Slashdot Mirror


Xbox Hacking Book Prepares to Fly Off Shelves

SecurityFocus posted an article today about a new book that covers hacking the Xbox. The book's author, Andrew "Bunnie" Huang, reports that it's selling well, even though the release date has not yet arrived. Presumably, this is because the book covers soldering techniques and adding features like blue LEDs and modchips to Xboxes, most of which violate the DMCA. If this stuff is interesting to you, you can order a copy from Huang's site. It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores.

71 of 319 comments (clear)

  1. The heart of the debate? by mao+che+minh · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I find it amusing that the open source crowd shows such great interest in a closed piece of hardware, hardware that is defended by DMCA-supported lawyer jargon and manufactured by "The Great Satan" of digital freedom. It goes to show you how strong and creative this community is, and highlights upon some of the beneficial fundamental values that the open source crowd holds: freedom and expression in computing. Sappy huh. =)

    At the heart of the modding debate (or very close to it), I think that Microsoft wants to prevent hacking and modding of the Xbox because it reveals to the consumers the true identity of the Xbox: a PC that is being sold far too cheaply; an entry into the console market that would be completely unsustainable if Microsoft were not a monopoly (I.E. able to sustain gross losses in many other markets in order to direct/force attention back to their OS and Office suite).

    1. Re:The heart of the debate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dear mao che minh,

      This message serves to notify you of your violation of a Microsoft(r)(c)(TM) trademark ("I.E.") in the previous post. We take infringements on our intellectual property very seriously.

      You may settle this case out of court by agreeing to pay us an unspecified sum of our choosing and signing a non-disclosure, indentured servitude agreement. If you refuse, I remind you that our legal staff is large enough to fill a football stadium but smart enough to know better than to go out in public together.

      We eagerly await your reply.

      Sincerely,
      Microsoft Legal Team

    2. Re:The heart of the debate? by El+Cubano · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I find it amusing that the open source crowd shows such great interest in a closed piece of hardware, hardware that is defended by DMCA-supported lawyer jargon and manufactured by "The Great Satan" of digital freedom.

      I find it even more amusing that after 5 years under the DMCA, someone still has the cojones to basically thumb his nose at "The Great Satan" of digital freedom.

      I think that this only helps further the idea that if the various media/software companies do not provide what the user wants, the user will figure it out for themselves. When the bottom line of company Y starts to really shrink, they will provide the customer with what they want to maintain the revenue stream on related products (think IBM and SUN selling and supporting Linux so that they can keep selling servers).

    3. Re:The heart of the debate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      No. Fucking no. They want to stop hacking and modding of the XBox because they don't want people pirating games. Clean, simple answer. There's no dramatic conspiracy behind it, they probably don't even care if someone wants to waste their time running Linux on it..they don't want people pirating games. Why? Because the system is cheap. They're losing tons of money on it, and the only money they're gaining back is from deals with companies producing games, and the few people out there buying the machines to -play- the new games. If XBox piracy becomes too commonplace then they'll essentially be shovelling hundreds of thousands of dollars building systems directly into the toilet.

    4. Re:The heart of the debate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      shovelling hundreds of thousands of dollars building systems directly into the toilet.

      That's the whole business plan with the i-loo!

    5. Re:The heart of the debate? by Gizzmonic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, Nintendo has never sold a console at a loss. That is totally anathema to their corporate personality.

      The only companies to have sold consoles at a loss are Sega (and only with the Dreamcast) and Microsoft (only with the Xbox). The PS2 may have been sold at a loss early in its lifespan, but it was a very small loss.

      As consoles continue to be manufactured, the parts get cheaper, and the process gets streamlined. Thus consoles become more and more profitable over their lifetime. Nintendo has the best profit margins out of the three on their console, despite the fact that it's being sold for much less...

      --
      (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    6. Re:The heart of the debate? by istartedi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I find it amusing that the home gardening crowed shows such a great interest in inexpensive "bedding plants" that are defended by nursery-supported patents and grown by "The Great Satans" of home lumberyards. It goes to show you how strong and creative this community is, and highlights upon some of the beneficial fundamental values that the gardening crowd holds: freedom of expression in horticulture. Sappy huh. =)

      At the heart of the gardening debate (or very close to it), I think that Big Box Stores want to prevent propogation and resale of bedding plants because it reveals to customers the true identity of the plants: greenery that is being sold far too cheaply; an entry into the gardening market that would be completely unsustainable if Big Box Stores were not monopolies (I.E. able to sustain gross losses in many other markets in order to direct/force attention back to their housewares and appliances).

      Get it? These kinds of business practices are not unique to Microsoft or computing, or to monopolies. The bit about bedding plants is real. I was reading about it in the Washington Post just the other day. Ever wonder how stores make money selling potted azaleas for $5? Answer: they don't. They're just hoping to pull you in so you'll buy a mower or something that really makes them money. Remember, from the POV of SCO, Linux looks like the same kind of unfair pricing that the XBox looks like to a lot of people on Slashdot, and in both cases people are willing to twist the law to "fix" the problem. The real problem? The real "heart of the debate"?

      Business law.

      A more broad, sweeping fix? Make it illegal for anyone to sell anything at a loss by default, and require an application for an exception to the law to permit "loss leaders". An exception process is needed because some loss-leaders like soup kitchens are deemed to have social benefits, and others are deemed not to harm the market, such as mints on hotel pillows. That means you too, Mr. Nonprofit. There's nothing that says companies have to be monopolies to cause "harm to the consumer" and there's nothing that says markets depressed at the hands of non-profits are beneficial to the consumer either.

      Now that's quite a kettle of fish we've gotten ourselves into, isn't it?

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    7. Re:The heart of the debate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dear Anonymous Coward,

      This message serves to notify you of your recent attempt to impersonate the Microsoft Legal Team. We take all such infractions seriously and prosecute them to the maximum extent possible under any and all applicable laws, and some that are not applicable too. We urge that you:

      1. Cease and desist from any such attempts at impersonation in the future.

      2. Issue a statement that clearly and unambiguously establishes your comment to be unofficial.

      We eagerly await your compliance.

      Sincerely,
      The real(TM) Microsoft Legal Team.

    8. Re:The heart of the debate? by Pooua · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Make it illegal for anyone to sell anything at a loss by default, and require an application for an exception to the law to permit "loss leaders".

      Several years ago, I was suckered into becoming a retailer for ColorCo thermochromatic t-shirts. I paid a lot of money to get a license so I could buy the shirts, then more money on the shirts. I had to buy some large quantity of t-shirts at a time, too. Unfortunatetly, I was unable to sell them, at least not at a profit. Over the years, I managed slowly to whittle down my inventory in exchange for ridiculous swaps. I gave a Navajo woman a half-dozen of my color-changing t-shirts in exchange for one of her silver-plated plastic necklaces (I went to a jewelry store to see if I could get anything for the necklace. I couldn't.)

      If you had your way, I would have been stuck with a gross of t-shirts that I could not even give away.

      BTW, I'm not in the t-shirt business, anymore.

      --
      Taking stuff apart since 1969 (TM)
    9. Re:The heart of the debate? by pjt48108 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I do not find it so amusing as all that, simply common sense. It seems to me that a closed-source system, to an open-source zealot, is like an unreachable itch: the longer it itches and the less reachable it is, the more tantalizing it becomes. Also, on a fundamental level, the Xbox is just a fancy-schmancy basic PC with artificial blocks on it to prevent anything but limited use of it. All told, the above adds up to a very enticing temptation to open-source muckers-about.

      What I find amusing at best (and sad at worst) is that the DMCA was passed by our "Elected" representatives in DC. These same people who are telling YOU (and me, actually), the American voter, not to pay "...any attention to the man behind the curtain," are the same ones you BLITHELY allowed to attain their post, either in an act of omission ("I forgot to vote" or "I was too busy") or comission ("I voted for Congressman X, but I didn't know that a kneejerk fundie neoconservative would actually FOLLOW THROUGH on the slow REPEAL of the First Amendment!).

      Suck it up crybabies: you let Congress take away your toys, now you have to play with the leavings.

      Ok... setting cynicism to off...

      --
      Mmmmmm... Bold, yet refreshing!
    10. Re:The heart of the debate? by nathanh · · Score: 4, Funny
      I find it amusing that the open source crowd shows such great interest in a closed piece of hardware,

      Hi, this is just a reminder that a crowd is, by definition, more than one person. The concept of different people having different opinions must be new to you. Please learn more about this concept. Thank you.

    11. Re:The heart of the debate? by ibsteveog · · Score: 5, Informative

      The old "all consoles sold at a loss" myth... The best truth is told here: acts of gord, proclamation 2!

  2. R-Type by mao+che+minh · · Score: 4, Funny

    $6,000 worth of R-Type stickers, racing stripes, sparkling paint jobs, loud exhaust pipes, and annoying Chinese characters that most likely mean "Stupid Round-Eye" serve no beneficial purpose to a $5,000 Dodge Neon either, nevertheless, they adorn the vehicles of 17 year olds everywhere.

  3. Heh. by numbski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The only part that violates the DMCA is the part that describes how to circumvent copy protection schemes.

    That's the reason Microsoft will want him to hang over this.

    It's also the reason someone has to do it. Someone has to stand up and show how insane this all is. Too bad someone has to martyr themselves in order to get the point across. This guy will ruin his fiscal life in the united states.

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

  4. Re: Car Manuals by RobPiano · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ignoring the parent comparining the cost and the fact that I'm for free software...

    The reason this is different than selling a car manual is that you are not moding your car to run equipment without paying for it or that is restricted for any reasons. If a car manual instructed people how to get military gps coordinates or pick up restricted broadcasts, you can bet it wouldn't be on store shelves.

    Regardless, this would this even be news if the xbox was a Playstation?

    Rob

  5. Wait a minute by s20451 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is the book banned, or the techniques the book describes? There's a big difference.

    Clearly, the book is not banned, since it is being published directly by the author. However, from his site, the book was not picked up by a publisher for fear of lawsuits. That's somewhat alarming, but it's not equivalent to outlawing a book.

    Actually, there are plenty of "survival" manuals and whatnot out there that describe all kinds of illegal activities, so I would be surprised if tort law could be used to terminate publication of a book (because if it could, it would have been done already in other contexts). However, this doesn't mean that the threat of lawsuits could not be used as a scare tactic.

    --
    Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
  6. talk about political corruption and errosion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    of consumer rights. If i want to buy an XBox and void the warranty, it's my right to do so. On the other hand, if I was being unreasonable, like modding an XBox and then demanding Microsoft provide support for it, the manufacturer would be right.

    Microsoft has every right to void the warranty if I purposely modify the box. What they don't have is the right to demand I don't violate the EULA and void the warranty. I hate to say it, but corporations should be banned from donating money to political parties or candidates. If a company wants to push their own agendas, they shouldn't get a free write off. Instead, they should have to pay their employees, who then donate the money. This means, for every dollar a company spends to buy votes, they have to pay taxes on it. I have no problem with companies like microsoft buying influence in the white house as long as those purchases are taxes at 33%.

  7. re: censorship by scubacuda · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores.

    If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all--Noam Chomsk

    Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself--Salman Rushdie

    You can cage the singer but not the song--Harry Belafonte
  8. DCMA, what's next? by deathcloset · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How is modding your X-Box illegal under the DCMA? I don't doubt that somehow it is (Frankly I wouldn't be suprised if having a dream with a top 100 song in it is illegal too) but is it only illegal if you actually use it for infringement purposes, or is the modification of the device itself illegal?

    if the actual harware mod is illegal then WTF? I should be able to do whatever I want with my hardware (physically). I bought it, I own it. I can hit it repeatedly with a bat If I wish. I can dunk it in a bathtub full of milk, I can throw it through any window in my house I so choose (That is if I own the house, but If I have enough income to fill a tub with milk then I think I would have enough money own the house (maybe in this example I own a barn)).

    1. Re:DCMA, what's next? by Bendy+Chief · · Score: 4, Informative
      Modification of an X-Box, namely, with a modchip, constitutes a form of copy-protection circumvention, which is an offense under the DMCA. By installing your modchip, you circumvent bootup routines contained in the BIOS ROM which prevent you from playing pirated games, installing Linux, etc, etc.

      The proprietary Microsoft BIOS ROM is what this whole DMCA spectre revolves around. You own the box but not the ROM inside. It's not your right to modify it. (As dictated by law. I'm all for mods)

    2. Re:DCMA, what's next? by Tom7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > How is modding your X-Box illegal under the DCMA?

      Well, check it out -- search for 17 USC 1201 on google and read the law. Section c, I think, describes circumvention devices and outlaws them. Also, the act of circumvention is outlawed.

      In this case, circumvention and circumvention device are defined carefully, but I believe that x-box modchips would fall under the definition. Certainly the act of using a modchip to play illegally copied games would be a DMCA violation. If the modding community builds enough reasonable legal uses of modchips (ie, Xbox linux), then it's possible that modchips would be in the clear because they have substantial non-infringing use.

      > if the actual harware mod is illegal then WTF? I should be able to do whatever I want with my hardware (physically).

      Yes, that's something awful about the DMCA, isn't it?

    3. Re:DCMA, what's next? by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 3, Funny

      I had that circumvention thing done to me when I was a baby... And *now* they make it illegal?!...

      Damn...

    4. Re:DCMA, what's next? by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Frankly I wouldn't be suprised if having a dream with a top 100 song in it is illegal too

      It would be under DMCA if it was Bender having the dream.

    5. Re:DCMA, what's next? by Bendy+Chief · · Score: 3, Interesting

      IANAL, but as I understand it, any act preventing their BIOS from running in exactly the way they intended is a violation. It doesn't matter what you do afterwards. (Unless that's further criminal activity)

      Furthermore, I am not a US citizen (Canuck), so I haven't researched the DMCA as exhaustively as I might otherwise have. Still, I believe it's as draconian as I implied above.

    6. Re:DCMA, what's next? by Lochin+Rabbar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The notion that the restriction of which software you can run on the X-Box is a red herring designed to divert attention from what, in the EU at least, is an illegal restraint of trade. The BIOS protections are there too ensure that no software producer can sell software that runs on the X-Box without handing over a significant proportion of its revenue to Microsoft. By the time the distributor and the retailer have added their markup to this extorted sum the end customer is paying a lot of money for the game, and the profits of the games manufacturer are being squeezed. The piracy issue is irrelevant.

      As to the ROM I have every right to modify it long as I don't do so for the purpose of copy-protection circumvention, since the X-Box is designed to run software not to copy it this is a non issue. What I don't have the right to do is to distribute copies of the modified ROM, though I can distribute patches for it.

    7. Re:DCMA, what's next? by dirk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As long as you are not using your X-Box to play pirated games (or access other copyrighted material), you are not using it to circumvent anything. You are free to do anything you want with your X-Box. This includes paint it, put a blue LED in it, or even put a modchip in it. Now if that modchip contains code copyrighted by MS (which they always do as far as I know) then you are violating not only the DMCA, but copyright laws as well. You can freely remove the X-Box chip and place a blank one in (not that it will do you any good). But the modchips contain a modified version of the X-Box BIOS, and that makes them illegal, even without the DMCA.

      --

      "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    8. Re:DCMA, what's next? by Klaruz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope, try cromwell.

      http://xbox-linux.sourceforge.net/download.php

      xbox bios replacement, no microsoft code. I mentioned in another thread that I'm thinking of chiping an xbox to make a mythtv front end. I intend to use cromwell in the chip, and just turn the chip off when I want to play an xbox game.

      No DMCA violation, no copyright violation. Just a dual purpose piece of hardware. Just doing what microsoft wants sometimes, doing what I want other times.

      That sounded almost like a defence of the DMCA, but I didn't mean it to. Hmmm.... Somebody must have laced my mountain dew.

    9. Re:DCMA, what's next? by nathanh · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Now if that modchip contains code copyrighted by MS (which they always do as far as I know)

      Nope. The first modchips contained code owned by Microsoft. There are new modchips which are Microsoft free. They are still illegal under the DMCA. Huzzah for America, the land of the free.

  9. Auto Makers by kUnGf00m45t3r · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just wait, pretty soon automakers will start using the DMCA to keep you from repairing your car yourself. That way you have to take it to an "authorized repair center".

    1. Re:Auto Makers by shogun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just wait, pretty soon automakers will start using the DMCA to keep you from repairing your car yourself. That way you have to take it to an "authorized repair center".

      I thought they already did that, well not via the DMCA as yet, but by keeping proprietry engine computer management data out of the hands of the 'unauthorized service centres'.

    2. Re:Auto Makers by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I saw on TV a few weeks ago where a car shop somewhere installs MOD chips that turns kittens into tigers.

      The chips apparently modify the fuel injection system, pollution control, timing, etc.

      It used to be to hot rod a car you installed goodies like NOS injectors, turbo chargers, Holly four barrel, etc..
      Now you replace the factory chip with a "HOT" mod chip..

      I don't see the car companies invoking DMCA to stop that..
      What the hell is the difference?? mod chipping a car to run better vs. mod chipping the xbox to run better (replace M$ w/ Linux) ?????

      Screw them...

    3. Re:Auto Makers by jpetts · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't see the car companies invoking DMCA to stop that..
      What the hell is the difference?


      Perhaps because Joe Sixpack would easily be able to understand that his rights are being violated in this case?

      --
      Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
    4. Re:Auto Makers by Geekbot · · Score: 2, Informative

      I believe they already do this, or are at least planning to. I believe this was brought up on here before. ....
      Basically, to service your vehicle, a repair shop needs the help of the car's computer. The car's computer gives the repairman certain diagnostic codes. By deciphering these codes, the repairman can figure out what the computer already knows is wrong with the vehicle.
      However, since this information could be considered "encoded" then the automakers can give the codes only to those authorized dealerships or those paying large sums for the codes.
      Anyone who devises a means of figuring out the information stored on the car's computer would be "breaking the code" or circumventing encryption that protects the auto makers Intellectual Property. And of course then they'd be sued all to hell.
      The conclusion is that the automakers could use DMCA protections to ensure that only expensive authorized dealerships have access to the information necessary to repair your car. This would cause smaller owned car repair shops to close. That would cause the dealerships to have less competition and be able to charge more money. That would lead to the automakers being able to demand more money for the codes. And onward into a never ending spiral of corporate greed crushing American citizens through monopolistic practices encouraged and enabled by the DMCA.

      However, I haven't found any auto repair shops that aren't a bunch of scammy crooks anyway, so good riddance. Just wish we didn't have to throw away more freedoms to get rid of the scamming autorepairman.

    5. Re:Auto Makers by moankey · · Score: 2, Informative

      As someone already said they do this with the cars ECU or computer. People can get a scanner to get codes from the more popular cars but there are cars out there that only a dealer can work on.
      But then we also have modders there are garages that can modify the ECU for better fuel economy, more horsepower, or adjust it for optimal settings for whatever modifications you may have chose to make.
      Although now I hear many manufacturers have what they call learning ECU's. They sell it to the consumer as a way to get better fuel economy and emissions. But in reality whatever you try to do in terms of reprogramming and modifications get eventually set back to default as the computer learns itself back to its factory settings.

  10. Bans and Stuff by fm6 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores.
    If GM or Ford had an automotive equivalent of the DMCA, they certainly could ban service manuals. The fact that they don't have oen and don't want one should be a lesson for media and software companies.

    American auto manufacturing started out as a small, boutique industry. Henry Ford changed all that by assuming (correctly, as it happened) that ordinary people would buy cars if he made it practical for them to own them. Part of this was inventing more efficient manufacturing techniques, so he could sell cars more cheaply. But he also specifically encouraged the aftermarket car parts industry, even going so far as to choosing his own manufacturing techniques so that they'd be easy to copy. Thus somebody with a broken Model T didn't have to send away to Michigan for parts. This relationship extends to this day.

    1. Re:Bans and Stuff by Siniset · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortunately, it's becoming harder and harder for people to mod their cars, what with chips and other electronics in the car. You need diagnostic software now to diagnose and fix most problems on modern cars. Which increases the efficiency of a car, but decreases the ability of the weekend mechanic from fixing a car. Oh well.

  11. Nope! by Erwos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores."

    I'd argue this is more like a book about how to defeat car alarm systems. If it was "how to repair your X-Box", I don't think we'd see this controversy.

    -Erwos

    --
    Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
  12. Illegal Acts by Detritus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I own several books that give step-by-step instructions on how to commit acts that are felonies under federal law. The authors and publishers have a first amendment right to publish this information, even if acting upon it would be a crime. Why should a book on hacking the xbox be any different?

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    1. Re:Illegal Acts by Tom7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not. This is just typical slashdot DMCA alarmism!

      The only thing I can think of that would reasonably make people think that a book describing circumvention would be illegal is the threats that Ed Felten received about his watermarking paper. However, I don't see any reasonable argument (or any actual caselaw) that would indicate that such a thing is banned by the DMCA.

  13. The reason Bill's upset about this is by TerryAtWork · · Score: 2, Interesting

    that he makes his $ on the games not the box. He loses money on the box, and he's not going to lose $ so some hacker can build a Beowolf cluster of cheap Linux boxes.

    BUT he's going about it the wrong way. The RIGHT way to do this is make it a physical bitch to modify the box, not to get lawyers involved.

    --
    It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
  14. BOOKS CANNOT VIOLATE THE DMCA by autopr0n · · Score: 4, Insightful

    God damnit people, if you're going to rail against something, you should at least learn what it actually is. The DMCA explicitly excludes speech from being outlawed. The issue with DeCSS was wether source code should be considered 'speech' or a 'device'

    A book is obviously not a device, and it is protected by both the 1st amendment and the DMCA itself!

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:BOOKS CANNOT VIOLATE THE DMCA by nadachicken · · Score: 2

      The reason DeCSS violates the DMCA is that allows people to circumvent copy protection mechanisims. If a book explains how to circumvent a copy right protection mechanism THAT IT DOES VIOLATE THE DMCA. The real question is whether moding an xbox can be considered circumvention.

  15. I pose a question. by schappim · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I were to buy a whole heap of xboxes and put linux on all of them without putting in a modchip, (using the raincoat hax) and then sold these as internet tv devices with keyboard and mouse, would it be considered illegal?

  16. "Ban" is relative by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Clearly, the book is not banned, since it is being published directly by the author. However, from his site, the book was not picked up by a publisher for fear of lawsuits. That's somewhat alarming, but it's not equivalent to outlawing a book.
    Well, in the strictest sense, there are no book bans in the U.S. The First Amendment doesn't allow them. (Well, mostly. There have always been exceptions. But these have gotten few and farther over the years.) But if you can make it impossible for people to buy something, you've banned that item, no matter how you go about it.

    You refer to tort law. That's certainly a factor. But the DMCA provides for criminal prosecution of violators. If nobody is willing to publish, or even self-publish, books on hacking this or that because they don't want to go to jail -- well then, that kind of book is banned, whatever you call the process.

  17. uh by autopr0n · · Score: 5, Interesting

    None of it violates the DMCA. Books are not devices. They do not violate the DMCA. Ever.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:uh by ryanr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about if I print a book with copyrighted information that I violated the DMCA to get? How about if I print DeCSS?

    2. Re:uh by zurab · · Score: 5, Insightful

      None of it violates the DMCA. Books are not devices. They do not violate the DMCA. Ever.

      It's easy - DMCA - Sec. 1201:

      (2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof that--

      `(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological protection measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;

      Emphasis mine. Books qualify as products, don't they? I think free speech violates DMCA - that's the problem.

    3. Re:uh by pyrote · · Score: 2, Interesting

      actually I have a stack of papers with decss in barcode... does that count as a digital copy or a print copy?

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  18. Re:War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is. by corsec67 · · Score: 2, Funny
    Put a modchip that allows me to run PalmOS on the thing so I can use it as a really big PDA at the office.


    Oh, wow. that would be quite the PDA. You could cut a hole in the side of the XBOX and it would be the office. It would be pretty cool to see.
    Just don't try to put it in your pocket.
    --
    If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
  19. Re: Car Manuals by Theatetus · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If a car manual instructed people how to get military gps coordinates or pick up restricted broadcasts, you can bet it wouldn't be on store shelves.

    Oh come on, he didn't write a book about how to hack a PRC-90 to pick up secure broadcasts. He wrote a book about how to mod a PC thinly disguised as a game platform in order to run software other than that supplied by the platform vendor.

    That said, Wiley & Sons has every right to refuse to publish anything it doesn't want to (that's part of "free speech" too), and Huang seems to have done OK publishing it himself. No blood, no foul.

    Still, the fact that you were so willing to compare a mod that can allow you to put Linux (or pirated games) on an XBox to a mod that can allow you to actually threaten national security says a lot about how the public conceives of corporate vs. personal interests.

    --
    All's true that is mistrusted
  20. Flying Off Shelves by MSTCrow5429 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Flying off shelves? How can it fly off shelves if it's being sold direct by the author? Wouldn't it need to be sold in bookstores to be capable of flying off of shelves?

    --
    Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
  21. Wrong, the DMCA does not outlaw information by Tom7 · · Score: 3, Informative

    > the issue is distributing information about how to bypass copyprotection which is very illigal just ask the poor guy who made decss.

    No. 2600 got in trouble for distributing the source code for DeCSS because the source code (while information, at some level) is a "circumvention device" (according to the judge). The functional aspect of the code (once run through a compiler) was key to this. It would be difficult to argue that a book is an actual "device," and the DMCA does not ban anything (relevant) other than the act of circumvention and circumvention devices.

  22. Freenet by someguy456 · · Score: 3, Funny

    So how long before it appears on freenet? Not only would it be pirated, but it's content might not even be illegal (sorry, no time to read article). This would be a perfect opportunity to use freenet. Free speech! Free Books!

  23. Dead Tree Publishing Get Mo Bettah Rights by cmholm · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Mr. Huong will do just fine with his book. That the publishers he's contacted won't publish is a roll. I think they just don't want to deal with such a limited printing, and the fear of lawsuit is a good excuse.

    While the DMCA makes it easy to shut down a web site, the US Judiciary is VERY leary about restraint of dead tree writing and publishing. IMO, Mr. Huong getting a pro-bono defence would be easy, since any attorney should/would know that a form letter with a law office header is about all that's needed to fend off anything short of a libel suit or national security issues.

    For instance, printing and selling a magazine with DeCSS source code is no big deal, but if the same people put links to the electronic version on their web site, it is. As long as the "Anarchist's Cookbook" is still on the shelves, "Hacking the Xbox: an Introduction to Reverse Engineering" hasn't got a problem.

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
  24. Car repair manuals by saihung · · Score: 4, Funny
    It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores.

    What the...no! No! I was only adjusting the carburetors! Nooooo!!!!!

  25. Car service manuals don't tell everything by bagofbeans · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores."

    Not really. The Haynes manual for my Chevy Malibu does not even admit there's a harness for the seatbelt alarm (and other alarms), so I can't disable it without trial and error.

  26. they'd have one if one company had a by knowledgepeacewi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    MONOPOLY

    There are no "good" multinational corporations.

    Its about the money and if Ford, or GM had a monopoly they'd do it. Lucky for us they make horrible cars compared to Toyota and Honda.

    Henry Ford primed the economic pump by paying his workers more than they deserved so that they would be able to afford his product. It was economic genius.
    But these are the days of the Microsoft monopoly.

  27. Re:War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is. by Minderbinder106 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Liberal Democrats??? How about the entire Senate. Link

  28. Info on Nintendo and Sony taking losses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do you have links to valid information confirming that Nintendo takes losses on GC sells, or Sony on PS2 sells? I have looked, but never found any. Can you let us take a glimpse into your crystal ball?

  29. Banned books... by djupedal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned,

    I guess you're too green to remember Abbie Hoffman's "Steal This Book"......and a bit too charming to know that this kind of 'publicity' helps to sell such books.

    "Laugh while you're faking it and smile while you're taking it."

  30. What if Ford did this? by bear_phillips · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The car service manual analogy is interesting. I wonder how the public would react if Ford sued Chilton, using the DMCA? There are plenty of aftermarket carbs, cam shafts, mod chips etc for cars. What would prevent Ford or GM from applying the DMCA on aftermarket parts manufacturers?

    Ford has a copyright on the engine design and wants to control access to the design. By taking an engine apart you can thwart their control and get the engine design. They bolt the engine togther pretty tight, so that is their copyright protection.

    --
    http://www.windmeadow.com/
  31. Why I won't purchase an X-BOX by diabolus_in_america · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I've seriously considered buying an X-BOX, and I almost did on a couple of occasions, but I've decided against it for now. Here's my reasoning.

    I am not an open source zealot, but I do have serious concerns about many of the projects that Microsoft has on the horizon, such as Palladium, the whole Trustyworthy Computing scheme, and Microsoft's push toward their proprietary Windows Media format. I see the purchase of an X-BOX as a $200 endorsement of Microsoft. And that's not something I am comfortable doing.

    The whole DCMA debate leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I follow most of the discussions pertaining to the DCMA on Slashdot. In fact, it seems like the X-BOX is the focal point of much of the DCMA debate on this site. And while I agree that the DCMA is a terrible piece of legislation, I don't see the logic of buying and modding an X-BOX to protest the DCMA. It seems like the easiest thing to do is to avoid the DCMA entirely, or at least, to avoid the corporations that use the DCMA to prosecute consumers. I can render Microsoft's enforcement of the DCMA moot by not purchasing an X-BOX. If I want to hack around on a console, I think the best choice is a Dreamcast. I can run NetBSD on it, and since it is no longer a revenue stream for Sega, they are not going to go to legal expense of throwing the DCMA at enthusiasts who hack around on it.

    Microsoft is making it difficult to buy an X-BOX without also making additional purchases, namely X-BOX Live! Some of the newer games, and especially many games on the horizon and in development, will simply not be playable without an X-BOX Live subscription. There is also at least one game out now for the X-BOX that virutally requires the purchase of an additional controller which costs nearly $100.00. It seems that this is a trend that Microsoft will continue. And it's a trend I have no desire to endorse.

    Simply, I can write all of the vehement arguments I want against Microsoft and the DCMA. But if I were to open my wallet and plunk down the cash to buy one, I'd feel very hypocritical because the best way for me to protest the DCMA is to avoid the X-BOX altogether.

  32. Re:Surfs in the techno-fiefdom by Maul · · Score: 2, Informative

    So, when you purchase an "Xbox" or other such item you actually only purchase a license to use it but not actual ownership of that physical unit. And of course, not being a property owner, you have no rights other than the right to use as the License states.

    Since I have not purchased an X-Box, I might be wrong... but I'm sure that Microsoft lets you know of the fact that they consider your X-Box THEIR property AFTER you open the box.

    --

    "You spoony bard!" -Tellah

  33. Free pre-testing of Palladium by hargreavesd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Xbox hacking is funny, but it just shows microsoft how to make the secure PC truly secure - the Xbox hackers are gradually teaching them about all the glitches, so they can produces something uncrackable in the future.

  34. Then how come Felten was threatened? by Svartalf · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He was going to publish a paper on the weaknesses of the SDMI schemes. The SDMI people threatened to prosecute under the DMCA and only backed down when Felten went to the Supreme Court about the whole deal.

    Whether or not part 4 applies, you have to go through the courts to exonerate yourself- and you might not be able to easily do it, having to go through the entire judicial system to do it.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  35. What about by Stonent1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you unsoldered the bios chip that contains the boot code and mailed it back to MS. Does that mean you have the legal right to do anything you want with it at that point? Since there is no licensed software in it?

  36. Re:Read it again by zenyu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    it says nothing about your rights of free speech or the press concerning publishing in a dead-tree format.

    I used to think so too. But then 2600 got blocked from publishing decss, and then even linking to pages publishing decss. There was a reason the new york times spoke up for the magazine, I assume it's the same reason they no longer link to related sites in their stories, but instead inconveniently write out the URL as if it were text. The DMCA ended 'free' speech in the USA. The party is over, all consumers please return to your assigned duties, we've got a war with the Canadian aggressors to organize.

  37. Ford is Dead by twitter · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Henry Ford ... made it practical for them to own them. ... he also specifically encouraged the aftermarket car parts industry, even going so far as to choosing his own manufacturing techniques so that they'd be easy to copy. Thus somebody with a broken Model T didn't have to send away to Michigan for parts. This relationship extends to this day.

    Do you think for one instant this spirit survives? Detroit, at great costs, changes their body styles yearly and supports a far greater than needed diversity of models. They do this to make it impossilbe to keep a car running beyond it's "planned obsolescent" date. To get body pannels and parts, you go to a junk yard. Sure, some parts are interchangable and third parties can sell them, but your old car is going to be ugly fall appart around you.

    As for the DMCA, Detroit is slow but it won't be long before they follow the printing industry's lead on banning 3rd party sales on anything with a chip in it. It's already difficult, if not impossible, to get information on your car's computer. Ever seen a service manual that would help you make a real mod there? It makes me sick.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  38. Why they don't want anyone to know the deal. by hackwrench · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because then they'd realize they could use it for things and in ways that don't make Microsoft money. As long as Microsoft maintains the illusion that the X-Box is only good for playing Microsoft approved games, it can make up the initial loss off the games, and the X-Box doesnt compete against regular computers, another Microsoft revenue stream.

  39. Copyleft T-Shirts by jeti · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Please note that Copyleft is currently sued over
    their t-shirts with DeCSS source code on them.

    I think the code in this case does not have that
    "functional aspect".

  40. Modding and banning by zwaffle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores." Pffff, car service manuals are necessary for maintenance in order to assure the safety of the passengers and fellow human beings. Car service manuals don't tell you how to turn your car into a dragster. In the same spirit of distorsion, what about the right of modding a semi-automatic gun into full automatic mode? But, ok let ppl mod their own XBox as much as they want, but I'm all for banning these from XBox Live!. Online playing needs rule just like any other "competition" (no doping at the Olympics, precise car specs in racing, ...).