software:
Firstly the 'M' machine:
Human being has modified machine, wishes to play duplicated software. He may A) obtain a copy, or B) produce a copy himself.
If he travels road A), there is argument that he has bought pirate software, BUT, he HAS NOT defeated the control system on the disk himself, therefore there is argument that if he were to say purchase a HK Silver game (pressed disk manufactured in a factory), although he may well have bought a pirate disk (NOT ALL HK SILVER DISKS ARE PIRATE, THERE ARE MANY SLIDE-SHOW (XXX Rated) TITLES AVAILABLE FROM ASIA THAT ARE HK SILVER PRESSED DISKS THAT RUN ON THE PS2), he has NOT defeated the copy protection himself, therefore does not contravene any laws (such as section 296 of the Copyright, Patents and Designs act).
If the human produces a copy himself (using a cd-writer), then he MAY have infringed the law (This is not solid-set, and the law changes between different countries of the world). The UK laws state that 'where necessary', it is allowed that ONE backup of software be allowed.
This 'where necessary' clause can be deemed to be a little wide. For instance:
Human lives in the UK, and goes to the USA, and purchases / returns with a licensed game, and he will play on his 'M' upgraded console. BUT, after a few days in the grubby hands of the kids, he notices the disk is suffering. So he decides to make a backup, in the knowledge that he has little chance of obtaining a replacement from the USA as he will not receive 'support' outside the country. Is this now a 'where necessary' situation ?
But to dig deeper:
He now has his backup, which he has made under belief of the 'where necessary' clause. He places this backup in the console and 'M' boots the game.
What is now the scenario ?
Is 'M' illegal because it is booting a 'where necessary' instance ?
And if the owner of the 'where necessary' backup tried to boot his 'where necessary' backup on an UN-modified console, would the 'restrictions' imposed by the console actually be denying him of a legal right ?
Let's go another step further:
'M' would have had no way of knowing if the 'where necessary' title that was loaded was an original or backup. This is because as mentioned at the very top of this page, the patented technology was not available to it, so it must be asked:
QUESTION: Is 'M' playing the backup, or is the Human playing the backup ?And further, is the backup actually illegal, or falling under the 'where necessary' clause ?
The answer is summed in one quotation that I gave once on Messiah-worlds:
" 'M' does not play pirate software, Humans do" !
OK, so the human played the backup, and he did this by placing the disk in the tray and it booted. BUT, what happens if its a NEO2 ?:
Forget all the mumbly-jumbly, lets just look at the human playing his 'where necessary' backup:
To play with this version of chip, he first needs to load the Datel disk (defeats preliminary control system), and then he will use the NEO 2 to eject the disk tray and place his 'where necessary' backup in and the game will load.
WHAT is the difference ????, the backup is loaded and is playing !!!!!!!
Does 1+1 being sold as a package make ANY difference whatsoever ?
It appears it does, and although millions of 1+1's are on sale, its only the '1's that matter.
More food for thought:
Definitions: (in relative context)
CDR
(Media that is on recordable disks, can be software developed that will run on the PS2 if modified, this software can be found many places on the internet, and you will come across small game programs, graphics demonstrations, art etc. etc. 'M' will direct boot these without swap.
DVDR
The same as above, but a different medium, 'M' will direct boot these without swap.
BACKUP
Could be a backup of the above mentioned software (not the original disk). 'M' will direct boot these without swap.
HK SILVERS
Factory pressed disk (usually silver bottomed), can be duplications of the software mentioned above, or in fact as seen recently, slide shows etc.
The 'conception' that HK Silver means 'illegal is totally false. 'M' will direct boot these without swap.
DVD SILVERS
Exactly the same as above.
'M' will direct boot these without swap.
IMPORTS
Games / films purchased abroad, but shipped into your resident country. This is not illegal, and neither is the business of importing consoles. 'M' will direct boot these without swap.
PS2 BACKUPS
Software written to run on the PS2 operating system, and then 'backed up' from the original disk (many forms of this available on the internet, again, graphics, animations, games etc.) 'M' will direct boot these without swap.
PSX Backups
Same as the above, but written for the PSX operating system. 'M' will direct boot these without swap.
So, when you look at the 'capabilities' of a design on a site, you make sure you understand the exact meanings that can be implied by functions stated.
Only the Illegally thinking mind thinks illegally !
'He's NOT the Messiah, and certainly not my savior,
But I followed him faithfully' !
(Gazza, 2001)
While you license the software, you still own the physical manifestation of it. I.E the media and box and such. This would likely be enough to qualify you for protection under this law.
You are correct. The language clearly states: "owner of a copy." If it were the copyright owner's right (as cpt kangarooski seems to think), the language would state "owner of copyright under this title" as in 17 USC 106.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The net yaroze was in fact a VERY scaled down development system, if you can even call it that. It would use a serial cable to connect to the pc and had a special program to run. The most you could do was upload small programs the size of the playstations memory (2MB IIRC).
So in effect, what you got with the Yaroze was the same thing that you get now with the stock Game Boy Advance plus a PC to GBA link cable. The GBA uses a serial cable (attached to the PC's parallel port) to connect to the pc and has a special program to run (mb.exe). The most you can do is upload small programs the size of the GBA's memory (256 KB). It's designed for netbooting off cartridges, but it makes a nice devkit for those starting out in GBA development.
It did not allow access to the cd drive at all either.
Unlike Yaroze, the netboot method lets you access the cartridge, the serial port, everything. To keep the system from booting off the cart, hold Select+Start while booting and then send your boot image.
Will I retire or break 10K?
If you buy a game you'll see it in legal speak, whether it's in unwrapping the game or placing it in a player the language will read those actions to be an implied consent to the license.
Conventional software is even more specific, you have to press that "ok" button for the software is installed and once you've done that, you've signed the EULA in a legally binding matter. When you buy a Dell or Gateway, Compaq whatever, the first thing that pops on the screen whe you plug in the box and switch it on is a EULA which is nearly impossible for the average Joe or Jane to bypass.
And yes, these EULAs in the above situations are legally binding in the United States and most other First World nations.
Regardless of how well YOU care for the CD's, you cannot rule out CD playing devices themselves destroying CD's.
My car player has eaten several CD's, leaving huge grooves etched in the CD.
Otherwise I also have CD's ten+ years old that are still in perfect shape.
.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It would be interesting to see what evidence, if any, that Sony submitted, to support their allegation that the users are bound by the terms of some license. (Whatever evidence it was, it was apparently good enough to convince the judge. That's why I'd really like to see it.) I don't know how things work in UK, but here in USA, we normally purchase commerical software, not license it. This is especially true with console games, where the transaction is simply a cash-for-game deal between a retailer and an anonymous customer.
Another thing about that wording, is that it's not even clear who they are talking about. It almost sounds like the judge may have been referring to a license between Sony and some other entity (not the user) (perhaps a distributor or something like that?) -- i.e. we're not just talking about a EULA here. If that's true, it's very interesting, since it means that UK law allows a deal between two parties, to somehow magically cause a third party to unknowingly assume abligations. That would be really bizarre.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Dreamcast remains the only game console that people can develop home-brew games for. Between Kallisti!OS and the various attempts to create a Linux boot system for Linux-based games there's going to be one hell of a platform on the way for developers. The Dreamcast is also the most documented of the game consoles, with developer information on almost every subsystem in the box. Too bad SEGA discontinued production on the damn thing...
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
I'm not that familiar with the Sony Playstation/Linux port situation, but don't you require a 'chipped' device??? This means that you will not be able to use GPL'ed (or other) code, or write your own games for hardware that you own. This is truly a sad state of affairs. I have thought for a long time that games consoles could be used as cheap internet devices for families who don't want a 'big' PC.... Fat chance of that becoming a reality now. Simon W.
And the DMCA wasn't enough to have you STOP buying their products? Support for CRM? Or SSSCA?
You should have stopped supporting sony years ago. (I stopped buying sony in 1999)
Sony's move here is to stop piracy and 'illegal' DVD viewing. Sony and others lobbied to get the rights to have piracy and out of region DVD watching made illegal. So now they are protecting that investment in congress.
There are ModChips that will *only* play imports. I'm not sure on how the PS2 has upgraded things, but the PSX/one had two things gumming the works.
1) There was a block with an impossible checksum on the disc. No CD burner (except for the pros') would write such a checksum.
2) There was also a region code placed in there.
When the PSX booted up, it grabbed the checksum and region code to make sure that it was a real disc and playing on the proper hardware for the region. All the ModChips do is constantly feed the hardware that checks these codes with good values (the newer 'stealth' chips stop a few seconds after boot).
So, there *are* chips that *only* send the valid region code and *not* the funky checksum. That will let you play any original PSX disc from any country. It doesn't help with "backups" - legal or otherwise.
Needless to say, these chips don't sell very well. They're often sold by legit importers or people with a strong moral adversity to piracy, but not to imports.
As for the homegrown games, that would require some further logic in the chip.
Come on people. While there are many who actually use a mod chip honorably to play import games, there is a significantly higher percentage of people who use it to pirate games. I have at least 2 friends who own a PS1 and neither of them own a single game, but their game libraries are in the fourties. We can all harp about how bad Sony is and the RIAA and MPAA and the DMCA etc. but the reality is, there are LOTS of people out there using technologies like this to pirate. Juuuussstt like Napster. Last I heard (someone can check me on this) pirated software resulted in a loss of around what, 6 billion dollars last year for developers?
Jussst my opinion, flame away.
Nick
We should all go buy old crappy games from pawnshop bargain bins for $4.99, scratch 'em up with a key, and ship them in for replacements. When none of them get replaced, we could try to pool our efforts on a class action suit.
do not read this line twice.
The technical reason for the decision being based upon the fact that a game that is run without permission makes a copy of copyright material in memory, this copy is 'infringing' because it is an unauthorized copy argued Sony. Basically, this 'controversial' statement made it illegal to play games purchased from abroad.
Isn't this a very similar arguement the IPDroids have made for complete remote control of your cable boxes and satillite equipment?
Somehow I think those in government are conspiring with hardware makers and IPdroids to use copyright law as a means to filter those things that are unwanted and not just "copies of copyrighted works", the POWER TO FILTER EVERYTHING YOU DO AND SEE. The best part about it is that development will go on to restore user freedom and get copyright law off of the internet and other networks, not through "the rule of law", but rather through the "rule of code and will". Americans and Freedom loving people worldwide efforts will truely shape the world to come! Say goodbye to politics, welcome scientists to a new era of freedom.
Doesn't Sony make most of its PS2 cash on licensing permission to write games for the console? In this case then, it isn't alienating anyone except folks that paid for a game that's not licensed, the sales of which Sony sees not one red cent for.
You can't lose the same money twice, you know.
Tatsujin
Not really...in fact, it was specifically worded ("owner of a particular copy") so as to not apply if a EULA was in force.
Contract law trumps copyright law. All 17 USC 117 says is that a contract that prohibits copying into RAM must be a signed contract, as a user can use the software without agreeing to a click-through "contract." The publisher gets the user on grounds not of copyright infringement but of breach of contract.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I can't see this as being good for PS2 sales
Agreed!
The reason the PS became the best selling console in the UK was because people could easliy pirate games onto a CD and play them with a mod chip.
No way could you easily pirate a Nintendo/sega cartrage.
Any market will have a stall selling dodgey pirate games, and any (indipendent) games shop will happily chip a PS for you.
In stopping this illegal trade, Sony are harming themselves not helping themselves!
Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
Don't believe what you read is the truth.
In the past, modchips were nothing morer than custom programmed pics, is this still true? Why doesn't someone just release the code for the pics then? If posted along with ps2 linux code, I don't see how they could attack it, since the modchip would be an essential step in using linux on the machine. Or does this not matter, when you're a corporate giant, and can buy IP laws at whim?
Patents matter fuck all ... they cant control what you do with the hardware after you bought it. Thats luckily not what patents are for.
Since you are so open minded and well informed I wont embellish the point and simply state something someone as you should recognise as a simple truth and from which all the objections against your arguement stem.
You buy it, you own it.
alt.possessive.its.has.no.apostrophe
The Slashdot Paradox: "100% Overrated"
From the title of the article, am I the only one who read that and thought of the UK going "Hulk smash!" and causing massive damage and casualties? :)
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
Does anybody know how to stop using the "This DVD Player has rating enabled, enter password" prompt on the PS2? It's very irritating that the movie doesn't just play. I may return it and buy a whole new Athlon XP box if I can't turn it off. I can't get GTA3 anywhere, and I'm in the mood for blood, so that makes this a pretty expensive machine to only play nba live 2002 on...
Also, does anybody else think those "WEGA" tv sets are a little over-priced for the picture you get? My 27 inch Phillips displays regular cable-tv better than the WEGA... Does that mean it doesn't make sense to buy it until I move somewhere that has digital cable? Or go sattellite and re-buy hardware in 2-3 years when HDTV is standard.
Who did what now?
If I paid for a PS2, and I paid for a game, I should be able to play that game, right? WHERE on the globe I happened to be standing at the time should not matter. I have a number of friends who pay a premium to have games shipped from Japan to the United States because in their infinite wisdom, Sony and the software companies have decided not to import that game. This practice and DVD region coding is the kind of draconian practice one expects to find a George Orwell book.
Apparently in return for territorial exclusivity dealerships have to provide staff who are qualified enough to provide the relevant after sales service.
It's nasty and produces some truly bizarre pricing differentials which are exaggerated by a lack of tax harmonisation. An article in the economist even quoted an example where Danes near the german border would save money by buying spare parts from german dealerships however the germans would save cash by crossing the border in to Denmark to buy new cars.
The block exemption runs out this september but you can expect the manufacturers to be lobbying for an extension (last granted in 1995).
First explain it to me, and then to the judge:
'swapping' of backup disks between people would be uncontrollable, and damaging to Sony as nobody would obviously pay £25-45 for a game
Exactly how is this obvious? It seems to be the same argument that was made against VCRs when they came out. Who was the plaintiff in that one? Why, it was Sony, wasn't it? And has history shown that the argument was true?
Nope, no sig
Seems to be a few points folks are missing:
1. Sony owns (0wnz?) the console market. Their consoles are still the most popular (yes, check the latest sales figures), their game licensing is fantastic, their loyal fans insane. Complain all you want about the programming difficulties, the 'Sony proprietary' issues, whatever. The PS1/PS2 one-two punch was a fantastic marketing and technological move.
2. 80% (or more) of their user base does not give a ROYAL FLYING DAMN about playing overseas games, or mod chips, or even trying to crack open the case. Let them boot GTA3 or Madden, and watch Region 1 discs with a layer skip here or there, and they're in bliss. If that changes, just watch: they'll react.
3. Start trumpeting the XBox? Please. Go for it. We've seen countless times what MS does to people who attempt to modify their products or challenge their vision. It's never been pretty. And Halo sucked anyway.
Bottom line: Sony is, in their eyes, protecting their investment. They're entitled to do that. They may be scum while they do it, we may think the DCMA is shit (it is), etc., etc., but it's their sandbox, and *tons* of people want to play in it, myself included (GTA3 and GT3 rule). This won't even scratch their PS2 sales, or their corporate image or blahblahblah, because the vast majority of users (idiots? sleepers?) just...don't...care.
Remember: they don't make their money off of techies. They make it off of the unwashed masses. That's why their products are cheap, easy, and flashy. And many users will fall into the Sony-authorized trap. Think about that the next time you unleash a string of curses at the monitor.
But the DMCA gets around this since such modchips have are copy protection circumvention devices. So not only could this happen in the US, but it would happen a lot more easily
plain, simple, to the point.
As some will know, the UK is known amongst many global industries as 'Treasure Island' for the inflated margins being charged. Technical fixes that enforce this 'local pricing' system should be banned.
Devil Dice was made on a net yaroze system if I am not mistaken. Sony bought the rights to it and released it in Japan and the US. It was a highly addictive puzzle game. I used to get playstation underground magazine (cd mag) and there were always a few homemade games on the discs created by people using their net yarozes.
And here's how to use it.
I've been in the ps2 homebrew dev scene and here are a few things that people need to know about the ps2 protection.
The ps2 checks the protection once when the disk is loaded. It's possible and very easy to do a swap trick using a gameshark2 or a codebreaker cheat disk. I wired up an override switch for the tray motor on my ps2 using 2 dpdt switches and a diode. (pull +5v from the mainboard and run it through the diode to drop the voltage a bit before wiring to the drive tray motor)
There is plenty of info online on how to do this.
Check current modchip diagrams for where to get +5v and grnd.
A ps2 drive will read ps2 and ps1 disks. It's possible to make the ps2 run a ps1 disk as if it were a ps2 disk. This is how all the ps2 modchips work. Put a ps1 modchip in your ps2 and do a swap with a gameshark (no switch needed). The ps2 will think it's a ps1 disk and the gameshark/codebreaker will boot it as if it were a ps2 disk. (no switches needed)
Now the most convenient solution is to patch the ps2 rom so that it can decide how to boot a disk by using some other method than the protection.
This is how the latest mods work (neo4/messiah).
It's also doable by any determined hardware hacker. I expect very simple instructions to surface soon especially if the modchips get pushed underground.
DISCLAIMER:
I'm only a programmer and practically none of this info was discovered by me. I'll credit anyone who wants me to
Rats would be more funny if they could fart.
correct! I saw 11 people get the psx because they could get games on cdr from their mates. they also bought their own titles. sony and the games companies won all the way to the bank. let 'em shoot themselves in the foot in their haste for greed.
Sony profits, significently, from the sale of games liscensed for the PS2. The profit from the sale of a PS2 is very small (it is however, not sold in a loss like some other consoles.) Therefore, Sony has a fairly good reason to remove things it suspect may reduce the number of video game sales.
I'm sorry but those monkeys are illegal under the DMCA, as they are a circumvention device, So I'll have to confiscate them now.
--xPhase
The following sentence is TRUE. The previous sentence is FALSE.
But the DMCA gets around this since such modchips have are copy protection circumvention devices. So not only could this happen in the US, but it would happen a lot more easily
But if a fellow in the U.S. designed a modchip that allowed playing imports but blocked playing backups, Sony wouldn't be able to touch him under 17 USC 1201, especially given the substantial non-infringing use exceptions in 1201(a)(2) and 1201(b)(2) and the reverse engineering exception in 1201(f).
Will I retire or break 10K?
The architecture of every game system has been as well. I remember that sega had an official sega licensed cartridge for the Saturn which would allow you to play import games. This was a god send to people who wanted to play arcade perfect ports of games like Marvel vs. Street Fighter or Street Fighter Alpha 3, and not deal witht he crap versions available for the PS1 (let's face it the PS1 wasn't very good for 2D due to it's lack of ram). These ports weren't available for the Saturn in the US and sega made it possible for American players to play these gems. Capcom even included the english version of Marvel vs. Street Fighter on the japanese disc. It was unlockable after beating the game a number of times. I realize that in the age of cheap cd-recorders pirating is a big issue, but perhaps Sony could release their own product allowing the play of imports, so that we can play games like Vib Ribbon that were never released here and probably never will be.
I bought a Japanese PS2 when I was in Japan last spring. I bought it because I prefer to play games that involve voices, (like Final Fantasy X) in Japanese. It's sort of the same reason why I, like many others, prefer subtitled over dubbed anime.
In addition, there are several games that are never will be released in America. True Love Story 3 is a perfect example. The fabulous Tokimeki Memorial series on the PS1 are other games that will never be released here. These games would never sell in America, but I enjoy playing them.
Also, I was able to play Gran Turismo 3 several months before I could have in America.
So now, I have this Japanese PS2 and despite my best efforts, I had yet to find a way to play American games! I still can't play Metal Gear Solid 2 and I've been wanting to play SSX Tricky for a long time. I have no desire to pirate games - just be able to purchase both imports and American games and play them on my PS2. I know this is possible, but SONY is making it quite difficult for us!
I don't care about what British copyright law says, but American copyright law has "fair use" built into it which gives me some rights over what I can do with copyrighted material I've purchased. This includes making back-up copies for myself, or playing a game on a foreign or even custom-made playstation.
I'm still searching for a way to play American games on my PS2. I have a little box that plugs in to the USB port that lets me play American PS1 games on it, but I haven't been able to get American PS2 games to work. I thought a "game shark" might help, but it turns out that those too, are region coded. Anyone have any ideas?
the manual until after I've played the game. The
first time I play, I see NO end user lisence agreement stating that to play the game I need to
agree to the terms of the lisence, unlike software for my PC.
While there may be an agreement in the manual somewhere, I don't have to read or agree to it
in any way to play the game. The same goes with DVDs
that I buy.
As far as I'm concerned, I haven't agreed to a single thing at all when I pop in the PS2 disc
and play it. As far as I'm concerned, I should
be able to play whatever I want in the thing as
long as I bought it legally.
I've never played burned discs on my consoles, and
have no intention on ever doing it. I have, however, played import discs on my consoles, and
have every intention on doing it again if there
is a game I really want that will not be released
here in the USA.
A more fair ruling, IMO, would be to force mod
chip makers to make their products in a way such that burned discs can not be read, but imports
still can.
Honestly, I doubt Sony of UK or Sony of America lose much sales over imports. Only a very small
percentage of people will buy an import when a
US release of the game is imminent. Not too many
people want to play through FFX having to spend 5
minutes on every dialogue box looking through a
kanji dictionary.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
See this web page explaining why 17 USC 117 does not protect you in all jurisdictions.
Be careful, copyright infringement can (and has) resulted in huge damages being awarded. 60K pounds total or approx $96K US in the case mentioned in this article.
The above web page mentions "MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer", which was an incredibly bad decision which basically says 17 USC 117 only applies if the copyright owner allows it to apply (by selling rather than licensing the software). In other words, it is useless for keeping the courts from stealing your money and giving it to the plaintiff.
Also, the fact the defendent in the Sony vs Channel Technology case lost on summary judgement is scary. What about the RIGHT TO A TRIAL? Here in the USA, we have it in the Constitution - the 7th Amendment for civil cases - but that part of the Constitution has been de facto suspended for a long time (anyone know how old "summary judgement for plaintiff" is in the US?)
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Why do they make mod chips in the first place? For playing copied games and movies and what not, but they say that they are to play stuff from other regions .. hah.
Why doesn't someone just make one that specifically doesn't let you play a copy, this is the logical step to to take as no one is going to try to pull you into court and sue you for play a non US game are they. Remember as long as they don't let you play copies they don't cirumvent the copyprotection. The DMCA specifically says that copyright circumvention devices are illegal, so why make them and try to say that you are using them for something else.
Does this mean that Alan Cox will now, in a fit of pique, not even tell himself what the changelog contains? According to the Register article this makes the British law much more in favor of copyright holders than the DMCA.
So? It's NOT the business of the government or of me to guarantee any particular business a profit, or indeed that it stay in business.
But it IS the business of government to see that, when a person or organization has played by the government's rules and has something of value, they do not lose that value to someone who has NOT played by the government's rules.
You may have an argument with the rules - whether they're proper, or whether they're consistent with the rest of the rules - especially those that override lower-level rules. But that argument is not with Sony, but with the government: With the legislature (for constructing the obnoxious rule), or with the courts (for not resolving the inconsistency with other rules of the same or higher precedence).
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
You are an idiot.
Sony losses money off of consoles.
They only make money off of legit software sales and licensing.
This also wipes out any chances of seeing home brewed software on the Playstation 2 anytime soon, as well.
You silly twit. The linux kit for the PlayStation 2 is right around the corner. You'll basically have a full sdk to tinker around with and write your own titles. You may not be able to distribute them on CD, but who does that anyway? Do it over the web via the included Ethernet adapter!
Look, all the slashdot script kiddies may think home dev is really cool and all...
But homedev lead to the crash of the gaming market in the 80s. Nintendo's licensing ideas saved it.
So yes, it is illegal in the UK.
Is it true that there's no "fair use" or "fair dealing" provision in UK copyright law?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Where is this license? Did I click 'Agree'? Did I sign paper? Did I verbally agree? No.
I bought a PS2 game in the mall, and took it home from my vacation to play it.
Why would you want to buy the same thing more than once? It's basically price fixing, so they can set different prices in different regions. MPAA does this all the time. It should really be an anti-trust issue, but since they channel enough $$$ the governements way, they turn their cheek.
If the government can say that gas stations price fixing prices around the country is illegal, and are investigating it, then this should be no different.
How would you feel if Honda said that they started making their cars maintenence free, and as such welded the hood shut, and got rid of all the filler caps, so that when its time to change the oil, add gas, change filters, replace battery etc, you had to buy a new car, or a new engine. Don't think that would fly.
Or more simply, if they put some special additive in all their gas and oil, and then patented/copyrighted it, and put a sensor in the engine to detect if you put in oil/gas that is not Honda brand, and made the computer shut the engine down. I'm sure that would piss off people, and invoke lawsuits....
My uncle is not a ford dealer; yet he modifies people's cars for them. He does all kinds of work to make them faster. he has pre-packaged kits to soup them up.
Is this illegal because he does not have a license from ford?
Because the situation with sony is *exactly* the same.
Your statement is a scary indication of the way people are beginning to think due to the bizarre software licensing issues we have been plagued with for the last 2 decades. People actually think that the company that sold you a device outright can dictate what you do with it. They can't.. they SOLD IT TO YOU..
The mass amounts of money that 'Companies' lose on copyrighted software is bullshit spewed by the SPA and the like. Sure, they may lose some sales.. but nowhere near the numbers they make you think they do.
It's the First Sale doctrine. You cannot exercise control over something once you sell it.
But they ARE legally allow to make it illegal for YOU to use YOUR OWN backups. Under the law they can do whatever they want, but our attempts to exercise our rights in spite of their resistance is illegal.
That is EXTREMELY anti-symetric in favor of the rights of the manufacturers.
What good is the right to make backups if they are illegal to use? And with the DMCA, even making the backup is often illegal (since "circumvention" is required to do so).
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
'nuff said.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
If any of you actually bothered to read the article, you would see that the judge acknowledged that there were plenty of legal things this chip allowed you to do, but because it also allowed the illegal playing of pirated games this outweighed the good points and THAT IS WHY SONY WON THE CASE. RTFM!!!
That's like saying that driving a car can be done for many legal reasons, but since you can drive a car into somebody killing them, which is murder, then driving should be made illegal. Heck, talking should be outlawed too, because you can commit perjory(sp?) and libel.
I noticed that, as well as your current page lengthening posts, you have taken requests for page widening posts. This is a subject that interests me greatly and I am curious as to whether it would be possible to generate page shortening posts? Is this possible? Or would the very laws of physics have to be broken in order to do so?
Who gives a flying fsck about the PS2? If you want to get screwed, buy a games console. Let's face it - PS2 hardware is crap. If you buy a PC right now you can do pretty much what you want with it and no lame-arse company can touch you. Modern GFX cards, the Emu10k1 and MMX/SSE/3DNOW have some really powerful technology that anyone can use (but noone seems to want to!?). The pc can do anything a PS2 can do, if you give it a suitable OS (Ie, instead of trying to chip a PS2, why don't these hackers do somthing cool with superior PC tech?) And yes, before you flame me, I am planning to do my bit here.
Nintendo claims they never take a loss on hardware sales (though that's hard to believe considering the Gamecube only costs $199).
Tricky accounting might let Nintendo say this without technically lying even if the real cost of all the parts + putting 'em together exceed the wholesale cost of a Gamecube.
Suppose IBM, MoSys and NEC want Nintendo to be successful and they're also on the weak side in the negotiation (don't know if that was the case, but read on). Nintendo negotiates incredibly cheap prices for the ASICS so the Gamecube really is cheap (to Nintendo) to build.
The chip guys aren't making much or are maybe even losing some money, but the contract guarantees a certain number of chips per quarter (at a particular price) will be bought over the next few years & they believe their process guys can get the cost down & they'll eventually make money.
It's the same idea as sell below cost now, but reduce the price slower than the cost falls. You're just moving the loss (and the potential profit gain from cost reductions) outside the primary manufacturer.
Of course, what really happens is contracts always get renegotiated so if Nintendo doesn't sell enough, they buy fewer chips & the penalty is softer than originally agreed. If the chip guys drive their cost way down & Nintendo gets wind of it, they renegotiate the price down.
Oh, and the engineers who enabled the cost reductions get nothing but complaints about how they didn't do enough or how fallout went up because 20 cents was saved on a crappier regulator.
Moderation: +1 bitter
Feel free to bash microsoft about similar agreements with OEMs regarding O/Ss
The exemptions in the DMCA are useless ... "Summary judgement for plaintiff" overrides [the right to a jury trial] ...
We'll see what the Supremes have to say about that. They can't just deny cert to every single copyright-related case that comes up in the United States court system.
Besides, I have another attack on the 17 USC 1201 that exploits the exemption for works that don't entirely fall into its "work protected under this title" scope. If even one of Charlie Chaplin's silent films (pre-1923 so it doesn't fall under perpetual copyright) is sold on DVD with CSS encryption, it may be possible to make a CSS decryptor that's marketed only for purposes of decrypting public domain content from a DVD (even though the rest of the DVD may be copyrighted under the compilation provisions).
Will I retire or break 10K?
Anyone with half a brain is able to discern that not everyone on slashdot has the same opinion. Stereotyping only makes you look like a fool.
>Sony losses money off of consoles.
Then, in the US at least, they may be breaking various laws (dunno which). Are PS/2s a higher cost in the US?
Also, if they are losing money, then that's their own fault. If I sell you a car for $1 with a 1 year warranty, and you come back saying its broke, and it costs me $1000 to repair, who is more the fool?
If you ask me, both Sony and you are idiots.
This judgement could have far reaching implications, with the judge implying that even playing original imports was illegal.
This effectively upholds region codes, both on games and DVDs.
The irony, in my case, is that I wouldn't go to the trouble of ripping (and very rarely pirating) DVDs if it weren't for CSS and region codes.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
> This also wipes out any chances of seeing home
> brewed software on the Playstation 2 anytime
> soon, as well.
All albinos are white; I've been called white; I'm an albino.
What the judge said was that games specificly licensed for distribution in one geographic location only should not be played in another. Said nothing about and implied nothing about games made "to be played in any geographic locale".
Net Yaroze showed me Sony's more in tune with the home hacker than most gaming companies have been in the past. Now that Linux is available for the PS2, I think that shows Sony's continuing support of the homebrewer. Now afaik the Linux distrib doesn't allow access to video hardware, and I don't know many people who want to play Quake 2 in software anymore, but for FreeCiv and relatively simple hacks? Perfect.
The question wrt homebrews is distribution, namely licensing. This article doesn't seem to step on any toes *nor* open any doors there. It's not good news, but it's not bad news. About homebrews, it's no news.
It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
I would love a way to put in my disk to a jukebox affair, and have my dvd player hook to it, my PS2, and my stereo. That way 'mishaps' would happen less.
Realisticly thou, How long will the hardware last, or be backward compatable? Further: CD's have the potential to last 30 years, but how many people will actually want to listen to them? Oh wait.. there is great 50's music :)
make Linux, not Microsoft. sin(beast) = -0.809016994374947424102293417182819
Copyright infringement is MUCH more serious [than contract violation]
OK. Another angle: In some jurisdictions, 17 USC 117 is nullified when the copyright holder says it's nullified, but can the copyright holder say that using any legal instrument other than a contract? If the courts reject enforceability of shrink-wrap or click-through EULAs, and a case makes its way to the Supremes, it may bring 117 back from the dead. Is this likely, or do the immense financial resources of the big five entertainment companies prevent any likelihood of a favorable ruling? If not, what should I put in a letter to my representative and senators?
Will I retire or break 10K?
I never modded my PS2 and it works fine the way it is. Basically, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!
You are allowed to resell your physical media if you've uninstalled all previous copies. Is the new owner bound by the license he only sees during the installation process? He cannot take advantage of any 'return for refund' option if he bought it in an estate sale or from a storage unit place auctioning off stuff from college students that didn't pay their summer storage fees. Is it a valid contract if you have no choice but to accept it? Are the companies supposed to allow someone who buys software in an auction to return it for a refund at retail price? Or are we just starting to enter this era and there are no legal guidelines?
What with the HD/Linux combo presumably coming to America, I was hoping that Sony would release a "home" version of thier Developers Kit. It would be a blast porting Angband to PS2.
Oh well.
The Genesis cartridges were a different shape in Japan than in America. But there was a converter you could buy, so you could buy $10 japanese games instead of $30 american games. The hiragana/kanjii by the way is way more of a hassle than you'd think.
Anyone remember if this was produced by Sega? I'd imagine not, but they certainly didn't go after the company for selling it.
Is there any way these restrictions could be challenged under WTO rules?
I think it can be argued that these liscenses are in direct violation from two points:
Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
and
Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Together these sections clearly show that I have the right to travel to any country in world, and if I have purchased the right to use software (e.g. a liscense) this cannot be taken away from me within the time limit of the liscense. Because I *DO* *OWN* the right to *USE* the software even if I do not own the software itself.
Therefore region coding and limitations are crap, and in direct violation of International law.
not sure if anyone has come across this, but from reading this on the register; http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/23814.html
it would appear that due to the rulling, it will be illegal for us brits to purchase non-region 2 dvds from overseas companies!
This is madness.
This was a case of MAI employees leaving to join Peak to service MAI computers. It was also a case of undisputed licence (machines & software acquired by third parties) not a shrink- or click-wrap.
IANAL, but this case seems to have been very poorly defended by a defendant that did plenty of wrong things & the courts wanted to punish. Some more obvious defenses that were apparently not used:
unreasonable restraint of trade to prohibit competition in servicing MAI computers,
agency -- Peak was doing the copying to RAM at third-party specific request, just like a 3rdP employee.
Peak wan't party to licence with third-party for the machine under service, so 17 USC 117 governs, not licence. 3rd parties should have been persued for licence violation.
Bad facts make bad decisions make bad law.
In the UK (US too) a legal system of precedent is used. This means that judges and juries should follow what was set down before.
When a case comes to court that challenges an old way of thinking, or would have NEGATIVE consequences, the judge or jury is well within thier rights to rule AGAINST the law. A poor judge is one who refuses to do his moral job and simply upholds the letter of the law.
This is the advantage a precedent system has over a penal system. There is a flexibility so that a single ruling can change the face and scope of the law.
Whats more is that pirates will not buy unchippable console, and those who were going to buy it will still buy it. Still chineese pirated copies will prolifierable at 10$ a pop, and sony won't be able to do anything about that, because it is grass roots.
Point is, Sony just had put a kleen into its foot just now. With stiff competition in the market and XBox to be chippable, so is Nintendo these chumps will get their PS/2 failed in no time.
Whats more is Xact copies will proliferate from Eastern Bloc and other countries, driving the price down of the games, making iso burning ineffective use of hard earned cash. That plus a bad taste of relationship with piraters, will reduce market share of PS/2 in the market.
does this mean they finally got rid of that horrible N64 controller as the 'games' icon? if so, good riddance. crappy console, ugly, awkward controller.
This also wipes out any chances of seeing home brewed software on the Playstation 2 anytime soon
Ah, it wouldn't be a Slashdot article without a misinformed quip at the end.
A ruling on mod chips does not affect anything to do with the Linux PS2 kit being released. That's like saying that a ruling saying removing region blocking for DVD's is bad would stop Apple from releasing iMovie/iDVD.
Quite simply, the judge did the right thing. If this was just region bypassing I would have been annoyed too, but it allows for backups, and that allows warez kiddies to distribute games for it. Look at the DC to see what rampant warezing can do.
Yes, it doesn't get rid of all backups, and you can probably just import another one from lik-sang, but it raises the bar of difficulty.
of homebrew games for the playstation - games and demos mostly - even some utilities check out this site http://www.hitmen-console.org
I ordered some games that were imported from Japan to play on my playstation. I also was told I needed to get my PSone moded, so I purchased a boot disc that supposedly does this.
It turns out that *new* playstation games detect if you have moded your playstation, and the game terminates. Does Sony have a legal right to terminate my game that I purchased legally because I made a modification to something that I own?
I spent $200 on games that were imported and can not play any of them. I think it is pure bull that Sony can get away with something like this. I think someone should bring a suit against Sony for making products that are built to be defective.
Whenever you buy a piece of software or anything with a EULA or similar they usually state that you must read and agree to the eula and that installation or use constitutes an agreement. HOWEVER, they also state that if you do not agree then you can return the product either to the place you purchased it from or the manufacturer and get a refund. Therefore I suggest you go to your local computer store, buy one copy of everything with a licence, open it, and return it saying you don't agree to the licence and demand a refund. This will incure costs on the manufacturer of reseller to transport the product to be repackaged, administrative costs, and, if enough people do this, a logistical problem that neither retailer nor manufacturer have planned for. On top of all that, the consumer rejection of licencing would be clear and irrefutable. Actually I think there should be a global anti-licence day. That'll tell em what we think.
Currently region coding poses a bit of a problem for me. You see, I live in America (region 1) and go to school in Australia (region 4). Most people in my dorm are from southeast Asia (region 3). I also speak Japanese and would like to play Japanese games (region 2).
Being unable to buy games here, being unable to borrow or lend games to friends, and being unable to play the Japanese games that are unavailable here is just slightly annoying.
So Sony, aside from purchasing FOUR ps2 consoles, what would you suggest I do?
You can change the DVD region in parental controls. Its not region free, but you can change which region it uses.
Wtf yo! There are two reasons I wanted this kickass Messiah thing
1: import games that won't show up here. (Think Vib Ribbin for PS1.)
2: play backup ps1 games. I, like many others, like having backups of games - I don't buy them that often, and they tend to sit around for a year or three after i play them. When two years later I decide to finish FF7, I might find it under my bed, or just lose the damned CD. Who know's where it went. Or it could just get scratched. I'm crying about FFX - I'm no more than a couple hours from beating it, I loan it to my brother for the week, and he reports to me that he can't get past Killika Temple - must have gotten corrupted or deeply scratched. So I can never really replay the game. Unless I buy a new one or rent it.
Hence, Backups Are Cool.
Honestly, Sony has lost a LOT of support from me recently - I've always been supportive of Sony products because they don't suck, but Sony itself seems to suck these days.
Poll your biggest fans, Sony. They won't remain that way for long.
From the Channel home page:
The judge acknowledged that indeed it may be useful to have a backup of software as allowed under the CDPA 1988, and there could possibly be cases of 'where necessary', but also the aspect of 'swapping' of backup disks between people would be uncontrollable, and damaging to Sony as nobody would obviously pay £25-45 for a game, therefore 'piracy' becomes the main factor for consideration above all other.
Though IANAL and am not familiar with UK courts, it seems this case should have a decent chance of being overturned on appeal (assuming it's appealed) as the judge contradicted both himself and the law. He admitted that the law explicitly allows for legal backups, but then he disallowed this explicitly legal act of backup simply because, in his opinion, people would be likely to commit crimes with the same tool. This seems similar to prior restraint, or perhaps guilt by association - he's disallowing something legal because it's associated with something illegal.
If we followed this argument to its logical conclusion, then guns, cars, knives, photocopiers, rocks, and pencils should all be illegal, along with every other kind of object that you might commit a crime with. If I can kill you by hitting you on the head with a phone book, should phone books be illegal for all purposes??
Perhaps a more rational question is: should a tool or technology be illegal if its principal or most likely use is by definition part of a larger criminal act? This applies to nuclear bombs, smallpox, and handguns, but not rifles (rifles are for killing everything, whereas handguns are only useful for killing people). Applying this argument to copy protection circumvention technologies is a bit of a stretch.
Personally, I choose to use circumvention technologies simply to avoid the pain of the copy protection technologies, which ALWAYS interfere with the quality of the media they're used with. In the mid-80s, my Commodore 64 floppy drive was destroyed by the hardcore copy protection in EA games; I stopped buying them, started pirating them, got a new drive, and everything was fine. Which is a perfect example of one reason copy protection will never work - it doesn't hurt pirates because they circumvent it, so the only people it hurts are legitimate customers. Of course, from the perspective of the record labels, there are no legitimate customers; we're all thieves.
Hmmm - this logic would mean that when an ISP copies a web site into its caching proxy for later distribution to their customers that this _also_ could be considered unathorized copying.
So just where and when did all the ISP's of the world obtain the right to copy websites indescriminantly in order to provide access to same to their customer base?
If the ISP's of the world did not obtain this right, then perhaps they should start paying the webmasters that create the content the surfing public wants to see. If this were the case then cyberspace might become a healthy environment full of excellent constantly updated content... web masters would not have to try to resort to advertising in order to support their websites... and people would not have to try to outwit the advertisers who are trying to stuff this advertising down our throats. In short, everyone including the ISP's would win.
Thank you for your ideas, they have been very helpful. I think I will opt for the later of your suggestions - I can't believe I didn't think of that before !
Copying into memory is copyright infringement? What utter rubbish clearly demonstrating the judge was a moron with no idea what he's talking about.
These guys should just move their operations somewhere else, like say NZ or Aus where they'll be protected from scum like Sony.
If any of you actually bothered to read the article, you would see that the judge acknowledge that there were plenty of legal things this chip allowed you to do, but because it also allowed the illegal playing of pirated games this outweighed the good points and THAT IS WHY SONY WON THE CASE. RTFM!!!
Which is a very dangerous ruling, maybe someone should ban the judge using the same reasoning that his potential for illegal acts outways any posible good he might do...
You are legally allowed to make and keep backups of your software. Right or wrong, the hardware manuf. is not legally obligated to allow you to use the backups, though.
But should they have the ability to prevent you being able to use your backups or to prevent a third party providing something to enable you to do so.
Effectivly it's case of "we can't take that right away from people, but we can manipulate things such that for all practical purposes the right is useles". The difference between these situations is really a matter of hair splitting.
I said this before about the whole Bleem thing, I'll say it again, ironic how a company who that produces god knows how many devices for piracy (CD writers, DVD writers, camcorders, VHS recorders, mini disc recorders, tape recorders, etc) should be the ones complaining about piracy.
"Dre don't get as high as me.... I'm Cheech and Chong" - Snoop Dogg
yeah, damn straight.
"...It's those arsehole customers of ours, always buying our stuff and then wanting to use it..."
I haven't read the judgment, but prima facia this ruling is inline with an odious EC court descision which 'protects' trademark (and therefore copyright) owners rights to the distribution of their particular goods within the EC. that particular case was brought by Levi's against a UK supermarket who sort to source the Jeans from the North American 'grey market' where they are cheaper. this case upheld a eariler EU case ( about 1992) also against UK supermarkets by a 'cartel' of trademark owners.
So whatever was stated in the judgement it would have to have been in line with these judgements or itself would have been subject to appeal.
as for the person who things that they buy the software in the US this is totally wrong, even IBM didn't purchase the original MS-DOS just a right or licsence to use and distrbute it (though MS did purchase the software or complete copyright)