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.
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.
Looks like I'll be picking up a new hobby...
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.
No, but putting a chip in a PS2 to play Japanese games isn't morally questionable, but just as illegal.
(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,
He wasn't just selling mod chips, he was also selling pirated games. Not sure if they would have just busted him for the mod chips or not though.
Xaotik Designs
Sheesh, did you read the article?
He was caught modding the machines and selling pirated software out of his store. I don't think you can get busted for modding unless they can prove the intent was for pirating and not backup. Well, having and selling pirated software with your mods counts as copyright infringement.
It's like saying he had a lockpit set and was caught using it to steal goods from cars. Guess what? It's not the possession of the lockpit set that got him busted.
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.
>>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.
The article says "two counts of copyright infringement", which is pretty self-explanatory given the "413 pirated video games".
Of more concern -- and perhaps why you're scratching your head -- is the "four counts of selling unauthorized computer equipment". What the hell does that mean?
Who "authorizes" computer equipment? Do the charges stem from something like violating FCC-equivalent (DOC? CRTC?) RF regulations, or something equivalent to "possesion of burglary tools", or something more ominous, considering the free speech aspects of computers?
Anyone know? ("Know", not speculate.)
-- 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. 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
It sounds rather DMCA-like. I wonder if Parliament passed something DMCA-like with almost no fanfare.
No. Heritage Canada and Industry Canada have been collaborating in a very significant consultation process accross Canada. I attended their Ottawa consultation meeting, which had surprisingly strong "citizen" representation. The big american content producers were given their say, but not given a lot of credibility. Michael Geist, a U of Ottawa lawyer , was particularly good with not letting things by.
Canada DMCA opponents mailing list.
Digital-Copyright.ca
Thorough background brought to you by Matthew Skala, the chap that broke (IIRC) the Cyber-Patrol encryption and, again IIRC, was pursued by Mattel for DMCA violations, despite being a Canadian.
-Rob Ewaschuk
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
Agreed. The subject title is deceptive.
It's like saying Timothy McVeigh was given the death penalty for failing to return his rental truck in time... and other associated offienses.
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
Actually, since this story is Canadian, the One True Doughnut would have to be from Tim Horton's.
~Idarubicin
If we are going to be vocal on the unfairness of legal roadblocks to fair use in the cases dealing with DeCSS and proposed DRM legislation, we have a responsibility to be equivalently vocal in cases where technologies we advocate and claim rights to are being used illegally. If we want DeCSS to be legal despite its "side effect" of decrypting DVDs, we have to denounce those who exploit that side effect for illegal personal gain.
If we want mod chips to be a legal and accepted use of our own hardware for playing legally purchased Japanese games or burned backups of others we own, we have to speak against pirates who want to make money using mod chips and CD/DVD copying technology illegally.
Neil
"There are thousands of types of people in the world: The type of people who think there are two types of people in the world, and the thousands of other types."
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.
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.