Slashdot Mirror
More on Microsoft vs. Lik Sang
Levendis47 writes "CNET's News.com is running an article on Microsoft's legal manuevers which have successfully shut down the Lik Sang ecomm store where they've been selling various game system mod chips including the OpenXBox Mod Chip. This leads me to two questions (and I'll admit my ignorance, faux or not, in order to get discussion on this topic): 1) When a customer purchases an XBox (or any game system for that matter) are you intrinsically "signing" an end-user agreement in the purchase that makes modding the device illegal? 2) Could a non-profit org setup an effort to have mod chips produced and "distributed" at the cost of production w/o legal repurcussions? (i.e. would not making a profit on XBox's hardware mods protect you from their wrath?) 3) I understand the whole DRM aspect of mod'ing for playing copied games, BUT, what about legit gray-hacks like the Mandrake Linux XBox project and such? It would seem to me that in the long haul, Microsoft would support such efforts because they could sell more devices (and potentially more software if they licensed an opensource validation library)... "
They don't want to sell devices, they want to sell games...
I'm still undecided as to whether the Xbox is a honeypot for MS to see how easy people find it to crack the hardware, in preperation for whatever is going to replace it. I'd like to think it isn't, but then for some reason XP refuses to return any results if I search my entire system for "*.java" in XP, and I'm a Java Developer...
Invoicing, Time Tracking, Reporting
It seems to me that this whole situation isn't as clear-cut as it may first appear...for starters, there only seems to be once source to confirm that it was Microsoft who ordered Lik Sang closed down (which admittedly was Microsoft itself, but the Australian branch, which from prior experience I know shouldn't be trusted :0).
:0)
Also, why are Lik-Sang still collecting e-mail addresses for people who want to be told when they are back online? Why not just shut down the domain and save on hosting bills? I know most of you are going to say that it's a Microsoft ploy to get a list of addresses of mod chippers, but that's a little farfetched even by MS standards.
The much more likely scenario is that MS doesn't want Lik-Sang to close down altogether (betcha they sell a whole pile more PS2 chips than they do X-Box ones), they just want them to stop selling X-Box mod chips...in which case, the site will be back up in a few weeks, when all the legal problems are sorted and Lik-Sang have "smelt the glove" of Microsoft
===
You know that guy who stole your girlfriend away from you in the summer of '95? He's going to die.
It all comes back to the DMCA (damn the US government for making a law that always reminds me of a Village People song!). Whether it's right or wrong, the law says you can't go around and break apart copy protection systems, which is what goes into the consoles. If Ford were to ever start putting region encoding in their engines, then modding cars would all of a sudden require a lawyer :0)
===
You know that guy who stole your girlfriend away from you in the summer of '95? He's going to die.
The answers to the questions are IMHO:
1. No, you don't sign an agreement when you buy an XBox. Even if such an agreement was included, it is questionable if this holds any legal value.
2. Profit is not truly an issue in this conflict.
3. There are a few reasons why a MOD chip (and/or its sale) can be illegal:
- The MOD chip contains copyrighted code from the original.
- The MOD chip qualifies as a circumvention device under the DMCA or similar non-US law.
These are usually the reasons a MOD chip is pulled off the market by a court order.
Microsoft won't allow anyone to mod their xbox because then anyone could write software for it. If this were to happen, than M$ wouldn't get any money from game publishers, etc for allowing said publishers to distribute games for xbox. They might allow someone to port linux or other OSs to the xbox, but only if that someone were willing to pay the same fees as game publishers (or perhaps even higher fees), but I doubt it. Even then M$ would probably force the ported OS to use DRM, so it would only run the software they chose (ie, whose developers payed them).
"I love the smell of burning Karma in the morning." Codito Ergo Sum.
This statement makes no sense. Why would MS support Linux - their sworn enemy? Why would they make it easy for people to buy their hardware and run Linux on it?
Even if MS didn't care about Linux, just look at the facts. The Xbox is basically a PC. However, it's sold at a huge loss. The sales of games make up for this loss. However, if everyone buys the Xbox at a loss, and then doesn't buy any games, but installs Linux on it, and uses it as a PC, MS loses a shitload of money. Without the Xbox, these same people wanting a PC would have to buy one from Dell, or something, which comes with Windows XP and other MS software, so MS has made money on software, without losing any money on hardware.
The only reason MS entered the game console market is to make money. They need the games in order to make money. Without them, they lose, and the Xbox will be as dead as the Nintendo PowerGlove.
Yes, you _can_ buy an Xbox, and run Linux on it with a modchip, but why would you want to? Why would you want to use MS hardware, which is a stipped down, shitty PC, and run Linux on it, when you can get a mini form-factor (XPC) bare-bones system for under $150, add a processor and drive, and be up and running on a better system without having to look at an MS logo everyday? Sure, I understand the "because I can", argument, and yeah, it's cool to make Linux run on something that wasn't mean to explicitly support it, but really, it's not like it's going to become a true platform.
That having been said, I am in no way supporting MS' extension of US laws to foreign companies. That does in fact suck.
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
1) When a customer purchases an XBox (or any game system for that matter) are you intrinsically "signing" an end-user agreement in the purchase that makes modding the device illegal?
Not particularly, no. Of course MS is under no obligation to support you, or your box if it breaks. Also don't necessarilly expect it to work with the Live service. In other words, you're free to break it, just don't dump on MS when it breaks or you can't use it with some new game, or their online service, they are well within their rights to exclude you if they are able.
2) Could a non-profit org setup an effort to have mod chips produced and "distributed" at the cost of production w/o legal repurcussions? (i.e. would not making a profit on XBox's hardware mods protect you from their wrath?)
Ahh, now here's where you get to the quasi legality. It's the production for profit of mod-chips that has dubious legal value. Ever wonder why you can't just walk into a store and buy a cable descrambler? You might be able to avoid them - but you have to show up in court, and pay the legal fees when they sue you.
3) I understand the whole DRM aspect of mod'ing for playing copied games, BUT, what about legit gray-hacks like the Mandrake Linux XBox project and such?
Microsoft is concerned about a larger picture. Of having the X-Box be an end unit in a network of units. They want to make sure that the network is somewhat secure. By supporting something like Linux on the X-Box, they help to compromise their plans.
Plain vanilla copyright allows you to make modifications to software/hardware you've purchased. For example, you can purchase Windows NT Workstation and hex edit the bits that cripple Workstation so that it acts more like Server. You may not however redistribute it.
Microsoft hates the idea because they want to sell Server, which is just a recompile (with a few other tools) for much much more. They claim that you are bound to the End User License Agreement when you open the shrink-wrap package you forfeit this and many other rights. Of course, they don't get your signature, and most people never have any idea of what this license says, and some would say it's plain illegal to force customers to waive so many rights just to use software, so it's kind of up in the air.
I imagine this same EULA makes mod chips illegal. EULAs have not been sufficiently validated in court (cases seem to go both ways for a number of reasons), so you're rolling the dice by challenging it.
However, IANAL.
Greetz DJB, JS
No, you're absolutely right. The real problem is that Microsoft is using copyright law to make sure no one reverse engineers their hardware. To me, that's just an abuse of copyright. It really has nothing to do with protected the BIOS that they worked so hard on. It's a way of closing up their hardware, and having the law to back it up. I don't like that.
You can repgrogram alot of the computer system in the car yourself, you just have to figure out how. Propritary solutions (such as Ford's and GM's) are harder to break, ISO 9141/SAE J1962 interfaces (as used in most European and Asian cars) are basically RS-232 with diffrent voltage levels, and allow communications for accessing information about the vehicle (OBD-II). Most of these interfaces also reuse the 2 "Propritary" pinouts to provide a second RS-232 interface to the programmable parts of the system, such as the ECU/ECM and ABS subsystems. As far as Ford/GM, they use fucked up pulse width modulation crap to transmit data.
The diffrence between ISO 9141/SAE J1962 and RS-232 is that ISO/SAE protocols use +12V and 0V instead of +10V and -10V (if you know how RS-232 works this will make sense).
I'm hacking my car (literally), to find out what extent these things have control of it. It's neat, once you figure out how to build a ISO 9141 to SAE J1962 adapter (I've got all the specifications now..).
Note that if you use ISO/SAE papers to do this crap, you then can't talk about it due to the licensing agreement. I don't use ISO/SAE materials, so fuckem. Someday I'll have all the stuff documented publicly.
So, no, an X-box is not a car. If Honda/Acura tries to tell me I can't do this, I will nicely tell them to fuck off. They aren't protecting media with their car. They aren't copy controlling anything. etc.
Not true at all. You have no more chance of getting an equal opportunity in the US than you do in numerous other countries; possibly less opportunity. Americans can't see it, probably because they think the world begins and ends at their borders, but for the rest of the world the US is definitely no longer first choice when considering migration. Possibly better communications have made more people aware that they will have few employee protections there and have a much greater chance of being exploited by their employer than in many other countries.
Can you imagine purchasing a car and not being allowed to install a turbo, or better exhaust...or modifying it to run on fryer oil?
Check out full explanation here
I believe the Magnuson-Moss Warranty act allows for the purchase of accessories like mod chips:
" Tie-In Sales Provisions:
Generally, tie-in sales provisions are not allowed. Such a provision would require a purchaser of the warranted product to buy an item or service from a particular company to use with the warranted product in order to be eligible to receive a remedy under the warranty. The following are examples of prohibited tie-in sales provisions.
In order to keep your new Plenum Brand Vacuum Cleaner warranty in effect, you must use genuine Plenum Brand Filter Bags. Failure to have scheduled maintenance performed, at your expense, by the Great American Maintenance Company, Inc., voids this warranty.
While you cannot use a tie-in sales provision, your warranty need not cover use of replacement parts, repairs, or maintenance that is inappropriate for your product. The following is an example of a permissible provision that excludes coverage of such things.
While necessary maintenance or repairs on your AudioMundo Stereo System can be performed by any company, we recommend that you use only authorized AudioMundo dealers. Improper or incorrectly performed maintenance or repair voids this warranty."
It is my understanding of this act that no accessories manufacturer is required to get permission from the original manufacturer before producing the add-in parts.
Manguson-Moss also allows for "unintended use"...that means you can buy a hammer and use it as a paper weight if you like (as long as using it as a paper weight does not result in the destruction of the hammer). So Microsoft can not prohibit you from running other software on your Xbox.
How did Microsoft pull this off? MS must have better attorneys.
-ted