Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft: No Xbox for You!
Markel writes "According this this story in the Sydney Morning Herald, Microsoft is very concerned about a man having been acquitted after allegedly selling [mod chips for a PlayStation]. So concerned in fact, that they are saying: change the law, or they will have to reconsider selling the Xbox in Australia. Not selling the Xbox is well within their rights, but putting it in a (I paraphrase slightly) "change the law or we'll .." context seems assuming a bit too much. I guess well see how many of our MPs are XBox gameheads."
Nintendo, Sony, and other companies over the years have had to deal with mod chips and people who like to mod their hardware. Last I checked, these companies are not having financial difficulty because of modding.
What bug is up MS's butt?
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
...couldn't Microsoft just be saying this to try and kick up sales of the Xbox? If the government refuses to change its position, then there'll probably be panic buying of Xboxes before MS withdraws them from Australia.
Note to M1-ers: a curt but otherwise insightful message is not "Flamebait" or "Troll".
I think they have every right to do this
I don't think anybody is claiming that Microsoft doesn't have the right to sell or not sell XBox's wherever they please. However, this does not translate into the right to buy a law to suit their needs.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
I would assume they're worried that it will set a precedent for people who sell any kind of mods in Australia. If the PS2 guy gets off, how can MS stop the evil guy who does it with their precious Xbox? ;)
PS/2 + modchip = CanPlayThirdPartyGames
Canon + adapter = CanUseThirdPartyLenses
This would be the same Australia that sold refugees?
Doesn't exactly sound like nice ethics to me... The continuing suppression of Aboriginals is also far from nice...
I'm going over here and I don't know why!
From the article quoting Steve Balmer:
"If there are aspects that are not allowed, it would encourage us to require a change in the legal framework. Otherwise, it wouldn't make economic sense."
If the legal frame work of a given locality doesn't support your business model, don't use it. In the past few years we've all seen a bunch of crazy business models crash at full speed into the solid wall of reality. What Balmer is proposing here makes even the worst dot-bomb plan look sterling. Even groups like the RIAA and the MPAA can claim that "times and technology have changed" when they go to try to change laws. In this case MS is the newcomer to an existing markeplace that has had to deal with the problem of mod chips for quite some time. I suppose that this just shows that you don't have to smart to help run a multi-gajillion dollar company.
Hopefully the "change the law" business model doesn't become as popular as the "put it online and they will buy it" model was. If this takes off one can just imagine the headlines: "Company fails to buy law, declares bankruptcy." If that wouldn't be grounds for a mismanagement suit on the part of investors, I don't know what would be.
Never disturb your enemy while he is busy making a mistake.
What's broken is regional lockouts. I do not support using mod chips to play burned games, and I don't know if those are even available now that xbox games come on DVD. There is no reason I find acceptable to keep me from playing Japanese or European games on a North American system. Companies should bring games to all three markets in a timely fashion. Too many games never make it to certain markets, mod chips actually increase sales of those games for the market it was released in. Plenty of games get brought to NA with awful voice acting in place of the great Japanese. I'd far rather play the Japanese version, especially when the Japanese version has an English subtitles option.
In Oz, it's essentially illegal to enforce region coding, which this stoush seems to be about. It's considered anti-competitive. Similarly, a company cannot stop a product from being imported into the country, even if it already sold there (no anti-grey marketting laws). So basically you could still get your xboxen if you really wanted to and MS can do fuck all about it.
It's interesting to note that Visa and Mastercard are thretening similar action if the Reserve bank doesn't back down on some reforms.
One day, when we get rid of all the evil corporates, Australia will be the perfect place to live.
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
Since the PlayStation was (and perhaps still is) a loss leader, and we know for CERTAIN the xBox is a loss leader, your statement doesn't make sense.
The thing that hurts Sony is somebody buying an MS game instead of a Sony game. Nobody makes beans on the hardware, and anything that broadens the set of people who buy software is good for the licensor.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
It really is sad that some great games don't make it to other regions. Americans at large _still_ think that the Sega Saturn was a fruitless platform, when some of the best games of that generation are Saturn exclusives.
Ever since I was young, reading about all the games released in Japan for the Famicom and PC Engine that would never make it to the NES & TurboGrafx-16, I've always wished that the American arms of Japanese game companies wouldn't pick and choose on behalf of the American market which games to release, particularly regarding sequels. The infamous example: Secret of Evermore is _not_ as good a game as the game that should have been released here in its stead, Seiken Densetsu 3 -- sequel to Secret of Mana.
As an American, my heart has to go out to the PAL region gamers. Not just is availability of most Japanese titles more limited than in the U.S. (with the odd notable exception), but the quality of the gameplay often suffers because games weren't programmed with the PAL video standard in mind, or the translations from the European publishers can be very bad (from what I'm told).
< tofuhead >
It is still the dark of night.
Not such a valid reason these days, since the vast majority of modern TV sets (and lets face it, how many people likely to buy a PS2/Xsux/Gamecube *really* will be using an ancient television?) sold in Europe are more than capable of displaying NTSC signals. Makes sense really since the TV manufacturers don't have to make everything twice.
Additionally, how the images are output to TV at hardware level has nothing to do with the game software at all.
It's just another excuse to fix prices.
--
ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US!
Microsoft is threatening to not sell the XBox in Australia due to a guy being acquitted for making mod chips. Now just above Australia, is China. Wasn't there some crazy stat that 78% (2000) of the software in China is pirated and Microsoft is still selling there? If I was a Microsoft share holder I would be concern on the focus of Microsoft. I think less XBox mods are going to sell compared to copies of Office or XP.
"If they're going to go so far as to threaten the government of an entire country "
Erm...how does refusing to sell a video game console "threaten the government of an entire country"?
Are they really that important?
A modern day witchhunt.
The games do have to be programmed differently if they are going to be run on NTSC or PAL.
Oh really? PAL has two variations: the 625-line, 50-Hz PAL used for European TV, and the 525-line, 60-Hz PAL/M used for Brazilian TV and for European video games. PAL/M gives exactly the same pixel count (about 720x480) as the NTSC signal used in Japan and the USA. Thus, NTSC-style games on modern PAL consoles will run in PAL/M mode. (Older PAL consoles often halted the CPU during the extra scanlines of PAL, resulting in a slower game.) Not only do almost all PAL TVs multisync to both PAL and PAL/M signals, many can also display NTSC signals.
Another reason Nintendo releases at different times in different regions is they have a policy of only releasing a game after translating it to the local language
Then why not simultaneously release in the United States and the United Kingdom?
The real reason for region coding is the fact that different companies may own the copyrights or the exclusive licenses under copyright on a given work in different countries. For instance, Peter Pan fell out of copyright a long time ago in the United States, but the United Kingdom has passed a statutory perpetual copyright on the work and on all derivative works. The region lockout is intended partly to enforce parallel-import restrictions on works in markets where they don't have copyright clearance.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Amazing.
Razor companies sell the handle as a loss-leader, making up huge profits on the blades. Sure, some third-party blades that fit the handle come out that are cheaper, and the original company complains somewhat, but the vast majority continue to buy the "genuine article", and life goes on.
Ink jet printer manufacturers probably don't make a dime on the printers themselves: the profit is in the ink carts. Yes, some people buy refill kits, but still the vast majority buy the real replacement cartridges. Token complaining aside, the printer maker is happy.
The same is true, I'm certain, with the X-Box. There aren't that many modded systems out there to make more than the tiniest dent in actual sales of X-Box games. In a sane political environment, Microsoft would whine a bit but really, there would be nothing they could do, as the console belongs to the citizen and it should be none of Microsoft's business what anyone does with it.
Microsoft, however, has the advantage of being on the "right" side of the WIPO treaties which forbid all this "digital theft", and effectively remove a person's right to do what he/she wants with their own property. The USA was a "leader" in this: by passing the DMCA in 1998, they were easily the first Western nation to ratify this crap into what is now international law.
Most countries that signed onto the agreement haven't yet ratified it, but most are getting close to doing so.
Seems the Australian court system wasn't told how to rule properly on this issue. Ballmer thinks that a nudge may be required to make sure Australia is in line. Must be nice to have that kind of influence.
Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!
Just to expand on this a little...
The reason that regional encoding in general is viewed so dimly in Australia is simply because as a small market, Australia frequently gets hammered on prices relative to the rest of the world.
So, regional encoding looks like it's really set up to be price gouging to Australians.
There's been several investigations into, eg why CDs cost so much more in Australia than in other countries, or at least used to, before the exchange rate bombed.
Of course, this is the great thing about the internet. You can find the price of anything in nearly any market.
Frequently governments find this troubling, because it means they are missing out on sales tax, duties etc.
For corporations, I've heard of situations where they simply go and set up a subsidiary in the country which offers the cheapest relative price and do a corporate wide deal.
Consumers don't have that luxury, but Oz seems to have some resistance built up re this nonsensical price fixing by global corporations.
So does Anonymous Coward have good karma?
Really? I think that the VAST majority of Australian posters here have made the point that parallel importation is LEGAL in Oz and that region-locking is ILLEGAL. If I have an early DVD player or an XBox or PS/2 that is region-locked, I have to chip it before I can play the games/DVDs I have legally imported from outside Australia. This is hardly piracy.
I am not Australian and I do not own a game console or a stand-alone DVD player. I DO own a combo CD-RW/DVD-ROM drive in my PC. I DO have libdvdcss installed so I can (sometimes unsuccessfully) try to play legally-purchased, original DVDs on my PC because I am Microsoft-free by choice. If a DVD refuses to play on my system, I return it to the store as a defective product, because they NEVER show "system requirements" on the outside of the packaging, thereby breaching, at minimum, the implied warranty of merchantability under the Uniform Commercial Code.
NO vendor is entitled to tell me that I MUST use Windows or any other particular software product AFTER the purchase. In fact, they have a duty to inform me, the purchaser, of any special requirements BEFORE the purchase so I can make an informed decision whether I want to make the purchase or not.
For Rosen, Valenti or YOU to accuse me of piracy in writing is libel and I demand a retraction.
utter rubbish