Slashdot Mirror
Chip a Playstation, Go to Jail
perogiex writes "A man in Ottawa was
convicted of selling and installing mod chips out
of his computer store. Sony is overjoyed, man is less than thrilled. This is the first time such a case was tried in Canada." From the article: Garby said he didn't know he was committing a crime and would have never gotten involved in selling mod chips if he had known the law. Update: 07/24 21:53 GMT by M : Headline corrected; it's clearly mod chips for the original Playstation, not the Playstation 2.
For anyone who looks at mod chips as a way to do hobbiest development, versus piracy, this kind of thing is just depressing.
Dude, I think I can see my house from here.
Has this been tested, legally, in the US?
Alas, Babylon.
I'm scratching my head. What law was broken here? The article doesn't say very much. Something about "copyright laws", which is far from conclusive.
Everyone thinks the stupidity claim will work.. never does
This guy was selling a line of 413 pirated games and didn't know what he was doing was illegal? It sounds like he deserves what he got.
Or did you mean "PS2"? ;)
While I agree that chipping a PS2 shouldn't be a crime, the above is an extreamly lame excuse.
Free Mac Mini
He didn't know it was a crime?
He should've checked.
If it's morally questionable (and, please, don't tell me that chipping your PS2 so you can play pirated games on it isn't at least morally questionable), it just might be illegal, too!
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Looks like I'll be picking up a new hobby...
ah, yes, the old "ignorance of the law" defence.
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
The article states that he was selling pirated games alongside the mod chips. Maybe the charge of copyright infringement related to the illegal video games being sold (as Sony did not design the mod chips, it is unclear of whose copyright he would be violating).
ByteMyCode.com: A Web 2.0 code sharing community.
It sounds like he was also selling pirated games. I wonder if they would ever have cracked down on him if all he had done was sell and install mod chips. The article seems to downplay the fact that he was selling pirated games as well.
Even though I think selling mod chips shouldn't be illegal, I don't have sympathy for people who are selling pirated software!
according to the article, he sold "a line of 413 pirated video games" -- that's a little more than just selling modchips.
dennis
While it shows that he wasn't acting malevolently, ignorance of a law does not provide any sort of exemptions legally. I do not agree with the law or the punishment, but surely this guy must have realized that his hardware hacking was pretty nonconvential for a retailer and therefore perhaps legally questionable.
ôó
was it the mod chips they got him on, or the line of 413 pirated video games that he was selling the reason for his downfall?
i wouldn't have thought the mod chip selling was illegal, seeing how they're selling all over the place. does anyone have any more detail?
[ ] Bad
[ ] Good
[ ] CowboyNeal
sulli
RTFJ.
He was selling pirated games too, for something like $10 a pop.
Maybe the mod chip I can see, but "gee I didn't know hit was illegal to burn that disc." Yeah, right.
MJC
If you read the article, he was also selling a line of 417 different *pirated games*.
If he didnt know *that* was illegal, he's full of it.
If you read the article he was also selling 430 PIRATED games. Yea right he didnt know. He was selling pirated games, he deserves what he got. The two counts of selling unauthorized computer equipment is bunk though. You should be able to sell mod chips.
I mod down any one who says "I'm sure I will get modded down for this"
He was charged after an RCMP investigation found he was selling a line of 413 pirated video games and charging $30 to install "mod chips" in Sony PlayStation video game consoles
He was SELLING pirated video games on top of the mod chips and he thought there was nothing wrong with it? And on top of that, he was advertising this in the local paper? This guy has some serious balls. Honestly, he deserves the punishment.
PS/2 is easy to chip.. its USB and firewire that gives me problems
"he was selling a line of 413 pirated video games" doesn't jibe with "Garby said he didn't know he was committing a crime"
Read the story. He was selling pirated games and was busted on copyright infringement. There is no mention about the mod chip being illegal. There is only Sony spouting their garbage about the mod chip.
(emphasis mine)
Garby sold the chips from his computer store, Kustum Komputers
That in itself should get him life in prison with no chance of parole.
Trolling is a art,
Just a question: would it have still be illegal for him to just sell kits with detailed instructions from his store?
I was always under the impression that you could do whatever you want to your own hardware, so I don't know if this would be a terrible thing to do.
Since the mod chips circumvent copy protection, I can see how they are made illegal under the DMCA in the US. Is there a Canadian version to this I am not aware of?
2) Heh heh.. he still made some money off the deal.
3) Damn! 413 games! Where did you say this guy's shop was?
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
when you don't read slashdot!
if he was an avid reader he would have known allllll about this..
The greatest right given is the right to be wrong...
Garby said he didn't know he was committing a crime and would have never gotten involved in selling mod chips if he had known the law.
Unfortunately, ignorance of the law won't keep you out of trouble. You still have to face the consequences.
allow playing games that have been copied to CDR.
It's legitimate use is that it allows playign games from Japan.
FYI, the PS and PS2 also have region encoding similar to DVDs. Japanese games can't be played on American consoles, and (I believe) vice-versa. The mod chip prevents the system from recognizing that its not a legitimate disc (by replying to all queries as 'yes, this is legal')
Just as DeCSS is primarily used for watching other-regon dvds, but has a side effect of getting unencrypted content, the mod chip allows playing other-region games, and has a side effect of allowing games on CDR also.
Chances are that's why he got arrested. In the US, he could probably (also?) be arrested under the DMCA.
I'm not taking any sides, just stating facts...
Garby sold the chips from his computer store, Kustum Komputers, which he ran from November 1999 to March 2001. He advertised the mod chip sales and installation service in local flyers.
I'm sure it was mod chips for original Playstation, not for Playstation 2. In arcticle's text it also called just "mod chips" in Sony PlayStation video game consoles.
I think he was likely fined mostly for the sales of the pirated games. I don't believe we have an equivalent to the DMCA in Canada, and therefore the mod chip is perfectly allowable to be sold in Canada. He got caught for software piracy, not for breaking DRM.
But, I am not absolutely sure on this. Could a Canadian Lawyer verify this for me? Also, do you know if he could get caught on that Mod chip for a different reason?
~ kjrose
I really wish slashdot editors would do a piece of their homework. Look, the guy was selling copies of games thru his store. He had 413 different rom images in stock. Oh, and he was installing mod chips for 30$ too, but I'm sure that's now how he grossed 300,000$.
Here's a scenario. You bought a rad new PS2 game, you want to make sure that if it gets scratched, eaten, etc. . . you can still play your game, so you burn a copy, and use the mod chip to play the game. You paid for the game once, right? What's wrong with that.
If you ask me, aside from the selling pirated games, this guy had a case.
--What, you ain't know about them country fried sessions?
Phase 1: Mod chips
Phase 2: ?
Phase 3: PROFIT
(except here it actually worked)
Feel free to mod this down, this now common comment is actually getting pretty old, and i'm just trying to overdo it so it's not funny anymore.
He was charged after an RCMP investigation found he was selling a line of 413 pirated video games and charging $30 to install "mod chips" in Sony PlayStation video game consoles.
It sucks about him getting busted for the mod chips, but if you're selling pirated games, you've got no excuse for a little punishment. When you start profitting off of your ability to make exact replicas of other peoples work, with little work of your own, you're really profitting off of their work, not yours - and that's not fair.
-Andrew
I'd be tempted to defend this punk if he wasn't selling "a line of 413 pirated video games". Mod chips are great for playing games that never get sold in the US market, imports like Puyo Puyo games and such. I also detest hardware manufacturers who demand control over their hardware that they sell through retail outlets without forcing the customer to sign a contract. If I want to solder my toaster up to my PS2, IMHO, I think I should have a right to do it.
But noooo, this punk sells illegally copied CDs, slashdot posts it as "man convicted for installing mod chips" in an attempt to spin the story. Smooth move, Travolta. I'm sorry, but I left my gold stars in my other jacket.
Reading over the comments, I've seen people claim 413, 417 and 430... so far. All in the same ballpark, but really, how hard is it to copy a simple number from an article?
Look, there is a PS/2 and there is PS2 (without slash in the middle) First is very old IBM computer, second -- new (relatively) gaming console.
So, what this guy was selling ??
umm, what's with the Ottawa postcard link?
I keep picturing a guy going to jail for upgrading his IBM 386.
Je t'aime Stéphanie
It is called civil disobedience, and it is often the only way to get injustice corrected (and the DMCA is extremely unjust).
If enough people are arrested for outrageously stupid reasons, public awareness of what is happening will be raised. I remember telling a non-technical friend of mine, who is a pilot for a major airline and served in the airforce (and saw combat in Yugoslavia), about the arrest of Dmitry and he was outraged. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen him as angry as he was that day. He took that injustice very personally, as do most people who believe in the ideals of democracy and not the rule of corporate oligarchs, cartels, and monopolists.
The more lay people that are made aware of these injustices the better, and this guy is going a long way toward accomplishing this. The excesses of copyright have only succeeded these last decades because the awareness of what has happened (chronic copyright extentions, and now fundamental changes in its nature from a civil to a criminal law, and from a largely commercial regulation to a profoundly invasive personal one) has been absent. Copyright law, in its current form, will likely not withstand public scruitiny very well, which is something that would be good for every one of us (returning it back to its pre-1970 duration, if not repealing the notion altogether and replacing it with a gentler, non-monopolistic regime for compensating authors and artists, but that is a discussion for another day).
Raising public awareness of these issues is probably one of the most important things we can be doing, and if we as technically knowledgable people do not do so, no one will. This guy should be applauded for stepping up to the plate and putting his personal liberty on the line for the greater public good.
If we had more people willing to do this sort of thing when the despots seize personal liberty after personal liberty we would live in a much better world. He is a man who clearly feels strongly enough about software freedom to risk jail time, up to 5 years, which is a hell of a lot more grave than the $17,000 fine mentioned in the article (I wonder why they played that down. That makes his actions even more impressive).
Sony is over joyed, man is less than thrilled, america still doesn't care about canada, they're not even a real country anyway. And here' Michelle with weather.... Michelle...
First of all its a PS2 not PS/2.
Second, the artice said Sony Playstation, meaning the orginal playstation.
This slashdot artice makes it seem like they will go after you for putting a mod chip in, well this idiot "was selling a line of 413 pirated video games".
This guy sold a line of pirated software, according to the report. He was also fool enough to advertise that he would make modifications which would allow people to play pirated games. Then he claimed that he did not realize any of this was illegal. What planet is he from?
I agree that the recent trend in copyright law is draconian. But this guy is not the poster child for the cause of consumer rights. He's an idiot, and example of what copyright laws are good for -- protecting content creators from having their work ripped off.
You know who you are.
The Canadians who always act like the US is the only country with crazy laws and courts. The ones who always say "this could never happen here" and "this happens because US citizens are so lazy."
I think this clearly shows this is becoming a WORLDWIDE problem. And not just because of the long arm of the US.
They call it a "precedent setting" because they got him for 413 pirated games or because he made a mod chip? Of course selling copies of games have always been illegal, but there is not law AFAIK that makes it illegal to sell/make mod chips. I do enjoy the ignorance card he played there when he was caught. "Officer, these are only backup copies of my games to which I have misplaced. It's a good thing I made backups!"
"I bet I'll get blamed for this." --Mayor Quimby
He was fined for selling pirated video games, as others have pointed out. As well, it was PlayStation games and mod chips, not PS2 (and most definitely NOT PS/2).
"Editors": Is it so hard to read the article?
"He was charged after an RCMP investigation found he was selling a line of 413 pirated video games and charging $30 to install "mod chips" in Sony PlayStation video game consoles. "
he got punished for selling pirated games, not installing modchips. we don't have the crap laws like the US.
Ignorance of the law is no defense.
That said, I'm interested to find out which part of the Criminal Code specifically makes installing mod chips, and presumably other circumvention devices, a felony offense. It sounds rather DMCA-like. I wonder if Parliament passed something DMCA-like with almost no fanfare. The article makes it sound like the mod chip conviction is the important one for being the first of its kind.
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
Yeah, those 400-some stolen games were really his property, eh?
Well, I suppose the cd-r's were his, but certainly not the data on them.
Positive precedent? This ass has done nothing positive, and there was never any chance of anything positive coming from his actions.
Of course, as the ad says, mod chips also allow people to play copied games, but this is far from their only purpose. (Mods used to come out for cartridge systems by Sega and Nintendo as well, though it was often enough to just resize the cartridge slot.)
If he was convicted of mod-chipping seperately from selling pirated games, it is a big deal. Sony says the case was, "precedent setting." Therefore, I doubt the conviction was based on his selling of pirated games, which are already illegal.
Just one more reason not to do business with Sony. I'll accept anti-piracy measures. Iw ill never accept reion coding and I will not support a company that participates in it, especially with such vigor as Sony.
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
I seriously doubt that the fact he was modding PSX/PS2's contributed to his case compared to the actual software piracy. It's not illegal to open up something you own (yes, you actually OWN the hardware.. not 'licensed' like the software) and make modifications to it. The chips are designed to get around copy-protection though, yes, but cable descrambler boxes are for the same reasons yet thousands of retailers can sell them in Popular Science and Playboy. I think the bigger animal here is the software piracy.. once you cross the line and start SELLING the games, you are in for a kick in the stomach. I think Sony is focusing more on the mod chip side of things to discourage chipmakers / installers.
I always thought that the main reason that people installed mod chips was to play imported games? Sure, theres the benefit of playing pirated copies, but I think most people use them to defeat region protection. And if I remember correctly, didn't the Gameshark CDX for Dreamcast act like a mod chip (put in the gameshark disc, remove it and insert an import to play). And while I'm sure he knew what he was doing was illegal, couldn't those 400 games have all been imports?
Only the meek get pinched. The bold survive.
He was convicted of selling 413 pirated video games and Playstation mod-chips.
How do I know this? Well, first, I read the article; second, I know that there aren't 413 GAMES available for the Playstation 2!
Also, the PS/2 is a computer from IBM, and does not require mod chips to play pirated games. Sony doesn't call their Playstation 2 the PS/2, perhaps because they don't want to get sued. Does slashdot want to get sued? Well, it'd be nice to have some penalties for irresponsible journalism...
Finally, considering the facts of the case, it is disingenuous for the writers of this article to call it a conviction for selling mod-chips, since that wasn't all it was.
In conclusion, all you journalists are lazy, illiterate, and incompetent. If you don't agree with me, prove me wrong by writing something accurate, intelligent, or interesting.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Ignorance of the law excuses noone. There are about thirty different latin phrases, but the bottom line best response to our poor defendant's please is this: "You're kidding, right?"
four counts of selling unauthorized computer equipment
Isn't that a bit misleading?
If I buy an extension cord and use it to plug in my computer, who "authorized" that bit of computer equipment? Who authorized Bob's Harware to sell it to me?
-... ---
The one true doughnut.
Best Slashdot Co
(Score: -1, Troll)
Moderators R the funny!
Why is it illegal? It sounds to me like the law is morally questionable? Why shouldn't I be able to play Japanese imports, it's *my* PS2. (Actually, I don't own one, I'm just asking rhetorical questions). It seems to me that Sony must have some important need for these measures, e.g. price gouging in certain markets by restricting global free trade.
>>selling mod chips shouldn't be illegal?!?!
>Do you also have a hacked cable box? It is theft of service.
You miss the point so badly:
If you OWN something, it's YOURS. Not only do you NOT have the right to take away people's freedom, but you also have no right to even KNOW what people do with their property.
I'll give you a quick lesson in right & wrong:
RIGHT: You decide to paint your car YOU OWN, a color other than what it was manufactured.
WRONG: You LEASE (or steal) a car, and repaint it without the owner's permission.
Seriusly, the guy had 413 copied PS titles that he was selling from his "store".
I hope he get raped in the anus by a big gay black dude.
INAL, but as far as I'm aware, Mod chipping is a grey area of legality. Is it not illegal to sell or own the chips, however it is illegal to sell the PS/2 with one pre-installed, as that comes under the heading of selling Sony's product with unauthorized modifications.
What the customer dies with the unit *after* he pays for it is totally up to the customer...as long as the customer accepts the fact that it will not be covered under warranty.
It is a grey area because the ModChips can be used for legitimate uses as well as illegal ones...Much the same way that a CD-RW can be used for legit back-up and archival purposes as well as for pirating software.
This guy hasn't a leg to stand on as he sold Sony Product with unauthorized modifications as well as selling pirated software.
Phoenix
BTW: Before I get flamed/trolled, a legit use of a mod chip would be to have a working copy of a game that can get scratched and/or broken while the original is sitting in a nice shelf somewhere safe.
-- Wiccan Army, 13th Airborne Division "We will not fly silently into the night"
Should the focus of the story be on the chips? I always thought selling pirated games were frowned upon more then using mod chips?
Chika Chik-ah... do-e ow ow.
I've also got lawyers doing patent and lexis/nexis and google searches, to make sure all my thoughts are OK. And that I'm a True Patriot, and not violating the DMCA and thus secretly hoping that bin Laden triumphs.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
From the article:
Robert Garby, 38, pleaded guilty to two counts of copyright infringement and four counts of selling unauthorized computer equipment
Can somebody familiar with canadian law explain to me what "selling unauthorize computer equipment" involves. Is this like not getting the chips properly licensed with the canadian equivalent of the FCC? Or does canada have some sort of DMCA-like provision that I'm not aware of.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What? I cannot add a 387 in my old IBM? Will this be extended to all PCs in order to force us to buy Palladium compliant hardware?
So his argument appears to be, "Gosh, I was providing a chip that allowed people to use pirated software but I had no idea that was illegal."
Uh-huh. We see how far that defense got him. About as valid as a person driving a 2002 Chevy blazer that a guy on the street sold them for $200 and claiming they had no idea it might be stolen.
* As is generally the case, my opinions do not reflect those of my employer.
Even for Slashdot, this is depressing - Slashdot paints the guy as the victim. Read the freaking story guys - this guy is part of the reason all the regulatory crap and bills are being put forth. Let's see - he sold 400+ pirated games, and installed a mod chip that did nothing more than allow pirated games to be played.
Huh? No performance increase? No fair use? Just for pirating games? And he's the victim?!?!?! He's just plain stupid - and knew exactly what he was doing. How do you not mod a PS2 to play pirated games and sell those games without knowing it's wrong???
Read the article before you post it - he should have gotten hard time. There's a big difference between a mod-chip that enhances performance and a mod-chip that facilitates an obvious crime. He deserved more than what he got and I hope they track down those modded ps2's - that kind of crap makes it harder on the rest of us who try to do what should be legitimate and fair use excepting the harrassment we get from MPAA and friends. This guy just gave them fuel for the fire to screw the rest of us. Get over your fanatisism and see crime as a crime for crying out loud!
Well no shit he was convicted it says he was selling over 400 pirated games too.
There's a little history here you guys don't know about.
A while back, 5yrs maybe, the RCMP got caught having more PCs with Win95 than they had licenses for, so they cut a deal with M$, and now are in the habit of prosecuting anyone/corp that so much even bends a ELUA. In summary, the RCMP is sucking huge corporate dick. This was demonstrated in their unprecedented effort to prosecute consumers "stealing" US satelite signals with the new digital dishes. Wtf, last time I checked, the RCMP is funded by Canadian taxpayers, not corporate America. This is very depressing for all Canadians who have come to understand the current RCMP position of being the pitbulls for US Multinationals.
Raise Your Fist and stop your Bitching
Fester
Phase 1: Provide a service (PS2 modding) which there is demand for, and charge for it an amount of money that is greater than the cost of providing the service, but not so much that people are no longer willing to pay for it.
Phase 2: People utilize the service.
Phase 3: Profit.
Makes sense to me.
(Maybe you should come up with some other abbreviation for "Playstation 2"...abbreviation overloading is a Bad Thing. :-) )
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
If everyone is expected to know all the laws and what they mean, then why are there so many lawyers? Our law systems are so confusing and complex that we have to hire special people to interpret and find laws that will help defend us and prosecute others. So it's not suprising that someone might not know there's a new law saying something is illegal.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
If you OWN something, it's YOURS. Not only do you NOT have the right to take away people's freedom, but you also have no right to even KNOW what people do with their property.
Not that I disagree with your point at all, indeed I heartily agree. But try telling that to the BATF if, for example, you make a minor mechanical modification to a legally owned semi-automatic rifle that converts it to fully-automatic (ie a machine gun), or cut the barrel of your legally owned shotgun down to less than 18 inches.
If you thought DMCA enforcement was tough...
-- Alastair
I know at least on the PS1 you had to install a mod chip to play Japanese games. I think it had something to do with a DVD-like region control system, or maybe the consoles were just made to different specs in the states.
Some of the best stuff comes from the land of the rising sun, and never gets imported. What if I want to play too?
'Course now, this is probably a DMCA violation in relation to circumventing the intended use or some other such tripe.
"I do not fear computers. I fear lack of them." -Isaac Asimov
In which Gord is arrested.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
There aren't 413 playstation 2 games (as said by several people), so the PS/2 signifies playstation/playstation 2. a collection of games for both. Ergo, he was probably modding both of them as well. Quit your trolling
--fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
I agree with your ideals on property and liberty. Fully. What's mine is mine - hell I paid for it. But in this case, it seems i paid for the right to use the techonology that has been made available - not the right to copy software or develop games.
I hate the idea that big businesses have become the ones protected from innovators by American patent laws, but it doesn't change that they do hold rights.
Relax and review what others have said: "There are legitimate uses for mod chips. For one to develop games without paying Sony the 30k for a development set. " Is this legitimate use? bypassing the development license?
Anything you say will be held against you.
The /. version of this says he was convicted of selling and installing mod chips, but makes no mention of the pirated video games he was also selling. Since the original story is often unavailable moments after a slashdot article goes up, this was truly a disservice to the readers. The story gives no clear indication of what the hoser was really convicted of, the mod chip or the illegal copyrighted software, but I expect there would have been a lot more trouble of getting a conviction without the illegal software. For that matter, the guy was only fined 17k and giver a year of probation after selling (at least) 30k of illegal software, doesn't sound like he made out too bad or that this will seriously curtail the piracy issue.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
342.1(1) Unauthorized use of computer
342.1 (1) Every one who, fraudulently and without colour of right,
(a) obtains, directly or indirectly, any computer service,
(b) by means of an electro-magnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other device, intercepts or causes to be intercepted, directly or indirectly, any function of a computer system, or
(c) uses or causes to be used, directly or indirectly, a computer system with intent to commit an offence under paragraph (a) or (b) or an offence under section 430 in relation to data or a computer system is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
342.1(2) Definitions
(2) In this section,
computer program means data representing instructions or statements that, when executed in a computer system, causes the computer system to perform a function;
computer service includes data processing and the storage or retrieval of data;
computer system means a device that, or a group of interconnected or related devices one or more of which,
(a) contains computer programs or other data, and
(b) pursuant to computer programs,
(i) performs logic and control, and
(ii) may perform any other function;
data means representations of information or of concepts that are being prepared or have been prepared in a form suitable for use in a computer system;
electro-magnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other device means any device or apparatus that is used or is capable of being used to intercept any function of a computer system, but does not include a hearing aid used to correct subnormal hearing of the user to not better than normalhearing;
function includes logic, control, arithmetic, deletion, storage and retrieval and communication or telecommunication to, from or within a computer system;
intercept includes listen to or record a function of a computer system, or acquire the substance, meaning or purport thereof.
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 45.
He was also convicted of straightforward, old-style piracy; he was apparently selling pirated games on CDRs.
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
How is this article precedent setting, he was selling pirated video games which makes it easy for them to establish that the mod chip's were illegal because he was installing them to allow them to play video games he was selling.
It's sort of like a crowbar, its completely legal to have, but if you are breaking into someone house with one its considered B&E equipment.
It looks like Sony and the media are trying to focus on the mod chip angle and not the real issue of video game piracy, piracy has always been illegal, and i would doubt that if you're not selling pirated games, they could arrest you for mod chipping.
ITC Grants Microsoft Request For Video Game Market Probe
Ok...They have cracked Canada -- that is like a pre-season warm up game. Now they should start the league games and go for China. If you have ever talked to someone who has lived and/or been to China -- it is pretty evident that almost everything sold on the open market is is pirated..(let alone the closed door stuff). Chances are, you would not be able to buy a legit version of something even if you wanted to.
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
moderation
Oh come on. If you buy a cable box, and hack it to decrypt content you haven't paid for, that's supposed to be OK? How about if you buy a blank key from the hardware store, and then steal, copy, and return the key to the back door of the movie theater. You then use the copied key to sneak into movie showings you haven't paid for - do you really think that's OK?
The story clearly says that he was busted for both copyright infringement (the illegal program disks) AND selling "unauthorized computer equipment" Seems to me that the formet charge was vaild, while the latter was not. Does this mean that if I sell an overclocked computer in Canada (read; a CPU being used in an "unauthorized way") that I can now go to jail?
These guys didn't see the law either?
This seems like a legit company selling a device to allow Playstation 2 to play copies, backups etc. Is this illegal?
"...selling unauthorized computer equipment."
So now computer equipment must be authorized? What about cars? When something breaks down in my Civic, must I only go to a Honda-Authorized dealer to get a part for $100, when I could grab the same part from Napa for $30?
"Jesus saves, but everyone else in a 10 foot radius takes full damage from the fireball."
posted by apple lied yesterday:
.Mac service be more reliable? .mac member. .Mac membership and an active net connection?
Q: Will the new for-pay
A: No.
Q: Will there be a phone number to call for technical support?
A: No.
Q: Will there be an e-mail address to report outages?
A: No.
Q: Will there, in fact, be any support at all?
A: No.
Q: Will the 100MB of storage come with an increased bandwidth limit for web sites?
A: No.
Q: Will you be telling us what the bandwidth limits are?
A: No.
Q: Will you support CGI, PHP, SSI, SQL, servlets, JSP, WebObjects applications, or anything else beyond regular static HTML files?
A: No.
Q: Will I be able to get access to my web logs? Or any other realtime webspace access statistics?
A: No.
Q: What about backup--our files are safe if we back them up to iDisk, right?
A: No. Apple does not guarantee the integrity of any files on iDisk, even if placed there by the Apple Backup software.
Q: Well, we can at least use the Backup software to back up our computers to CD-R, right?
A: No, not if you have any files bigger than 650MB.
Q: What about using my external tape drive, DVD drive or Firewire hard drive?
A: No, Backup only works with Apple-supplied internal drives. And only if you're a
Q: So the backup software doesn't back up from my local hard disk to my local CD burner, unless I have a
A: Correct.
Q: OK. The service also includes anti-virus software. Are there any Mac OS X viruses at all?
A: No.
Q: If I don't use Microsoft Office, do I need to worry about macro viruses?
A: No.
Q: Umm... OK. So how much for this invaluable service?
A: $99 for one year. Plus tax. In advance.
Q: Can I get two accounts, for me and my wife?
A: Sure, that'll be $198 plus tax. In advance.
Q: No, I mean can I get a second account at a discount because I've already bought one?
A: Oh, alright then, quit whining. You can get a second account for $10 a year if you buy one full account.
Q: And it'll have the backup, anti-virus, and web functionality?
A: No, only an e-mail address.
Q: Ah... but at least it'll be a full e-mail account, right?
A: No, you'll only get 5MB of space. But that's nearly enough to hold five days' spam.
Q: Can't my two accounts just share the same space for a nominal extra fee?
A: No.
Q: Is there a satisfaction guarantee?
A: Yes. Apple reserves the right to terminate your access to the online services and the software, without cause, without notice and without refunding your money, if it's not satisfied with your behavior.
Q: What kinds of things am I not allowed to post on my web site?
A: Anything "lewd" or "vulgar", anything "embarrassing" to anyone, or anything that counts as advertising for any product or service.
Q: So you want $99 a year for an e-mail address, useless backup software, anti-virus software I could buy for $50, and web space limited to inoffensive pictures of fluffy kittens? $99 even if I only want to keep the "lifetime e-mail address" that you previously said was free just for buying a Mac?
A: Yes. Pay up now, in three weeks we'll delete your files and bounce your mail.
Q: I have one more question... What exactly are you smoking out there in Cupertino?
A: We think it's crack. Think different.
I don't see how making a physical modification to an object you own, or having somebody else do it for you, even for a fee, can be illegal. Custom cars. Imagine if Chevy got all excited by engine modifications? Hmmm. this begs the question...can I paint my playstation another color if I want? The analogy isn't ideal, but surely if I own the machinery, I should be allowed to do to it what I wish. Perhaps Sony should accept that people out there are going to do stuff to the products they sell, which they will not like...like throw it out the window in anger...and that they will have to live wih it... Software piracy, now thats a completely different issue...
You're forgetting that the development kit is just that, a real kit. It includes software liscenses to programs and compilers that you cannot get legally without buying a developers kit. Also the developers kit includes a ps2 that has extra debugging features built into it. So yeah, as long as you are not stealing software to program on the ps2 (which is easy since the arch is supported by the gnu gcc), then yeah it's perfectly legal and legitimate.
Modding your ps2 should be perfectly legal, but copying games shouldn't be. I don't know 100% if modding your ps2 in america is legal anymore but as long as you are not copying games or movies then why should it be illegal? Being able to play games from other regions is a really neat feature, as some games are never released in America. Owning a ps2 from japan and playing games from japan isn't illegal, but for some reason modifying your american ps2 to play japanese games is? Seems kinda lame to me.
It happened to my neighbor just last week!
Well, that and the fact that he was using the computer to download Celine Dion MP3s - a capital offense up here!
No, not for the reasons you think - we don't live in an RIAA-driven world up here, but rather because ever since that Quebec independence mess Canadians have been unanimously in favor of imprisoning and executing the stupid by any means possible.
Next target: People who actually do 'switch' after they watch those Apple commercials.
The act of "theft" is what is wrong, not the modification. It is the actual "theft" that should be prosecuted. The mere exercise of an individual's property rights should not be prosecuted.
Individual property rights are one of the pillars of the modern western democracies. They should not be trampled upon so casually.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
In general this wouldn't be necessary because journals have an obligation to present the facts and correct themselves as needed. Slashdot rarely reflects these practices, however, and many other online equivalents of pen-and-paper journals are sorely lacking in their journalism.
However, people and organizations can still be sued for slander and libel, even under the First Amendment. I think that organizations that purport to report the News have an obligation to report the facts accurately, and should be held to a higher standard than are individuals.
I'm arguing that the headline is negligent and misleading, and should be corrected. Every minute that goes by when it isn't misleads and confuses another person who might have expected news or accurate reporting. Many people have come to expect this sort of inaccurate reporting from slashdot, but that doesn't excuse it.
Perhaps they could have an "editor" on duty whose job it is to "edit"?
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Just a point of clarification, the "pirated" games were imports, not copies.
He was selling and installing chips so people could play the pirated games he was selling. They didn't mention any other types of mods. If he was only selling chips, nobody would have cared. Since he was also selling lots of pirated games some one took notice.
Xaotik Designs
Actually, you're talking about two completely different things.
In scenario #1, you're asking about a *purchased* cable box. Why yes, if the owner of said box wishes to make some modifications to the electronics inside of it that allow it to decrypt all incoming signals - I think that's perfectly ok and legal. If the owner proceeds to actually *use* the box to watch cable he/she isn't paying for, then that's a seperate issue and more of a "grey area".
In scenario #2, you're talking about *stealing* a move theater's key. Right there, obviously, it's illegal. Stealing isn't legal. If, however, you were an owner of the theater and copied the key - do you think anyone would care or have a problem with it? Probably not!
(Incidently, back to scenario #1, the real problem, in my opinion, is that cable companies made poor decisions in the design of their systems. They pipe *all* of the channels in to the homes of their customers.... in many cases - to homes of people who are no longer even customers at all, simply because they didn't bother to disconnect the physical cable when the previous home-owner moved. By doing this, they've created a "grey area" for themselves. Is it morally ok and/or legally ok to use one's own equipment to descramble these signals that are already coming into his/her home? Perhaps so. If the cable company didn't want this to happen, they shouldn't put the signals out there to begin with.) It's sort of like me signing all of the checks in my checkbook in advance, leaving the book in a public place, and walking off. Then I scream about the illegal activities being done against me when people start using those checks without my approval. Hey, why was I stupid enough to sign them all ahead of time? Do I even have a strong legal case against the users of said checks?
Mod chips/pirates games are all in one and the same
Give me a break. A pirated game is a copy of a game created without authorization from the government or from the copyright owner. A mod chip is a device that lets you run unsigned code on a game console. How does putting an interop chip in your PS1, writing a program on your PC, compiling it with GCC, burning it to a CD, and putting it in the PS1's drive violate Sony's copyright?
Will I retire or break 10K?
While the actual official reasons are a little different, he was busted for what he knew he was doing that was wrong: ripping off games and using a mod chip, then selling the chips so that everyone else could do the same. I actually commend them for coming up with an interesting way to get him into jail using existing laws!
The guy was selling about 413 illegally pirated copies of video games. I think that very obviously shows intent to infringe. Selling the mod chips in conjunction with those video games is very obviously going to nail him on intent.
So suddenly his mod chips are no longer semi-grey market (as the de-Macrovision devices you can get at Radio Shack are, for example) and are now part of the reason he gets the fine and probation.
Perfectly reasonable and nothing to be ashamed or outraged at.
Now, if he had just been selling the mod-chips under cover of interoperability with Japanese imports, for example, or for playing back-up games, I doubt very much he'd have been convicted, and I challenge anyone to dig up some Canadian precedent that specifically ruled otherwise.
Ahh - but your analogy is flawed. The property you are modified is already a controlled substance - so the rights to modify it are subsumed by the right of the state to protect its citizens.
Same goes for other controlled or illegal substances. If you own a poppy field, you don't have the right to create opiates from them. If you own a rifle, you don't have the right to go shoot people with it, or modify its performance so that it falls into a restricted category.
Take your poor example elsewhere.
Considering how long it takes the legal system to do anything...
Infuriate left and right
re: scenario#1
I agree - although the area isn't really grey. You're stealing the "information" of those shows you didn't pay for. Stupidity aside, even the blank check scenario is probably protected by law. The fact that you signed the checks and left them out doesn't change the fact that someone else, without your express permission, came along and took your money.
They broke the law, and hacking cable, even though probably easy, is also breaking the law.
I really want to get a mod chip for my xbox, so I can boot unsigned software. I want to be able to use it as an mp3 player, linux box, divx player, x terminal, etc.. I have plans!
So there are uses for mod chips, but pirating software? Hell, I live in the Seattle area, all the people at M$ get xbox games for 10 bux, I just have them get then for me. Why pirate?! (-;
I wonder if you owned all legal games, and a modded console, if a jury trial would find you not guilty. The FUD is so thick, its hard to tell what the un-slashdots would think.
As far as I know, it IS legal to back-up any game/cd/whatever you legally own in Canada.
Assuming that my above statement is true, it's logical that mod chips would also be legal in Canada (how else would you play you're backed up version of FF9?) Also, I have seen many ads in Canadian newspapers that advertised stores selling mod chips (but never one that actually advertised selling copied games.)
However, assume that my first statement is true and the Canadian government or whoever has deemed it so that mod chips are illegal. Wouldn't there be some backlash about Sony taking away Canadian's rights to back-up their own property (yes we can still copy our games but they're useless since we can't play them.)
I'm inclined to think that I'm morally in the right to make such modifications in the privacy of my home, but not to tote around this dangerous weapon or sell it or fire it off in the town square.
Sadly, it's difficult to reconcile a law with morality! (I think I know which side the DMCA falls on, though...)
I fail to see how a year of probation and a fine equates to "go to jail."
It's kind of funny, they say "ignorance of the law is no excuse".
But the legal definition of insanity is "didn't know what they did was wrong".
So he should've plead innocent by reason of insanity. =)
Also, when was the last time any of you tried to get a copy of the criminal code in a portable format?
Maybe he should have talked to his lawyer first. :)
"It's here, but no one wants it." - The Sugar Speaker
If you own something go do not have the right to do anything you wish with it even on your own property. Try dumping toxic chemicals in your backyard.
If someone is providing a service for a fee, you have the choice to pay for the service or forego it. Modifying anything to get the service without paying for it is called 'stealing'.
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
not the little ones. Apparently even Canada is a Plutocracy like the US.
There are web sites that sell mod chips and even will install them for you for a fee. But do they get shut down? No. But if you run a business and do the same thing, you will get shut down or fined. The Mod Chip can be used for backup purposes, ever scratched a CD or DVD game before and were unable to play it? $30USD to $50USD down the drain if that happens. Sony doesn't replace scratched disks, but with a CDR drive and a Mod Chip, you can burn Backups. This may fall under "Fair Use" but I think that the big corps have done what they could to get rid of "Fair Use" in recent copyright acts that they forced our governments to pass. What if someone needed to copy a game for a legit reason?
It seems silly. What next? Crackdowns on people who sell CD and DVD Copying software, because said software can be used to create pirate copies?
True, he may have been selling pirated games. But how do we know these aren't Japanese versions of the games that are playable with the Mod Chip he was selling? Maybe his distributor ripped him off and sold him pirated knock-off copies and told him they were legit? Did they catch him burning copies of the games or something?
The only thing that Sony can really get him for is voiding the warranty of many Playstation 2 systems by unauthorized tampering.
By hitting him hard, I guess they hope to set an example to the rest of them?
You miss the point so badly:
If you OWN something, it's YOURS. Not only do you NOT have the right to take away people's freedom, but you also have no right to even KNOW what people do with their property.
I'll give you a quick lesson in right & wrong:
RIGHT: You decide to paint your car YOU OWN, a color other than what it was manufactured.
WRONG: You LEASE (or steal) a car, and repaint it without the owner's permission.
I think you missed the point:
RIGHT: You buy a PS2 that you now own, and decide to put a mod chip in.
WRONG: You buy a PS2 from a local dealer, who charges you a fat fee to install a mod chip in your new PS2 (He profits from this activity).
I think this better describes your thoughts.
fully automatic weapons and sawed off shotguns are illegal in their own right. Firearms, while legal, are regulated. Playstations are not, and are not illegal. The same argument applies to making illegal drugs, or perscription drugs without a license, or bombs. The final product is illegal. But unless it would be illegal for Sony to sell multi-region PS2s, it shouldn't be illegal for me to make one. Now, if I use that to steal games, that is another story entirely.
That explains it - if he had just been selling mod chips, he would have been fine. The fact that he was doing it along side of selling pirated games is why they could charge him because he "used a computer system to commit an offense"
In Soviet Russia, hot grits put YOU down THEIR pants.
"Leave it to a Canuck..."
Nice... your momma must be proud of you!
My PS2 has a chip in it...Its small, on the side of the case. Its only a little dent! Please don't lock me up!
Slashdot is a waste of time. I enjoy wasting time.
Not really sure about you, but when I read he decided to plead guilty I knew the law hadn't done a damn thing. Only the threat of the (untested) law resulted in this Ottawan's conviction. Existing? Um, yeah. These laws certainly exist...
"I didn't know robbing a bank was illegal. Welllll EXCUUUUUSE MEEEEEE!"
-Steve Martin, _Let's Get Small_
Firearms, while legal, are regulated. Playstations are not, and are not illegal.
While Playstations may not be explicitly regulated at the present moment, it does not mean that they are free from regulation. Congress can, at any time, regulate video came consoles and "mod chips" that are distributed in (or substantially affect) interstate commerce. Such is the federal legislature's vast power under the Commerce Clause.
Right: you buy a Japanese Playstation, and play Japanese games
Wrong: You buy an American playstation, and chip it to play japanese games, which the author/producer, or whatever reason, does not want distributed over here.
Modding your box for the questionable excuse of playing out of region games is IP theft. If it wasn't theft the GPL wouldn't even exists, so let's not get started.
Sony doesn't have the right to know what he does with his playstation? Maybe on a moral ground, not really sure on a legal ground (licensing?). The state surely has that right, if you are infringing on someone elses rights with your own private property, that person can't come into your house, but if that person has a strong enough reason to believe you do, and tells the authorities, they have the right to come in.
If you want to live in a civil society, you have to respect the laws in which you live. If we each just picked the laws we were going to follow, well, you wouldn't have any stuff, and probably be lucky to be alive. There are a lot of people that don't do stuff, just because it is against the law, and could morally justify it easily.
When are these editors going to realize there is a big difference between a PS2 and a PS/2...i dont think i can go to jail for modifying the ps/2 port on my PC...
The property you are modified [sic] is already a controlled substance
Despite what some states (California comes to mind) and some congresscritters would have you believe, shotguns are not a "controlled substance". Even the paperwork involved in sale of same only applies to firearms dealers -- private sales are perfectly legal and require no background check. (Recall that BATF is a Treasury bureau, hence the love of paperwork. Even owning a machine gun isn't illegal, just requires a $200 tax certificate. At least, that used to be the case.)
And it really isn't at all clear what "the right of the state to protect its citizens" has to do with the difference between a shotgun barrel that's 18.1 inches long vs one that's 17.9 inches. (BTW, a state has no such rights. The citizens have rights of self protection, and may collectively authorize the state to act on their behalf.)
I don't have the right to smash somebody's skull in with a modified Playstation, either, but I do have the right to bolt a twenty pound steel plate to my Playstation, if I so choose.
-- Alastair
If everyone is expected to know all the laws and what they mean, then why are there so many lawyers? Our law systems are so confusing and complex that we have to hire special people to interpret and find laws that will help defend us and prosecute others.
This is where things start getting weird.
I noted in another post that "ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it" is a basic tenet of Western law. I'm not aware of any country that lets someone off for claiming "I didn't know that was illegal," otherwise everyone and their mother would use it. You're correct, however, in noting that our legal systems and codes have become so convoluted that it is nearly impossible to know what is illegal without hiring (or being) a trained lawyer. I find this slightly ironic, because I said pretty much the same thing to a fellow potsmoker considering a lone crusade in court.
Every time I think about stuff like this, I understand a little more why I espouse the political ideals I currently do...
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
It tends to vary from state to state, but here in Pennsylvania our constitution gives us the right to jury nullfication (no surprise, since William Penn wrote most of it and jury nullfication once saved his father in England).
We should be trying to get on juries in cases like this so we can do something about it.
So what's the difference between modding a PS2 and modding a car?
If I pulled the engine from my Ford Ranger and replaced it with a Chevy 350, aren't I likewise depriving Ford Motor Company of future engine part sales? This is setting a bad precident.
Yes!
Just out of curiousity, what is the distinction between selling mod'd PS/2 systems and selling, say, mod'd Nestle Chocolate Chips? If I combine Nestle Chocolate Chips with flour, sugar, butter etc to make cookies is Nestle going to come after me? Or is it ok because I'm selling them as cookies and not Nestle Chocolate Chips(tm)?
PS/2. Nestle. They're both just chips.
Is there anywhere that the Mod Chip source code can be downloaded? I know that most of these mod chips are a PIC embedded controller. And that there's a code-protect bit that is set on the chips sold by most Mod chip vendors.
Has anybody cracked it and extracted the code? I'd love to set up a Cheapbytes-type operation selling the mod chips for, say half of what the mod chip vendors are selling them for, and also offering the downloadable code free to anybody who wanted it.
Would the Mod Chip vendors sue me? Would I cry a fucking river about their IP rights?
Playstations are not [regulated]
Oh, but indeed they are. The FCC has a whole set of regulations covering consumer electronic devices and their possible RF emissions. You better believe that Sony has to file some serious paperwork with the FCC to get permission to sell the things. (Also with Underwriters Labs and the CSA regarding shock and fire hazards, but that's more of an insurance thing.)
Although I still believe you should be allowed to do whatever the hell you want to with your own property, so long as it doesn't actually (vs hypothetically) endanger others or trample on their rights.
-- Alastair
If Sony went and made games that people actualy /wanted/ to own long term, then pirating would not be such a problem.
:-D
:(
That and creating the whole atmsphere around the game, I remember my copy of Zelda, shipped with a nice color map and a manual with an actual backstory in it. Nifety cartridge to, gold, shiiiiny.
Dito goes for Final Fantasy (Monster Chart, Map, etc) and a lot of other good Nintendo games. But now days, *sighs* it seems like all the games are is the disc.
Of course a lot of the PS2 chippers are using them for Imports, which actualy BENEFITS Sony's sales since they almost always end up selling two copies of a game to the same person. . . . yeesh.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
http://www.easybuy2000.com/store/playstation%20II/ neokey.shtml
http://www.easybuy2000.com/store/playstation%20II/ index.html
- what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
Programming for the playstation?
Garby said he didn't know he was committing a crime and would have never gotten involved in selling mod chips if he had known the law.
-or-
I didn't know she was only sixteen, honest!
I've got a couple Japanese PSOne and PS2 games ("Metal Gear Solid: Integral" for PSOne and "Winning Eleven 6" for PS2) that I play on my PS2 using the knife-trick of swapping discs after the PS2 boots. Works great. You don't need a modchip.
There are two important differences here that will protect you from being Bubba's bitch for hopping up your CPU. First, the P/S2 is a proprietary machine, and SONY specifically states that modifications are verboten. There's nothing they can realistically do if you wish to modify it, but if you sell parts designed to modify it, you're in for it. Second, it's not "unauthorized" to overclock your CPU. Intel (and AMD) specifically state that if you do it and vaporize your CPU, they won't give you a new one, but they never specifically forbid overclocking, so you're not breaking the law by doing it.
Virg
(BTW, a state has no such rights. The citizens have rights of self protection, and may collectively authorize the state to act on their behalf.)
I was with you up until this point. The State has the power to legislate to protect the health and welfare of its citizens. This distinction between the people and the state is a fine one and impossible to implement in practice. You're right that the 18.1 vs. 17.9 inch cutoff is picayune, but so is your argument about the powers of the state vs. its people.
BTW, are you in a militia?
here's the legal definition of insanity. might work....he could claim he was schizophrenic or something; whenever he picked up a soldering iron his concepts of Right and Wrong went bye-bye for a bit.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
well then the laws should be challenged and made clearer...
BTW, let me clarify on "actually (vs hypothetically) endanger others".
If I were to build myself a machine gun, that might be a hypothetical danger because you can come up with all kinds of "what if" scenarios (what if somebody broke in and stole it, etc) where it might be dangerous, but it isn't an actual danger because I'm no more likely to use it against anyone than I would a regular gun, an axe, or even a baseball bat. And the odds of a machine gun accidentally loading, aiming and firing itself are pretty slim.
On the other hand, if I were to build a bomb in my basement, that would be an actual danger to both the life and limb and property rights of my family and my neighbors, because bombs (particularly the home-made sort - I'd be less concerned about military munitions designed for safe storage) are much more likely to accidentally detonate than is a machine gun to load and fire itself.
Mod-chipping a Playstation is a hypothetical danger to the property rights of game developers, and may even (though I doubt it) be an actual danger to the people's rights to interference-free use of the airwaves.
Whether a hypothetical danger becomes an actual danger is entirely up to the person controlling the object in question.
-- Alastair
Whether you approve of said law or not, or whether you choose to (ahem) "civilly disobey" is another matter. Though if you are nailing your theses to the door and declaring "Here I stand; I can do no other", don't you think you can find a better cause than the right to see unscrambled boobs on channel 33? Y'know, I think we've stumbled onto something important here. There seems to be a subvocalized argument that it's okay to copy/steal/share digital content because it is so easy and convenient. Sort of a "they have it coming for having lousy security/broken business model" argument.
I fail to see how that stands up, either practically or ethically. You don't steal things, not because it's too hard, but because it's wrong to steal things. If you leave your door unlocked it is still wrong for someone to come into your house.
Note also that in this case, the cable companies are scrambling the signal, and it takes a significant hardware mod to access it. Hardly comparable to leaving signed checks around. What's next
Actually it seems to be one better:
"Gosh, I was providing a chip that allowed people to use the pirated software that I'm selling but I had no idea that was illegal."
The article is somewhat confusing in this matter. It mentions that he was selling pirated games, and the conviction seems to take that into account to some degree, but nothing else is said about the matter. The mod chip issue might be a bit of a grey area, but if he's selling pirated games, that's pretty black and white, and probably what had drawn attention to himself in the first place. I don't know the canadian laws in this matter. I don't even know the US laws regarding mod chips, so I'm going to present two possible scenarios here. Either the possession, sale, installation, or use of mod chips is illegal in and of itself, or sale of these chips with intent to commit another crime in the process (selling pirated games) is the actual crime.
Owning and possessing tools to assist in a burglary is not illegal if you are obeying the law. However, if you break into something or some place while in possession, there are extra charges that can be applied because of your possession of the otherwise legal tools. Same goes with possession of firearms during a robbery. The tools themselves may be legal as long as no crimes are being committed.
Just a thought
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
They did, at least, according to some story or another on Acts of Gord, a website written by a former video game store owner. I have had no chance to independently verify his information, but I trust him. Supposedly, there was a chip which would ONLY allow imports; not backups. Such a mod also definitely existed for the Sega Saturn, since defeating the region encoding required a separate device; defeating copy protection was much harder.
For the PS2, as it turned out, defeating the region encoding is FAR more difficult than defeating the copy protection. Only recently have there been any chips at all that allow the correct playing of import games (Origa, Messiah). My PS2 chip will only play a BACKUP of and IMPORT. How messed up is that? And it absolutely would not play my imported copy of Psyvariar CE, original or CDR. I had to sell it to someone else.
You would be surprised at how many of us there are that only want to play imports, and aren't interested in stealing. In my opinion, the fact that there are ANY of us far outweighs any illegitimate usage of these devices.
While we can all say that ignorance is not excuse the deeper point is, is there an actual law on the books about chipped machines and if so what does it say?
Someone for example can sell a kit to turn your AR-15 into full auto even though it is against the law to own a full auto M-16. We recognize the existence or non existence of certain laws is occasionally nonsense. So it may be entirely possible that a chipped PS2 is illegal and even owning a chip to do it but unless there is a law against specifically installing that chip in that box it might be technically legal.
You're confusing "power" and "right". Yes, the state has this power, even duty. It is based, however, on the rights of its citizens, and as such, the state ought not exercise such power at the expense of other rights of the citizens.
BTW, are you in a militia?
Not sure what that has to do with anything, but no.
Do you believe that might makes right?
-- Alastair
> A mod chip is a device that lets you run unsigned code on a game console. How does putting an interop chip in your PS1, writing a program on your PC, compiling it with GCC, burning it to a CD, and putting it in the PS1's drive violate Sony's copyright?
It doesn't. The copyright infringement was for selling pirate copies of games. The mod chip charges stem from these parts:
When you get a P/S 1 (or 2) you agree (like it or not) not to reverse engineer or modify the device, and since it's a proprietary machine they can say that. When you put in the interop chip, you've violated their license agreement, and so you're no longer authorized to use the device. They will not normally enforce this against a single user, so people mod their systems all the time and SONY says nothing. However, this guy is selling the mod chips and the mod itself (he charged for the installation). That's the same offense, but since it's on a grander scale, SONY is more inclined to nail him for it.
The reason is, of course, money. The mod chip allows users to play pirate games, but it also allows users to play games for which SONY has received no licensing fees. Imagine if FF9 had been written and published for P/S2, but SONY didn't get their piece of every disk's price to put their seal of approval on it. They're doing this to defend their revenue stream for the games.
Virg
It cost me $400 just to get a lawyer to make a phone call to the cops and plea bargain away a traffic ticket (a nasty one that would have gotten my driver's license revoked, so it was worth it).
Unless he had a public defender, I'd say he ate up the rest of that money just on legal fees.
Although, I am not a Canadian, so maybe their legal system works differently.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
"... an RCMP investigation found he was selling a line of 413 pirated video games ..."
Okay, I felt kinda bad for the guy, like maybe he was as old as my dad, and out-of-the-loop in the tech sector, just trying to make a buck. Maybe he didn't know that people no longer had the right to modify their own property. But come on, he didn't know this was illegal either?
Based on your description, you have a case for defense in fair use. If you chip your P/S2, make backups only of your own games, and never rent, sell or distribute those backups (or the originals while you use the backups), you're within the bounds of fair use. If you want to play imports, unfortunately you can't since that's not fair use in the legal sense, and you'd have to buy an imported P/S2 to do that.
Virg
how some people can sound so stupid because they dont know the friggen history of IBM style pc's
brief history
8086 (yes it was first)
8088 pcxt
80286 AT
80386 PS/2 Microchannel architecture
80386 clone
80486
80586 pentium
PII
PIII
P4
next
yes, I left out the SX and DX version sets, as they obviously are covered under the larger picture. I also left out the AMD chips because they were not relavent in this byline
Why should legitimate users of the technology be banned from using it simply because other people are using it incorrectly? Perhaps if Sony wants people to stop pirating things, they should work with the government to enforce the law (it is illegal to pirate software) against the perpetrators.
The industry has a completely moronic idea of what enforcement means. They want to round up a few (
The entertainment companies only look for the big fish. They nail some guy with 200 GB of MP3's on a p2p network, and throw the book at him. Your average file-swapper has a ridiculously small fraction of that amount of material; they know that they are relatively safe from enforcement; only the BIGGEST offenders ever get caught. Then, you have overly aggressive sentencing - the average file-swapper could never imagine being sent to prison for multiple years for doing something so seemingly harmless! The thought never even occurs to them!
What the industry should be pushing for is a system that enforces minimal sentences against a vast range of people. Copying a game and handing it to your buddy is a miniscule crime, with very, very tiny financial ramifications. The sentence, as such, should be a slap on the wrist. I would suggest a ticket and a small fine. ($50-$100). If everyone caught trading illegal copies of video games online was ticketed, every time, the amount of piracy occurring would drop sharply! Imagine some 13 year old kid getting nailed with a fine! His parents would kick his ass!
I don't have all of the details worked out, but needless to say, it is not at all difficult to find thousands of people trading illegal software/music/whatever online at any time of the day, and people smarter than I have already devised clever ways of obtaining their IP address. From there, it shouldn't be all that difficult to find someone, and levy a small fine. Many, many people would never trade software again.
And of course, the greatest benefit of all will be that you idiots will stop trying to imply that a TOOL needs to be outlawed because someone else did something illegal with it. I don't give a rat's ass about what some other guy did. That's not my job. If you don't like what they're doing, tell them about it.
You totally do NOT agree to that. My brother just bought a gamecube. He gave the store X dollars, they gave him a system. Pure sale. No license, nothing. It's his. If he wants to convert it into a fancy disco ball, that's his call. If he wants to rewire it so that the cds spin the wrong way, or fast enough to explode, his call.
Well, if you went into a Ford dealership, and they told you up front, "you can only have Ford owners for passengers", then you agreed, bought the Ford, and took your Nissan-driving mother out for a spin, you'd be violating the contract. That's what "...dictate the terms under which his product is offered" means. You could certainly opt not to buy a Ford, but if you agreed at the time of purchase, you'd be in legal hot water if you violated that agreement after the sale. In this case, SONY offers P/S2 systems to Americans on the stipulation that (A) it only plays games authorized to play on American P/S2s, and (B) you promise not to fuck with the innards. If you don't agree with those terms, you should buy a Gamecube. If you do, you give up the right to do what you want with it (legally, at least) when you hook it up. Perhaps it sucks, but that's the way the purchase agreement works. If you don't like it, tell them that with your dollars.
Virg
> Their ability to DICTATE to you ends as soon as you give them your money.
Not necessarily. See below.
> For any other sort of property, this is painfully obvious. Only for "artificial" property are restrictions such as these considered anything but absurd megalomaniacal fantasy.
Not true. Real estate is a perfect example. Let's say you're looking to buy a house. You find a nice one, and you sit down with the seller, who shows you the bylaws of the neighborhood. One of those bylaws is that you're not allowed to put a fence up in front of the house. Now, let's say you buy the house, move in, and put up a stockade in front of the house. What happens next? You can guess easily. This illustrates how a presale contract can affect your use of your own property after sale. In the case of the P/S2. the purchase agreement stipulates that you are not allowed to modify it. If you don't like that stipulation, the seller (SONY, in this case) has every right to tell you you can't buy a P/S2. Since you bought it, you (in a legal sense) agreed to be bound by that stipulation. If you then go home, shuck the case and chip it, you've violated that presale contract, and so you're liable for legal trouble. It's that simple. The answer to this, is, of course, not to buy the P/S2, and if enough people don't the profit hit will get them to rethink the contract. But that's the only legal recourse.
Virg
The article seems to be focusing on the guy selling the mod chips, but I believe the larger crime would have been the 400+ pirated video games he was selling.
I've seen people around town actually advertise about installing and selling mod chips (in Canada), so I don't think it the conviction would've gone thru if he were only installing mod chips.
On the other hand, charging $30 for the installation sounds criminal..
...that held your P/S2. The terms of use for the device say that you're not allowed to modify it, and if you don't agree to the terms of use (including this one) you should return it for a refund. That's called a "presale contract" in legal terms, and is quite sufficient to prove you broke the law (contract law, in this case). Your only legal recourse is to buy a Japanese P/S2 that'll play the games, or return your P/S2 to the store.
Sorry. I agree that it sucks, but that's the law.
Virg
Good to see that a government will protect a company's rights with criminal prosecution when it comes to intellectual property. I wonder how much money I'd have to have to get someone arrested for violating my individual rights?
_______
2B1ASK1
When you bought your car, you most likely did not agree to a "terms of use" contract, like you do when you buy a P/S2 (for a closer comparison, try opening the hood and putting your mods on a car you've leased, rather than bought, from the dealership). If you had, then modified the car in violation of that contract, you'd be breaking the law. If you think the terms of use for P/S2 are too restrictive, then don't buy one, and tell SONY why you didn't. That is, unfortunately, the only legal path you can take.
Virg
Okay, this has probably been said already on this board, yet I'm just sick and tired of going through so many lines of whining and crap that say, "Hey, we can't develop now," or, "This isn't fair -- he shouldn't be fined, it's wrong, wrong, wrong, I wanna put a mod-chip in my PS2, I wanna bunch of free games too, waah!"
Listen, kids, let's put this into a perspective you might be able to understand, okay? Let's say you put together a little book describing how much fun you had at your little sister's tea-party. Now, you spend your allowance money putting the books together, distributing them, paying your classmates who did pretty little drawings on each page, and promoting it by standing out in the hall wearing a tiny pink t-shirt that says, "Buy my book." And boy, was that t-shirt expensive.
Now, some other kid comes in and buys one of your books, takes it to a photocopier, and starts whipping off copies of the books, little pictures and all. Then, he goes to all your friends and says, "Hey, you can have this book cheaper; pay me instead!"
At this time, little Johnny Customer in the hall goes for the cheaper book. Little Johnny may not even know better -- he's just interested in the tea party, and he wants a deal. So, he pays the kid and the kid gets the money. You get no money for it, yet you made it. You lose your allowance. You lose your time. You lose your patience.
The kid didn't cross the line when he bought your book and copied it. He crossed the line when he started selling those copies to other kids. Because, now, you're out of your allowance, and any more candy money you might have gotten is but a dream.
Now, you get mad. You confront the kid who is selling your books. The kid sticks out his tongue, calls your sister names I dare not repeat and says, "What do you need the money for? You've already got lots of money."
"Listen, kid," you might reply. "I'll make you a deal, okay? If you're gonna be willing to go out there and sell these books for me, I'll help you make some money too. You can buy these books for a lot less than what you'll sell them for. That way, we both win."
The kid looks at you like you're insane. "No way! I don't have the money to buy your books! I'm gonna keep copying it. I make more money that way."
"But I don't make any money that way."
"Screw you," he yells. "You're a big kid with lots of money now. You owe me. You got it because you must have punched somebody in the schoolyard for it. All you rich kids do that."
"I made my allowance money fair and square --"
"Well, I don't have any money! I deserve money too. Why are you getting all the breaks, huh? Is your daddy rich?"
"No," you reply. "I worked my ass off for it. I wrote this book. Some of my friends drew the pictures, and they deserve to get something back for that."
The kid looks befuddled. He can't explain how things work because he still lives in his bedroom and doesn't do anything for a living yet. He's a whiney little bitch, while you are making something of your life. "I don't care. I'm doing this, and you can't stop me."
At that point, you punch the kid in the face, kick him a few times, and make an example of him. Lots of other kids form a circle wearing green shirts that say "Slashdot" on them and start chanting, "That's not fair! See? You're a big bully!"
Luckily, you're insane, so you keep making these books, even though these little parasites keep taking your due.
I suppose in a world like that, maybe the kids are right? Why work when you can whine, beg, and bitch on Slashdot while stealing another kids lunch money?
PS: Please, don't bother to reply if the best you can do is find a few spelling errors on here, alright? Go stick your head in the sandbox, you little freaks. You know who you are.
...but I'll say it again. Let's say I have a brick, and I tell you, "I'll sell you this brick, but only if you promise not to saw it in half." You agree, and I sell you the brick. Now, you own the brick, and you saw it in half. Since you gave your word not to do something, then did it, you have committed an act of dishonesty, which is morally unsupportable.
When you bought your P/S2, you agreed not to modify it (yes, legally you did, by using it). If you modify it, you're breaking that agreement. That is, by virtually everyone's definition, morally questionable.
Virg
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Related story:
Sony Win Court Case Over PS2 Mod Chip
Written by David Grace on January 24, 2002
According to one of EuroGamer.com's spies at Sony, the console's giant court case over a PS2 mod chip has been resolved with the decision in Sony's favour.
Made by Channel Technology, "Messiah" allowed PS2 users to play 'burned' copies (illegal copies) by defeating the copy-protection mechanism. This means that people who have this chip are very likely to pay a much lower price for a burned copy of a certain game. The judge at the case pointed out that the practice of 'swapping' backup disks between people could become uncontrollable and deprive Sony on 'average' a potential $35-$65 US which could cause long term damage to them.
As well as that, Messiah also allowed PS2 owners to view foreign DVDs by overriding regional coding, and therefore this ruling could have implications for the DVD market. The Sony vs. Channel Technology case could be even more damning in the future, because it sets a worrying precedent.
This decision will mean that future companies will have to think more carefully about whether or not to make modifications to equipment that plays licensed regional and copy-protected material in a way that violates Sony's Copyright, because it's clear from this case that the chances of them winning a court case over it are very slim.
Linked -> http://www.ps2world.com/news/20.shtml
> If I own it I have a right to copy it, stomp on it, pee on it, sell it, modify it. It's mine, I own it, I do what I want with it. (emphasis mine)
You specifically gave up the right to modify it when you bought it. The terms of use agreement stipulates that you can't modify it, and by using the P/S2, you legally accepted those terms of use. Don't like it? Don't buy it. If enough people take this route, the terms will change. Until they do, however, you're legally (and morally, since violation of a contract is dishonesty in moral nomenclature) wrong to alter it.
Of course it sucks. But it's not bullshit.
Virg
There seems to be a vocal contingent on Slashdot that assume that anybody using DeCSS, Napster, Mod Chips, etc... must be pirates and should be thrown in jail. Even if there are legitimate uses for a technology the potental for abuse exists and therefore everyone who uses it is therefore guilty.
Yeah, yeah, everyone throws around this argument. But let's face the facts, there for every 1 parent is concerned about making legitimate backups, there are 50 kids pirating games.
And another 10 parents who want to make legitimate backups, but wouldn't mind making just one copy of their friends games. Just one or two games, that's not piracy right? And it's not really piracy to borrow a friends CDR backup of a game, is it? You could have gone directly to the friend of a friend of a friend of a friend who has the original, but of course it's just easier to borrow the backup which everyone has. Or make a backup yourself, it's just one copy you made, that's not really piracy...
Face it, mod chip technology enables piracy and piracy of PS games is pretty rampant out there. It would have been even greater had it not required a bit of soldering knowledge. Yeah, I'm all for backing up software, but if you call the manufacturer they will often send you a replacement if you send back the original damaged disc. Those serious about playing import discs buy import consoles as well. Really, those numbers are small; how many US mod-chippers out there read Japanese? Enough to support the mod-chip for imports theory? No. So really, the huge mod-chip market is driven by one group and one group only, those who pirate games. No, not everyone who mods is a pirate, but the vast majority are.
-- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
Yes, it's really that broad.
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
You make more money, and you're never threatened with jail time.
Who is RTFM and when will he help me with Unix?
I think you're on the right track. I think Sony busted him on sale of pirated games and then twisted the details a bit (over-emphasizing mod chips) to make it sound like what the guy did was illegal. It's possible that the combination of selling pirated games and installing chips so they could be played is illegal, but I'm reasonbly certain that installing the mod chips by themselves is fine. (If Im wrong, please let me know. All I ask is that you be polite.)
To put it in simpler terms: Sony's manipulating the statement to make it look like a case that defines PS2 modding as illegal and enforcable. The reality is that what got the guy busted was selling copied games.
"Derp de derp."
HOLY CRAP!!!! GARBY!!!!! .... man he should've stuck to his old job... ... screen printing t-shirts.
ouch!
ZERO
for all those out there who think its ok for sony to dictate what you can legaly do to your ps2 nce you bought it should take a moment and think if this is ok, then its ok for MS to tell you what and who's software you're allowed to run on your windows machine, or intel to say what you can install on your pc?
Roughly means "guilty mind" in Latin. It describes the basis for our legal systems. It's not supposed to matter if they were ignorant of the law or not, they still committed the act.
> Your program is linking against Sony's code (the PS1's firmware). According to the FSF, this requires Sony's permission - at least, they say linking against other code requires that code's author's permission. (That's how the GPL bans non-GPL code calling GPLed libraries, unlike the LGPL...)
That's not right. The FSF says that distributing a combined work consisting of copyrighted code plus your code requires the permission of the copyright owner.
But there is no distribution of a combined work when you run your own software on a modded PS1.
Anyway, we already know that the copyright violation in this case was selling pirated games.
Doug Moen.
I have written a truly remarkable program which this sig is too small to contain.
He should've stuck to his old job:
...He was a good football coach though... we kicked ass... well, okay we never won the championship...
"Kustum Screen Printing & Embroidery"
no joke. i swear to god.
ZERO
Your program is linking against Sony's code (the PS1's firmware).
Not necessarily. I could claim that my program is linking against an LGPL clone of the PSX BIOS. This is a common claim for homebrew Game Boy Advance software, as most GBA emulators re-implement BIOS functions.
According to the FSF, this requires Sony's permission
You don't need permission from IBM to link against the PC BIOS. You don't need permission from Sun Microsystems to link against the C library included with the Solaris(TM) operating environment. You don't need permission from Microsoft to link against msvcrt.dll; otherwise, 90% of third party Windows software would violate Microsoft's copyright on the Windows OS.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Dewey Wins!
:)
It may not be a crime, but it's criminal...
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
When you get a P/S 1 (or 2) you agree (like it or not) not to reverse engineer or modify the device, and since it's a proprietary machine they can say that.
Could have, but didn't. I didn't see such a notice outside the box of my PS1 console, which I bought with cash a couple months before Dual Shock came out. I also didn't see such a notice inside the box.
Imagine if FF9 had been written and published for P/S2 [sic]
IBM PS/2 (slash) != Sony PS2 (no slash). Unless FF9 for PS/2 were to require a dongle that fit on the PS/2's MCA bus, it would run on every existing PC, through Bochs if nothing else.
Will I retire or break 10K?
No one served any jailtime here. If the poster / headline writer would have taken half a minute to read the article, they would know this. The defendant was sentenced to a year of probation, there was no mention of jail.
Catchy lies in a headline are still lies. Get some integrity Slashdot.
He probably won't get anally raped on probation.
RTFA.
Virg
> Selling a part that can be used to modify a PS/2 and actually modifying it are two very different things.
They are, but since he was doing both, I can't see why that matters here.
P/S2, by the way. PS/2 is an IBM PC. 8)
Virg
Check the manual, which is where the person I know who owns it claims to have seen it. It's also on the SONY web site, for what that's worth.
Second, don't be jiggedy. I didn't say PS/2 (the IBM thing). I said P/S2, which, while perhaps unorthodox, is not inaccurate. No, really. 8)
Virg
> Why is that not fair use?
Because you have to modify the machine to do it. Go figure why that's different from modifying the machine to make backups. And yes, it sucks. If you're American, thank you congress for taking such good care of your multinationals for you.
Virg
It's inside, but it states that you can return it for a refund if you don't like it. Good luck trying, but that's what it says.
Virg
Everything's regulated nowadays. That's life in a modern bureaucratic state -- U.S., Canada, E.U., or any other -- and it's generally a good thing, because that's how you know that the blender you buy isn't going to explode and hurl the blade at your face the first time you plug it in.
There are two imporant distinctions to make:
In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
> I bought physical property, which i may use however i like. I don't really care if they include a paper that says i can't do this or that with it.
I hate to be blunt, but the law doesn't concern itself with whether you care about that piece of paper, only whether it exists. You'll end up with your "Bull" in court, as proven by this guy.
Virg
But damn... I thought all those refined and cultured canadians were *so* *much* *more* intelligent and law-abiding than all of us Barbaric Americans.
You know, the Arrogant Country to the south where its residents cannot find thier state on a map of the world.
Yeah, the Capitalistic Pigs that "deserved everything they got on Sept 11".
He was also selling pirated games. If he had only been selling the modchips and/or doing the modding, they probably wouldn't have gone after him. But since he was selling pirated games, it made him look like he was doing the modding just to sell his pirated games.
In the US, mod chips are illegal under the DMCA because their primary purpose is to circumvent copy protection. I would be surprised if Canada didn't have a similar law, or at least plans for one. They beat us to the "tax blank media to 'compensate' the record industry" laws, after all =).
So while it's a lot less likely that he would have been convicted on the mod chip charge alone, it's not *impossible*.
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
pbptbp. That's a bummer. Hmm... wait, does the DMCA apply to the guy who installs it, the guy who pays to have it installed, or the company that makes the chip?
Mixture of all 3?
"Derp de derp."
The man is still rich, crime DOES pay !
First off, well spoken. You answered in a very organized and cool fashion. That's unusual here, when stuff like this comes up. That said, there are a few points that I want to respond to:
> Personally, I find such licensing schemes to be morally reprehensible.
As do I. Would that the courts agreed.
> In the U.S., the right to reverse engineer is legally sanctioned and assured.
Chipping a P/S2 is not reverse engineering, it's modifying. Take note that the law addresses these things separately (that's why the two terms are separated in most EULAs).
> The property management company broke the law by failing to repair air conditioning in the apartment in a timely fashion (AC is considered an essential service in Arizona by law), and although they had a clause in the lease agreement that "excused" the company from liability if they were unable to perform a repair in a timely fashion, the law took precedence over the contract, and I was vindicated.
This isn't exactly the same, since (despite what many of my friends say) the P/S2 isn't usually considered an "essential service". Also, there are no laws currently in place that specifically allow hardware modifications to the P/S2, so it's not the same as signing a contract that takes away rights explicitly granted, which is what happened with your lease.
> If I buy a piece of hardware in the United States, I can do whatever I want to it...
Well, here's where it turns grey. It's easy to say that, but not so easy to defend it in court. For example, this guy got fined for selling the mod chips themselves and installing them in customers' machines. In this case, he didn't buy the hardware, so where does the line fall? If you modify your own machine, it's fairly easy to claim fair use. This becomes much harder when people are paying you to break contract for them.
> All the more reason for me to enjoy being a U.S. citizen (until such time as the laws here are modified by corporate interests).
They're gonna pull your Slashdot account. Have you not heard of the DMCA? It applies to hardware as well as software.
Virg
BTW, are you in a militia?
Yes.
So are you.
(Unless you're crippled or a child.)
A "militia" is "every ablebodied [adult person] with [whatever weapon he/she owns, can borrow, can make, or can steal from the enemy]".
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
fully automatic weapons and sawed off shotguns are illegal in their own right.
No, they're not. They're just heavily taxed.
And the tax is collected by the same bureau of yahoos who collect the tax on liquor from the citizens of, for instance, West Virginia.
You saw examples of their tax collection tactics at a (primarily non-white) church in Waco, Texas and a mountain man's house on Ruby Ridge, Idaho.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Yes, and if I used Play-Doh to make a functioning fully-automatic weapon, that would also be illegal. It's the end result that is illegal, not the means.
We had a client (in NYC) who got nailed for essentially the same thing (wound up being convicted for trademark counterfeiting). One of the counts (of which he was acquitted) was Criminal Possession of Forgery Devices (Penal Law s. 170.40): "... with intent to use, and to aid and permit another to use, the same purposes of forgery, made and possessed a device, apparatus, equipment and article capable of and adaptable to such use, namely, a computer."
Plunder a company, Go to Bank.
Sigs are bad for your health.
Using unrealistic extremes to make an idea sound moronic makes you a shithead. Think first.
Offtopic, but how do you determine an unrealistic extreme? I'm sure nearly all extremes SOUND unrealistic... how do you spot one that really is?
I mean, I think it's unrealistic to have a law passed that bans people from using their own computers... but that doesn't mean it wont happen.
This sig is part of your complete breakfast.
Stupid Man went to jail today for not fully grasping software priacy, he was drag away screaming "But it wants to be free"
But unless it would be illegal for Sony to sell multi-region PS2s
Wouldn't Sony be signed onto some DVD cartel agreement that prohibits them from making region-free players?
Doesn't stop YOU making your own equipment region free, unless you happen to have a law against it...
Luckily I think the dvd region thing has no legal backing in my country. Rental stores rent DVDs from regions 1 and 4.
Not really... It all dependes on how is making the mod and for who...
If you do your own mod chip and use it for you own purposes, like... placing a PS1 as a meteo controling station using a program made by you i doubt that DMCA ever goes to apply...
BUT alas... the "legislators" [or more exactly stating the illigators] seam to be keen to make laws that are against international trade aggreaments and the like and protect those that engage in such activities... [like DVD zonning that is against the international trading laws, but i digress]
Cheers...
Oh come on. If you buy a cable box, and hack it to decrypt content you haven't paid for, that's supposed to be OK?
Assuming it is actually your box and not one you rent.
My sig was inspired by a 'shithead' (he knows who he is.)
:)
Somebody suggested boycotting the TV industry over 'pop-up commercials'. I said that boycotting was worthless and that people were better off capturing shows and sharing them on P2P commercial free. (Not verbatim, but that sentence is very close to what I said.)
He thought I meant that tons of people capture every single channel they can record from 24 hours a day, followed by editing the commercials. *eyeroll* I think most of the Slashdot population would assume I didn't mean that. I did leave some room for interpretation on what I said, but what he was suggesting I meant was silly. He went on to tell me there are problems with bandwidth etc.
Basically, his interpretation of my post was extreme enough to earn a nomination for 'shithead'. A realistic extreme would have been if he said "People like lots of shows. They're not going to sift through 4 hours a day worth of TV shows in order to edit out commercials. Serving them would provide trouble too.". That would have been an understandable objection.
The sig was meant basically for him, but it's old and I should take it down. Hopefully I helped you understand what I mean by 'unrealistic extreme'
Thanks for asking, most people who reply to my sig usually try to twist it as an insult towards me.
"Derp de derp."
This reminds me of a guy back home with his own small time health food store. He was approached by a "company" that sold Hearts and Roses Health Tabs at a time when business was very poor. The man never tried them. They were LSD tabs.
Needless to say he was quite suprised to be arrested within the week.
He was fined, but nothing went into his record, and he now double checks his suppliers carefully.
I agree that this man got what he deserved as far as the sale of pirated games goes. He was obviously selling the modded PS console with the intent of them being used to play illegally copied games.
The unfortunate side effect of the chip being referred to is that it will allow the play of copied PS, which an unmodded PS will not play. This, from my understanding of the chip, is due to technical reasons which were not avoidable.
This raises a larger issue, however. Once I've bought a PS, should I not be able to modify it as I see fit? Having a modded PS does not mean you're a pirate. You might simply want to play some of the Japanese games not available (and never will be) for the PS in the United States.
The Act of *PLAYING COPIED GAMES* *IS* a violation of copyright law and should be punished. But by the same token shouldn't I be able to make backup copies of my PS games *FOR MY OWN USE ONLY* under the doctrine of fair use?
How do we know that it wont be illegal to add a new video card to your computer because it might let you grab a screen shot which could possibly infringe on someone's copyright. Sheesh. Or what about those "terrible" TV cards which would let you "napsterize" television content? (this one is pulled straight from the CBDTPA stuff).
A man only has those rights he can defend. Tools should not be illegal. Convicting the man for the sale of the chip *alone* is like convicting you hardware store guy because he sells hammers and hammers can be used to commit murder.
It seems as though this society is fact approaching the "use your brain, get thrown in jail" approach so that the big vested interests can keep their revenue streams and buy even more congressmen.
This is precisely what happens when big money and politics get together.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
Something that everyone seems to be looking over with respect to the mod chip installations is that it's proof of his criminal intent.
Not only did he copy copyrighted material, he made a point of altering his customer's hardware to allow the pirated software to run. Seems like a fairly cut-and-dry case to me!
Having been a friend of Rob's and present in his business when he still practiced it, and having asked him details on his court preceedings last week, I am very disappointed to see the biased and closed-mindedness of the article that is very misleading.
Rob went out of his way numerous times to protect himself and ensure everything he was doing was legal. According to his lawyer, up until about a year and a half ago (I don't have more details, but this seems to coincided with the DMCA), everything he was doing was legal.
He did not "sell 413 pirated games". He provided a backup service for customers. They would come in, give him the game to backup, and sign a form stating that they legally owned the game, and that they would not redistribute it, bla, bla, bla, and that he was only provided a backup service.
How that got twisted to "selling 413 pirated games" is beyond me. It was very minimal compared to the chipping. He probably did 5 chips for 1 backup. Perhaps "413" was the total number of backups he did? He certainly didn't have 400 games in his store. It was too small ^_^
That aside, the legal situation is amusing. The RCMP spent thousands of dollars to send in undercover agents to try to "catch him in the act". They sent chips to Sony for analysis, and spent 3 months staking it all out. The man had the words "Unlock your playstation!" and the phone number in bright red letters on the side of his van that he drove around town. He obviously wasn't trying to conceil the business. He said numerous times, to me, to the RCMP, to his lawyer, and I believe to the judge, that if they had simply come in and said "You are breaking the law, can you please stop", he would have, without a second thought. What a waste of tax money.
I'm very afraid of what's going on in the Canadian legal system now. Rob now does screen printing for marketing and event companies, and laughs off questions.
It's the end result that is illegal, not the means.
You wish. The BATF has taken people to court, and won, over merely possessing the equipment with which to manufacture certain weapons. In there eyes, and in the eyes of at least one federal judge, possession of a shotgun and a hacksaw is the same thing as owning a sawed-off shotgun.
If BATF believed you could make a fully-automatic weapon with Play-Doh, and found you in the possession of a quantity of Play-Doh, they'd bust your butt.
-- Alastair
Sorry, buddy, there's no law that supports region encoding. You should modify the "Wrong:" part of your post in future postings. Sony, or any manufacturer, has no right, legally, morally, or whateverally to tell you what you can or can not do with your console. In case you hadn't noticed, software piracy is ALREADY illegal, so it makes the idea that Sony should be able to dictate to people kind of redundant.
Seriously. Look it up. There is NO LAW WHATSOEVER against importing. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. Sorry.
Listen, I can't play my DDR games without a mod chip! There ARE very legit uses for one. I don't want to spend forever playing Konamix just because Konami won't bring all the DDR mixes to the US.
WRONG: You buy a PS2 from a local dealer, who charges you a fat fee to install a mod chip in your new PS2 (He profits from this activity).
How is that wrong, assuming you knew you were buying the playstation as is and used, not new from sony? Who cares if he profits because he can solder better than i can? There is nothing wrong with modding a playstation. He was arrested for violating copyright law.
Thanks for asking, most people who reply to my sig usually try to twist it as an insult towards me.
;)
Heh, well, sitting at the bottom of an argumentative post, it could be interpreted as PART of the post, and thus an attack... I wouldn't be surprised if you've seen many incoherent responses =D
I thought it was a general statement (you see examples taken to extremes an awful lot on slashdot), so I was curious whether there was some kind of backup argument for it
This sig is part of your complete breakfast.
You can read some amusing stories on Acts of Gord on how Gord would install these region-free-only mod chips in to Playstations (and specifically state what the chip would and would not do) and then have an angry customer come back wondering why his PSX wouldn't play CD-R'd games.
You seem to be saying that this suggests that possession of a computer might be illegal, and is therefore ridiculous. But the cruxial term there is "intent", surely? And don't the prosecution have to prove that he intended to use the computer to commit forgery? Which would require showing for example that he was in the process of making fake drivers' licences or something similar?
The reason that this is important is that just about anything is adaptable to criminal use. The purpose of requiring the prosecution to show possession of relevant equipment is to provide an additional hurdle to proving intent. The intent is core.
Was this count (of which you said he was aquitted) there as an alternative to a count of which he was found guilty, such as actually using a forgery device? I am not a lawyer, but I am not sure you can be convicted both of intent to do a crime and of the crime itself: It's certainly unusual, and I think then even only if they show intent to commit additional crimes.
NO ID: BEING FREE MEANS NOT HAVING TO PROVE IT
Thank good it's not illegal to modify hardware in Denmark. It is also legal to sell modified DVD-players etc. Too bad that it is getting increasingly more difficult to get the chips.
Personally I think it is very odd that it should be illegal to modify a piece of hardware. That compares to not alllowing to put spoilers on a car.
-- look sir droids...
..actually dealing with the modchip issue. At the end also examples from the US.
http://ps2.ign.com/articles/365/365467p1.html
July 22, 2002 - With the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in full action ("steady, Nelly!"), the Canadian government and the Interactive Digital Software Association busted "Kustum Komputers" for distributing chip devices for PlayStation 2 computer entertainment systems.
In the Ontario Court of Justice in Ottawa, Canada, defendant Robert Garby pled guilty to six counts of criminal code violation and copyright law infringement for illegally selling mod chips and pirated games under the name "Kustum Komputers." (Oohhhhh, busted!) Garby got off pretty light, however, with a $17,000 fine and a 12 months probation sentence.
"This is an important case of first impression in Canada," said Riley Russell, general counsel, Sony Computer Entertainment America. "Sony Computer Entertainment America has been fighting circumvention devices like these within U.S. borders for years. We are pleased that our neighbor to the North has recognized the illegitimacy of these devices under applicable law."
The U.S. Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in October of 1998, which makes illegal "circumvention devices" that circumvent a technological measure designed to control access to a copyrighted work, such as SCEA's PlayStation 2. SCEA has successfully argued for years now that mod chips are illegal circumvention devices under the DMCA in the United States.
Previous recent rulings on mod chip cases in the United States include:
*On July 12, 2002, defendant Howard Chen of Howie's Hi-Tech Games in Milpitas, California was preliminarily enjoined under the DMCA from selling, advertising, installing or otherwise trafficking in mod chip and game enhancers.
*On May 24, 2002, defendant Rick Oliver (It wasnt me!)was sentenced in the United States Court for the District of Nebraska for willful circumvention of a copyright protection system for commercial advantage under the DMCA. Oliver was sentenced to seven months of jail time and was ordered to pay restitution to Sony Computer Entertainment America in the amount of $40,000.
*On June 9, 2002, Sony Computer Entertainment America obtained summary judgment and a permanent injunction against Digital Stuff, Inc. of San Jose, California, for advertising, distributing, promoting and selling game enhancers.
*On November 4, 1999, Sony Computer Entertainment America obtained a preliminary injunction against Michael and Carol Chaddon, doing business as GameMaster, Inc. in San Leandro, California prohibiting them from advertising, distributing, selling or purchasing game enhancers or devices that contain a mod chip function.
Yes, but don't these regulations mostly apply to the SALE of consumer electronic devices? Obviously if I do a mod to a device that starts broadcasting enough interference to distrub the neighbors, the FCC should come knocking on my door... but we're talking mw of current with most chips.
Now, if I go to re-sell my modded Playstation, it's true that it can no longer be FCC certified, but then it's MY responsibility to point that out.
Being that I *OWN* the hardware, I should be able to do whatever I want with it, as long as no results of that process leave my property.
As far as cable boxes go (which many people have used for comparison).. if I'm leasing it from the cable company (usually the case), I can't do anything other than use it.. it's not mine. If I go out and BUY one that works, I can go ahead and mod that all I want. That's not illegal. What IS illegal is if I then USE that device to watch programs that I'm not paying for.
By the same token, whatever Sony may claim, it's perfectly legal for me to modify my PS or PS2... it only becomes illegal when I then use it to play pirated games (or watch pirated DVD's).
The car example is much better... it's not illegal for me to modify my car and take all the speed governers off... but if I drive that fast, I'm breaking a totally unrelated law.
hey, how's it my fault the build the cases out of such crappy plastic. if they care so much about me chiping them, just build the cases better!
i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
The prosecution would have to prove that he had "intent to use" or intent "to aid or permit another to use" the computer "for purposes of forgery." A jury can infer intent from just about anything in evidence; the prosecution probably doesn't have to prove a substantive offense of forgery to prove possession of forgery devices under the statute.
What was particularly interesting, by the way, is that the RIAA trains NYPD officers to identify illegal copies of music compact discs (this was in an affidavit in support of a search warrant). Doesn't the NYPD have more important business than that?
Well, you know, it's funny. People have a way of bringing up one example of where an argument may not work, so they flush the whole thing.
Like the 'wind up charger' for the phone yesterday: Some git went on to say "it'd take hours to wind it up to full charge!"
Heh. People are funny, but they can be frustrating too. Personally, I think they bring that stuff up hoping to come off as being intelligent. "Well I immedieatly see a problem that nobody else has mentioned, that must mean my brain operates at a higher level." heh. Know what I mean?
Ah it's fun to get the gripes out! I can go back to being nice now.
"Derp de derp."
> Don't Be Absurd
Demonstrating a lack of civility is no way to gain respect for yourself, or your ideas.
> If you own something go do not have the right to do anything you wish with it even on your own property. Try dumping toxic chemicals in your backyard.
Another way to look at it is: you have a RIGHT to swing your fist, but that right ENDS when it touches MY nose, and does not overrule my right to be free from harm.
One could attempt to argue that they had a "right" to pollute land they own, but *I* certainly would not make this arguement! Your right to modify your land ends at your neighbor's right to a clean water table, and air. Furthermore, land is universally considered to be a fundamentally different kind of property than automobiles, Playstations, etc. Like it or not, your land is TERRITORY of the nation you are subject to, and so there are many who might to object -- even if you do not -- to your deliberately poisoning the soil.
If you were trying to make some "greater" point, that point was lost. Distortion is hardly going to convince anyone besides yourself.
Hey CoE, obviously a crack at Canadian content requirements in the broadcasting regulations of the CRTC. No doubt that Sega Channel was broadcasting 0% Canadian content and would have been turfed by the CRTC as soon as they caught on, if it hadn't gone down the tubes by itself.
What you call 'backup copies' the manufacturer calls 'theft'. Why? Because if it were ANY OTHER FORMAT you would just go get a new one and think nothing of it. You want examples?
But for some crazy reason, since your stuff is on a CD, suddenly you think you have the right to identical duplicate copies, as many as you want? WHY? What's the difference? Just because it's possible to make a virtually identical copy doesn't mean it's a good idea, much less that it's "right" or legal to do so. My car can go 110, doesn't mean it should.
Hmmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Classic Cop line (from The Untouchables):
To put it another way, it is because the NYPD have better things to spend their resources on that the RIAA invests their own cash in training officers. After all police forces have all sorts of things to do, many of which are more important than some of the other things they do.
NO ID: BEING FREE MEANS NOT HAVING TO PROVE IT
Somehow I doubt that the RIAA was paying the cop's salary during the investigation (or even during the training, for that matter).
Several points:
1.) Doctrine of First Sale doesn't directly apply to this case. That rule says that SONY can't forbid you to put the whole thing back in the box and sell it to someone else. Modifying it is not covered by DFS.
2.) It's legal to establish rules of use after sale as long as those rules are set before sale (they put the card in the box and don't regularly replace it with a new one) and you are allowed to withdraw (in this case, to return the device for a refund).
3.) The cost of the device is immaterial to the method of contract. You can enter into a verbal contract to buy a house. It's not a good idea, but it's perfectly legal. In this case, the terms of use state that you must agree (among other things) not to modify it, and your use of the device constitutes your acceptance of the terms. If you don't agree, you're supposed to opt out of the agreement, which means take it back to the store and get your money back. Since you're (presumably) using your Playstation, you've agreed to the terms, legally. Whether these terms are enforceable remains to be seen, but at least in Canada, this case points towards the legality of this contract, and in the U.S., credit card companies have successfully used this contract tactic so it's certainly likely that a court will accept it.
Virg
> So? It doesn't matter what the manual or the website says. What matters is what is legally enforcable, and a "please don't do this" in a manual is not.
What exactly makes you say that their request (which isn't actually a request but a term of use) isn't legally enforceable? Credit card companies do it constantly, and every case brought against them for it to date has been dismissed or lost. There have been few cases where shrinkwrap terms of use have been tested in court, but despite what you hear on Slashdot, that doesn't mean that every presale terms-of-use contract is invalid. In fact, most of them are considered valid from a legal standpoint, and this case sets precedent (for Canadians) that these contracts are very much enforceable.
Virg
The RIAA/MPAA seem to be applying it in all three areas.
The DMCA is a catch-all for companies to charge users for using equipment for unauthorized purposes. (For example, not buying their SDK to develop software.)
What's this Submit thingy do?
"He should've checked"
With who?
I dare you to come up with not just a practical answer, but somebody you could actually call to find out.
Hint: Nobody. Even the courts can't agree.
You really are a dumbass.
You made that up completely.
There's no such thing as a shrink wrap law for hardware.
You're such a corporate lackey.
I agreed to nothing when we bought a PS/2.
Shrink wrap? Sorry no.
First, there is no "license" agreed to at purchase. Second, my six year old son opened it and he isn't legally capable of agreeing to a contract.
So nice try, but try harder and with more intelligence.
Virgil,
That doesn't make any sense.
When you buy a physical piece of property (a PS/2), its yours.
For any kind of "contract" that you speak of, it would have to be included with it printed on the box so you could see it before purchase.
Guess what? ITS NOT THERE. This agreement you mention doesn't exist in normal time or space.
Plus, when I opened my PS/2, I was 15. How the hell can I agree to a contract when I'm not old enough legally? Minors can't agree to contracts, and particularly when they have no idea they're agreeing to a contract.
You're just wrong. Admit you're wrong and I won't beat you like a drum.
If he wasn't 18 he can't be held to any license.
There is no contract in that case.
Or do yo have to be 18 or older to buy a PS2?
Thought not.
Wrong.
"Modding your box for the questionable excuse of playing out of region games is IP theft"
There's no such thing as IP theft.
Do you mean copyright infringement? No.... he bought the game in this case.
Do you mean Sony doesn't like it? Yes... but that doesn't mean its theft.
Your thinking is exactly what's wrong with society today. You think you're being noble, and you're actually screwing up future generations basic rights.
Ah, for the lack of a clothes hanger sometimes....
Here's a Civics lesson: the two ways to change a law are to change it governmentally (lobby and boycott and get petitions and vote and such) or break it in a big, public way to draw attention to yourself (and, in the process, the bad law).
What you're doing is neither of those things. You're protesting a law by pretending that it doesn't exist (or doesn't matter), which is foolish, childish, and prone to prosecution.
Blow off all you want about how the law doesn't matter, but keep your Civics rants to yourself until you grow up. Good citizens fight unjust laws, but they do it properly.
Virg
> Are you a lawyer? I'm almost 100% certain your point 3 is totally wrong. In most area's certain purchases (in this area, I believe anything over $500) have to be in writing.
Cite the statute if it's there, but don't guess. There is no such statute where I live.
> Sure if you had 100000 cash and wanted to buy a house, i doubt anyone would argue with you, but still legally it has to be in writing..
Again, if you can prove this, do so with citation. The sale of real estate has to be registered in my state, but the contract of sale itself can be verbal as long as the transfer of deed is filed correctly.
> If you walk into a store and pick up a box and buy it, its yours. Thats just how it is, no amount of legalese inside the box can prohibit you from doing anything with it.
For the third time, citations, please. If you can't show me where the terms-of-use agreement is overridden by some other law, then you're guessing, and guessing wrong. Terms of use have been successfully defended in court, both in the U.S. and in Canada, and this case itself demonstrates the enforceability of that fact. Prove otherwise, or I'll have to say you're wrong.
> If perhaps the seller has you sign a contract before selling you the item, then you are bound to it, but if they just sell you a box with something in it no questions asked, the same way you buy peanut butter and the grocery store, you aren't held to anything.
But I've never bought a grocery store like that... 8) Anyway, you're mistaken, because there is a contract. There's no physical signature, but if you think that's a requirement for a transaction or contract, buy gas at a pay-at-the-pump station, then refuse to pay the bill, and see how long it takes the court order to show up. Your use of the device is your agreement.
> You can take it home and use it as its intended or use it to pound nails or use it to collect rain water if you want.
Irrelevant comment. You're talking about intentional misuse, and I'm talking about modifying the device. The first is not mentioned in the terms of use, and the second is specifically forbidden.
> If I buy a car and put a cd player in it that it didn't ship with and sell it my friend down the street, ford can't do dick about it.
That's because Ford didn't make you agree to any terms of use involving aftermarket CD players when you bought the car (so you can modify it if you like) and there are no legal restrictions on reselling the car.
> The same is true if I buy a playstation and put some extra chips in an sell it. It might piss sony off, but the worst its done is void the warranty.
Incorrect, because Sony did make you agree to terms of use involving aftermarket chipsets. You can say as many times as you like that Sony has no right to enforce (or even establish) such a contract, but you'll continue to be wrong.
> Where you can get in trouble with the govt by mass selling these things installed is that the device hasn't been fcc tested or whatever the relevant canadian authority is, so you are selling unapproved computer hardware, which is what a couple of the guys charges were.
You're quite right that FCC (I think it's Industry Canada that has jurisdiction for this up there) regulations can get you in legal trouble, but that's in addition to the trouble you're buying for breach of contract. The case against the fellow in Canada was pressed on "unapproved hardware" grounds because the government can't charge someone directly with breach of contract unless they're a participant. Sony would have to press that case.
Virg
> If you don't sign something (hell, the playstation doesn't even have a "click here to agree"), you can't be bound to it.
Try this logic out by going to a self-service, pay at the pump gas station. Use your card to gas up, and note that you need not agree to anything at all (not even a "push this button to agree") to use your credit card. Now, since you didn't sign anything, you're not bound by the agreement to pay the bill! Isn't that great? Go out and spend that money on a drink for figuring out such a great way around contract law! Just remember to put a little away to bail yourself out.
You agreed to be bound when you used the device. If it had a restriction against using it from 2 AM to 5 AM, you'd be breaking the contract by doing so. Now, that particular restriction would get a real thrashing in court, but your vaunted freedom from the "don't modify" part of it has already been shot down in court, so you're treading on very thin ice, in a legal sense, to say that it's unenforceable. Others have said the same, and got their proverbial heads handed to them (along with monetary judgements against them) in the real world.
Virg
Okay, I confess that it's a hyperextended example, but do I really have to provide evidence that a signature is not required to legalize a contract? To take the same example without overreaching at all, drive up to a full service station, and ask the attendant to fill the tank. When he's done, can you say, "since I didn't sign any contract for the sale of the gas, I don't have to pay" to him? You can say that that's not the same as buying your Playstation, but it's not different in a legal sense. Most universities have statements published that state that staff are not allowed to enter into agreements, including verbal contracts on behalf of the university without prior consent of the university board, which means they've accepted the legality and enforceability of unsigned contracts.
The point of this whole discussion is that you assert that the terms of sale for your Playstation are legally unenforceable, but you make that assertion without any legal backing or citation. Since lawcrawler.findlaw.com gets many hits on cases where ToS agreements are indeed successfully enforced, the burden falls to you to prove why you think that they're not valid. Present some citations or cases or anything that would back up your assertion. If it's so obvious, it should be relatively easy to prove through case precedent, no?
Virg
The original court decision which allowed the creation of audibly inferior tape copies has become the focus of all those who now demand the right to make audibly identical CD copies. Why the emphasis? Because that was one of the key points in the trial, that the copies were considered by the court to be non-competitive with the originals. The court based their decision on the technology of the day. Well, times have changed but the law hasn't. Thanks to improvements in hardware and software you can make CDs that sound so similar to the originals that experts can't tell them apart, so cheaply and easily you can share them with all your friends.
The court decided a point of law on the basis of a particular technology (cassette tapes), rather than on the underlying principle: Is it right to copy somebody else's work? As I pointed out in my previous message, this is not expected or even possible in most other venues, but because of this singular decision it has been enshrined in the popular mind as a "right".
As for "complete proof that you don't mind losing your rights", I'll go you one better: In my opinion, the "Fair Use Right" is crap, should never have been passed, and I'll celebrate the day it is overturned. Until then, I'll keep exercising my right to self expression, one spelled out after careful consideration and discussion, not created from whole cloth by a court.
Hmmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.