Slashdot Mirror
No Love From Microsoft For Xbox Modders
RandyOo writes: "Only 4 days after news of an XBox port of MAME was posted to Slashdot, Microsoft contacted the admin of mame.net and downloads have now been removed. Knew I should have downloaded it earlier this morning ... Thank goodness for P2P!" And scubacuda writes: "According to The Register, one group of Xbox hackers have decided to halt development on its Xbox mod chip. It will be interesting to see how other developers follow suit."
The site of another modchip manufacturer at http://www.xtender.info/ is also gone.
***Quis custodiet ipsos custodes***
They're still posting source code as they update it. Of course, without the Xbox Development Kit (which they used to develop MAME-X), you can't build it, so it's kinda useless.
Precedent has already been set forth by Sega V. Accolade. One does not need permission from a platform developer to release software for that platform, given sufficient reverse engineering. However, since MAME-X, and all other Xbox software, uses Xbox's (and Windows') APIs, effectively nothing can be released without Microsoft's consent.
The EULA strikes again.
"Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
There are a lot of things you buy, that you can carry around, that you don't own. No need to list examples, there are plenty.
Microsoft is selling X-Box at a loss, they need to make profits by selling software. If some slick hacker buys 10,000 X-Boxen and converts them to PCs, Microsoft makes no money.
Not that I'm an avid M$ supporter, just that common sense as well as legal sense prevails.
How can porting MAME to an X-box possibly be either illegal or damaging to Microsoft?
Microsoft's business model is to lose money on the console and make it up on the games. With this mod chip, people could buy the console, and never purchase a game, costing Microsoft millions of dollars. That is how it is damaging to Microsoft.
The mod chip is just a flash rom. You can download the code and then flash it onto a blank chip. You don't even need any special hardware if your motherboard has a flashable bios. Just swap the bios in your computer for a blank chip, flash it with the xbox code, then put the original bios back. Then put the programmed chip into your xbox.
So the MAME project uses the Xbox Development Kit to develop MAME for the Xbox. What this means is one of the following:
- They bought a proper license for the XDK. The ability to buy one requires an approved title.
OR
- They illegally pirated a copy of the XDK.
Since the MAME project had a working version on a devkit box (the clear case Xboxes), I'd be willing to bet that a programmer at a games shop that has an approved Xbox title took it upon himself to port MAME.
Once MAME was developed, the only thing required to get it running on commercial Xboxes was either pressing a true DVD-9 and getting the code signed as an approved Xbox title, or using a mod-chip and burning the software onto a CD.
The first option wouldn't happen - MAME is not a title that would show the power of Xbox, nor would it be something the average consumer would want.
The legal problem with the second option is that the ported MAME software uses Microsoft's intellectual property. When building software for Xbox, your application is linked against several static libraries that provide the base software services (file systems, memory management, etc.)
Hence, Microsoft really does have the legal right to stop distribution of MAME in this case.
Don't ask me about the mod chip's legal case - I don't know about it at all.
You should never take life too seriously - You'll never get out of it alive.
I don't work for Microsoft, and I don't know their current licensing agreements of their SDK, but here's my understanding based on my prior experience (in working for Sega, in their Developer Technical Support group).
There are apparently two things that Microsoft is griping about - the sale of Mod Chips, and the distribution of the MAME X-Box binaries.
Issue 1 (Mod Chips): Microsoft may not have a leg to stand on legally. Until reverse-engineering is completely made illegal in the United States (and other countries where Microsoft could sue people), the Mod Chips are semi-legal. I say "semi-legal" because although they generally allow for the use of pirated games, you can also claim that they let you run other things (like non Microsoft formatted CD-R's/DVD's, etc.), like MAME for the X-Box.
Issue 2 (X-Box MAME): It is my understanding that the binaries that were distributed were built using the Microsoft X-Box SDK. This is a no-no. At Sega, we would rent (believe it or not, basically, rent) the development hardware (which was a special Dreamcast unit that had a debugging CPU, a hard drive and a GD-ROM drive that would boot from non-retail GD's) for somewhere in the neighborhood of $5,000, and we would include with that a copy of our SDK.
The hardware and SDK were heavily licensed, to the point that we could take them away from a developer on pretty much our whim (although I had never heard of such a thing happening - usually the developers returned them on their own volition, like when they were finished development for the system). Also, the game concepts had to go through committee decisions, and the companies getting the hardware and software were generally heavily scrutinized. I can say from personal experience that I was ordered to not provide a certain company with support, even though they had our hardware and SDK, because they weren't working on an authorized title.
So, basically, you weren't allowed to give out the SDK's to anybody, and since you don't have permission to use the SDK, it is illegal to distribute the resulting binaries (kind of like the Quake I for Dreamcast that was floating around - it required WinCE to build, but only licensed Sega developers had legal rights to use the WinCE SDK). On this issue, I completely agree with Microsoft.
Build it without the X-Box SDK, and you're in the clear. Otherwise, get a good lawyer, because you're committing copyright infringement.
-- Joe
The PS2 had NOTHING for 1 year!! They had no good games, and at the end of the year when the Xbox came out, they got GTA3 and FFX etc...
*ahem* So Gran Turismo 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, ATV Offroad Fury, SSX, Twisted Metal: Black, Onimusha, NBA Street, Tekken Tag Tournament and Sky Odessy don't count as "good games"? I'd hate to have your standard for "good games", as you are going to be disappointed with just about 99.999% of all games out there.
Sorry, I know, feeding the trolls and all, but this tired "the PS2 had no good games!" argument ticks me off whenever I see it.
I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
< There is absolutely no legal reason to own a modified console.
Untrue. If one wants to play legally purchased imported titles on a legally purchased console
Right, but also...
It allows people to write new programs for it. I could write a recipie database, a web server, or GrandTheftSpaceShuttle3000 and sell it or give it away for free.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
It costs Microsoft money the same way refilling ink cartridges costs printer companies money. Microsoft is losing something like $150 on each X-Box it sells. Any X-Box that is used for something other than selling game cartridges cost MS money.
It's also similar to the situation where people were selling cheap internet appliances expecting to lock people into long, expensive ISP contracts. Anyone who bought one and hacked it to use as a cheap terminal was costing the company money.
Another similarly ineffective money losing endeaver was the CueCat debacle. Remember their value attempts to prevent people from hacking on hardware that they were giving away at Radio Shack?
Perhaps the real issue is whether there's any enforceable law that props up a business model that obvious gaping holes in it. Maybe the DMCA is applicable here? Are hackers bypassing any protective measures included by MS?
Ummm you really need to check your facts, read about what the plans are for the PS2 Online, some games are free now, but they will change that to something like $10/month.
I think you're the one that needs to do some fact-checking. Read on.
MS is the only one that has a flat fee. The cost of their service remains the same even if you have 10 games (and trust me I know plenty of people with atleast 5 Xbox games).
From PlanetXbox: P2P Returns To PSO Thursday, June 27, 11:44 | Talon | Xbox Live is an innovative idea, an idea that can turn out to be the future of this industry but, with every great idea, there are always a few problems. When Microsoft announced that Xbox Live would cost only $50 for an entire year things seemed on the up and up. Today, Sonic Team announced that Phantasy Star Online (PSO) would have the same pay-to-play structure that Dreamcast owners had to deal with in Phantasy Star Online V2. The only difference is that the Hunters License will no longer be $15 for three months. As it stands, the Hunters License will ring players a cool $20 per month in Japan. Of course, North American pricing hasn't been disclosed but, if pricing is anything like what it was for the Dreamcast version, we're likely to see similar numbers.
So, you see, your Xbox Live registration fee does you nothing for PSO. And there's nothing to stop anyone else from doing the same thing...especially if they'd like Xbox players to be able to play against other platforms.
The console video game market doesn't need any more competition than it already has, let alone from Microsoft. I'm sorry that you were short-sighted enough to buy an Xbox, but you don't have to cry about it here.
Okay, the information is VERY spartan so I'm mostly reading between the lines and making a guess here...
Microsoft demanded that the downloads be stopped because the binary was created using Microsoft's Xbox Dev Kit (XDK). Either something distributed in the binary, or the license restrictions on the Dev Kit forbid distributing the binary.
The source is still legally obtainable. The binary is probably available illegally through LimeWire/Kazaa/IRC.
Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
From http://www.xbox.com/dev/regdev.htm: "NO XBOX SOFTWARE PRODUCT(S) MAY BE PUBLISHED, OR DISTRIBUTED TO END USERS, EXCEPT BY A LICENSED PUBLISHER PURSUANT TO AN XBOX DEVELOPMENT KIT AND XBOX PUBLISHER LICENSE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY MICROSOFT."
So it sounds like they violated the license on their XDK. Question: How did they get an XDK, and how can the rest of us get one? Or are they also out there on Lime Wire/Kazaa/IRC?
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
One wonders when Ford Motor Company will start telling people they can't put mag wheels on their cars without voiding the warranty, or worse, having their corporate lawyers shut down the mag wheel manufacturers.
Well the government, with the full cooperation of the auto industry, prohibits people from updating the firmware in their automobile engine's fuel control system (mod chips for the car) to get better performance/worse emissions.
So I guess it's already happening, albeit not with 'shiney things' like mag wheels (apparently your level of understanding of automotive things.)
Actually, the don't have any right to limit what you can do with the hardware you bought. If they sold it to you for a loss, stupid them. The hardware itself is completely yours to do with as you please. What MS is using, and what companies who invoke legal action for hacking systems generally use, is the fact that in some part of the hacked system, MS-developed software is being used. In the case of this, its the code in the XDK. Since software isn't bought in the traditional sense, but instead licensed, they have a hook to stick it to you legally. Companies can use BIOS code in a similar manner. What we need now is somebody to make a clone of the XDK software (maybe using stuff from WINE...) so resulting binaries are "clean." That would stick it to them!
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Are you referring to this?
So, depending on the game, it's not so simple as you seem to think. How much did you pay to play Quake 3 online? Diablo? These are "games worth playing" with "large user bases".
Also, as noted in other posts, Microsoft's strategy may not prevent developers from charging additional costs. See PSO for an example.
Finally, there's this silly little thing known as "conflict of interests." What if Microsoft makes a game that competes against another developer's game (think EA's Madden versus MS's NFL Fever)? Electronic Arts would much rather support their own network independent of MS than depend on a direct competitor. This is not anti-MS rhetoric, this is how business works.
-J
Don't underestimate the power of the installed base. You can't sell games to people that don't own consoles. Not only that, as I recall (ergo, take this with a grain of salt...) there have been more PS2 systems sold in the time since the X-Box was released than X-Boxes. That's not exactly setting the world on fire if you're MS.
I think Sony knows exactly what they're doing. People keep saying that online play is going to be the next killer app for consoles but it isn't happening yet. The huge broadband rollout has not gone as well as expected, which is a big part of this expected console network boom (hence X-Box has built in Ethernet). If I had to guess, Sony put a plan in place to have the PS2 online but they're really waiting until the next hardware iteration for it to take off. I don't really care if consoles go online soon or not--it's a novelty. At some point it may be huge. But not now.
-J