UK High Court Rules Modchips Illegal

PhotoBoy writes "The Register has an article about the UK's High Court ruling PlayStation 2 modchips to be illegal. This means all homebrew and hobbyist coders in the UK can no longer modify their consoles to run games they have written. Gamers who like to mod their consoles to play games on import early are also out of luck. It's like saying you can't modify your car or your house or your clothes! Would Ford sue you for removing the rev limiter from your Focus?"

Comments

So many ways to get it

[stecoop]

Making it is illegal to bypass copy protection mechanisms

I have a sharpie that could be used to circumvent the copyright protection. My shift key also would be a violation. The courts won't go after Office Depot or Logitech because you want to go after big fish with money but not enough money to properly defend their selves.

Shouldn't the courts just go after the copyright violators rather than going after all mechanism that could be used to violate copyright? Of course not you know that judge doesn't want to youth playing those nasty region 3+ games; he is doing it for the good of public morals... right?

Re:So many ways to get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Having seen modchips in Asia over the past few years surrounded by thousands of illegal copies of copyighted materials makes me draw an association. Call me paranoid, but if you think people use modchips mostly for running custom games you also believe smoking doesn't cause cancer.

How about "anti-piracy" modchips?

[Samir Gupta]

It seems the UK court ruled on the basis that modchips can be used to circumvent copy protection by allowing the use of recordable media. However, the other use of modchips is to play purchased import games, and there exist so-called "anti-piracy" modchips that allow the latter, while disallowing the former.

Bypassing region codes (as opposed to copy protection) is certainly not illegal, at worst, ambiguous under UK law -- for example, the vast majority of DVD players sold in the UK are modded to be region free as well.

Don't Forget

[FractusMan]

While yes, there are people who use modchips to play their own, homebrew games, and play imported games, let's not overlook the obvious. People put modchips in their consoles so they can play stolen (ie, burned) games. If people did NOT use modchips for that purpose, this law wouldn't be necessary. But the fact is that the UK high court is not 'ruining your rights' - it's the people who copy and sell games illegally that ruin the fun for everyone. The UK is merely taking steps to stop that. Whether the steps are too far, I don't know and won't argue. But don't think that this is a cut and dried case of trampling of rights. Go bitch at your friends who have a bunch of "Backup copies" of games.

Re:Don't Forget

[Klar]

What about backing-up your own games. As long as games are recorded on cd's or dvd's, they will be very easy to be damaged. Shouldn't people have the right to back-up the software they buy?

Re:Don't Forget

[ViolentGreen]

I don't know for certain but I would assume the Plastation's terms of use would have something about only using their official games. If that is the case, I can understand the ruling.

Re:Don't Forget

[Erick the Red]

Cars are used in bank robberies, but they are still legal.

Knives are used in murders, but they are still legal.

Computers are used for vandalism and fraud, but they are still legal.

Almost anything has an illegitimate use, but we don't outlaw the thing, we outlaw the use.

Re:Don't Forget

[ortholattice]

In the entire history of game ownership, I've never managed to damage a single disc to the point where it is no longer playable.

Then you obviously don't have kids. If I had $49.95 for each disc my kid has managed to ruin, I'd be rich. Oh wait, that's why I'm not rich.

Re:Don't Forget

[KDR_11k]

Use the correct words. It's "pirated".

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't piracy involve ships and weapons?

OH NO! They like to make backups of stuff that costs $80! *AMAZING*!

You fully well realize that these "backups" are "backups" of games they DIDN'T pay money for, why are you pretending any different? He used the word sarcastically... Ah, yes, now I remember, on Slashdot sarcasm isn't, right?

Re:Don't Forget

[shawn(at)fsu]

This story has the typical /. slant. I wonder what the numbers are for people who use a mod chip to develop homebrew games vs. those who use it to pirate games. I'd be willing to bet that the percentage has to be very very small. I already see the replies about "just because it can be used to do something illegal doesn't mean that it should be illegal to own"

I think we need to face the facts many people use mod chips to pirate software, as the law stands right now pirating software is wrong and IMHO rightly so, many of the people who alter their direct TV box do it to obtain channels without paying for them which is also illegal. people who use fully automatic weapons don't use it to hunt wildlife, the list goes on. I think benefits need to outweigh the potential for abuse, sure you could use a mod chip to make your won games and sure you could use an ak47 to hunt deer but I think we need to face up to the facts that most people who use these items aren't using them for legal purpose and until we all mature to the point where we aren't using them for legal purposes they will and should remain illegal.

Re:Don't Forget

[minion]

let's not overlook the obvious. People put modchips in their consoles so they can play stolen (ie, burned) games.

People use cars to get away from cops.

People use fertilizer to blow up buildings.

People use gasoline for arsen.

People use (insert item here) for (insert action here).

By your reasoning, everything should be illegal, because you plainly state: If people did NOT use modchips for that purpose, this law wouldn't be necessary.

So, because everything can be used illegally, everything should be illegal, right?

I'm sick and tired of mankind's willingness to say, "This doesn't affect me, so I'm going to roll over and take it". Pretty soon, you roll over enough, there's no more room to roll over, because all of your rights are gone.

Re:Don't Forget

[wwahammy]

"Computers are used for vandalism and fraud, but they are still legal."

Orrin Hatch I'm SURE will fix that loophole in the law soon enough.

Re:Don't Forget

[Abcd1234]

Okay...

1) If I purchase a piece of equipment, it is my right as the owner of that equipment to do what I please with it. This includes bashing it with a baseball bat, ripping it apart for it's components, or chipping it.

2) The people who are distributing these games, and the people who are downloading them, are breaking the law. Your average homebrewer is not. Otherwise, why not outlaw the Internet for making distribution of these games possible? Or CD burners for making it possible to play these games? Hell, why not outlaw VCRs for making movie piracy possible?

3) Despite the use of baseball bats in crimes, they are not illegal. Why? Because, like the Internet, CD burners, and VCRs, they have substantial, non-infringing uses. Making "backup copies" of games is, in fact, an excellent example of non-infringing use. I can't tell you how often I've scratched a CD beyond playability. The ability to reburn that CD (whether it be a game, music, etc) is invaluable to many people. And that doesn't include all the other things a modchip can be used for.

Re:Don't Forget

[Reapy]

People may not be hunting deer with ak-47's, but they might be collecting them, or firing them at the range, or both. There are legitimate uses. There are illegal uses. I don't believe it is fair to ban the product because it may be used illegally.

It doesn't matter that the majority of people who purchase the chips are using them illegally. It is the people who make the decision to break the law, not the mod chip creators. Remember that t-shirt, "Guns don't kill people, I kill people?" Same thing, mod chips don't make me illegally copy games, I illegally copy games.

Anyway, when I eventually have children, I fully intend to back up all of my games and only keep the backups out for use. At 50 a pop, a 60 dollar mod chip and some hard drive space is well worth the investment.

Re:Don't Forget

[goldspider]

If cars were used 99% of the time to run over people, they probably would be illegal.

If knives were used 99% of the time to murder people, they probably would be illegal.

If computers were used 99% of the time for vandalism and fraud, they probably would be illegal.

Suggesting that these mod chips are used primarily by "hobbiests" is proof that Slashdotters cannot honestly look this problem in the eye.

Re:Don't Forget

[DrFrob]

Following that logic: only X% of Americans are black, so employment discrimination against them is insignificant and should not be an issue.

The needs of the many do not always outweigh the needs of the few. Likewise, the abuses of the many do not always outweigh the legitimate uses of the few.

Re:Don't Forget

[drwav]

So what you are saying is that it is OK to make law outlawing something as long as it only adversely affects a minority of people.

Let's say that 99% of people use mod chips to play copies of games that they didn't pay for (I just made that stat up to work with your argument), thus the 1% that use mod chips for legitimate uses must sacrifice their rights for the greater good.

Sure it sounds reasonable at first, because chances are very good that it won't affect you in the slightest. However, if you sit and think about it for a minute and wonder how those few people who are being punished for the actions of other people might feel, you might start to realize that maybe this law isn't reasonable at all.

If everyone practiced a little empathy before making broad judgements like this the world would be a much more pleasant place to live in.

Re:Don't Forget

[MachineShedFred]

While I fundamentally agree with what you are saying, here's the flaw:

99.999% of the people that use cars are not fleeing from prosecution

99.999% of the fertilizer that is produced is not used in the manufacture of explosives

99.999% of the gasoline that comes from the hydrocarbon cracker is not used to burn down buildings

99.999% of the modchips ARE used for playing illegal copies of games.

Not flaming here, just pointing out something that is somewhat obvious to me. I hate the erosion of rights as much as anyone else around here, but let's call a spade what it is, shall we?

* these statistics are for dramatic purposes, and I lay no claim to them being accurate.

Re:Don't Forget

[StillAnonymous]

Yes, because that works OH SO WELL for drugs and other things that have been made illegal and forced underground.

Take a look at the drug scene and the REAL crime that surrounds it thanks to the wonderous insight of the lawmakers.

This is just great! I can't wait for drive by shootings and 10 year olds being sent out with guns to sell people the latest in forbidden computer hardware.

Isn't it the case?

[Mikkeles]

'It's like saying you can't modify your car...'

I believe that there are jurisdictions in which car mods (or some kinds) are illegal. (California comes to mind).

Re:Isn't it the case?

[Martin Blank]

Most of the limits in California apply to things like lowering cars below a certain level, exceeding noise or pollution limits, or blatant safety violations. So far as I know, there are few, if any, that require any kind of review before they can be used on the road.

For example, they cannot be driven on public roads unless they have a certain amount of clearance from the road, meaning that air suspension units are allowed as long as they're not lowered completely while driving. But you have to be caught by law enforcement driving a vehicle set too low to be cited for it.

One friend has two cars that have been ongoing projects for ten and six years, respectively. Some of them are very minor -- like adding a multiple CD player to the center console -- and some of them have been more significant -- like rewiring the cruise control to control his radio (he hates cruise control, but it came with the options package). Other changes have included alterations to the exhaust system, new suspensions, new headers (I think), ceramic brakes, and additional changes to the electrical system. One day, he might even complete his projects.

The car analogy doesn't hold up!

[kingLatency]

"Would Ford sue you for removing the rev limiter from your Focus?"

No, Ford wouldn't, but this comparison doesn't work. We all know that one of the main uses (I couldn't say the main for sure) for mod chipping is piracy. Theft of intellectual property is rarely, if ever, part of modifying one's car, clothing or house.

car safety

[gears5665]

well, modifying a car involves the safety of the people around you and should be illegal if this is illegal. The problem always lies in enforcement. So many stupid laws aren't enforeced as it is. Why not just add another.

Wonder if this applies to DVD players

[afidel]

Since region free and Macrovision free players are so plentiful in Europe that they are sold in supermarkets I wonder what would happen if this logic were applied to DVD players?

fair and balanced?

[deft]

"This means all homebrew and hobbyist coders in the UK can no longer modify their consoles to run games they have written."

I think if you'd like the slashdot community to discuss this intelligently, the article needs to have both sides. It would have been just as easy to say "while this certainly is a big blow to piracy, the rights of other citizens, while a very small population, are being infringed upon.

All to often the submitters skewed view steers the conversation in only one way.

Re:fair and balanced?

[kfg]

Except your revision is incorrect. The rights of all citizens are being infringed upon.

Rights are innate even when they are not being acted upon. A monk who has taken a vow of silence still retains whatever rights to speak any citizen has and a law forbiding speech, even though he has already chosen not to, infringes his rights.

KFG

Re:fair and balanced?

[runderwo]

How is this a big blow to piracy? Piracy was _already_ illegal. What does making a potential piracy tool illegal accomplish? Is piracy somehow now "more" illegal now that the digital equivalent of a lockpick has been outlawed?

Re:fair and balanced?

[Anonymous Coward]

• Point #1 -- Just because Gary Jules credits p2p with the single's success doesn't necessarily mean that he is right.
• Point #2 -- Even if he is right, just because p2p had a positive effect on this single does not mean that it would necessarily have the same effect in other cases, let alone a majority of cases. It could also have a negative effect, or no effect, depending on the circumstances.
• Point #3 -- Even if p2p does have a positive effect all of the time, it is still in principle the copyright holder's prerogative to decide how, when, where, and even whether they wish to distribute what they own. No one else has the right to make that decision for them.

Re:fair and balanced?

[MacGod]

How is this a big blow to piracy? Piracy was _already_ illegal. What does making a potential piracy tool illegal accomplish? Is piracy somehow now "more" illegal now that the digital equivalent of a lockpick has been outlawed?

It doesn't make it "more" illegal, but I'll bet it makes the mod chips much harder to find, thus making the illegally-burned games that much more difficult to play.

It also means that careful pirates, who keep their bootlegs hidden, can still be busted just for owning a modchipped console. To use your analogy, if you're caught with a lockpick, you can still be arrested, even if you're not breaking into a house at the time.

And those who get caught with the games can have an additional charge added on (posession of the modchip). So while it isn't more illegal, it might mean stiffer fines for those caught.

Re:No.

[iamacat]

You mean they wouldn't sue you if you just killed their little girl with a regular, unmodded car?

More likely, government will have a beef with you for flunking smog test, noise standards or some safety parameter. Bill Gates had to go through a lot of trouble to import his dream car once.

Different analogy

[nulltransfer]

Would Ford sue you for removing the rev limiter from your Focus?

Not that I agree with this law, but lawmakers probably see mod chips as analogous to mounting guns on your car. There are many legitimate uses for mod chips, but since they don't want to deal with the exceptions, they probably want to completely illegalize the usage.

Earlier this year, the Italian court ruled that mod chips are legal on the basis that it's up to the user, not Sony, how they use their PS2. It even went so far as to name mod chips as crucial tools to "avoid monopolistic positions".

Thumbs up to the Italians, though :)

Commercial ModChips Only

[MooseByte]

From TFA: "The UK High Court has judged that the sale, advertisement, possession for commercial purposes and use of PlayStation 2 modification chips is illegal in this country."

An important distinction. It still sucks and I think it's a boneheaded decision, but the true hobbyist remains safe.

For the moment....

Re:Commercial ModChips Only

[ChrisMaple]

The sentence is ambiguous. Does it mean "commercial use" is illegal, or does it mean "use" is illegal?

Re:Commercial ModChips Only

[Hatta]

So where are you going to get your modchips from, except from someone selling them? Unless someone starts a modchip charity, you'll have to get your modchips from overseas.

Attack of the Weak Analogies

[mblase]

It's like saying you can't modify your car or your house or your clothes!

Modchips serve one purpose: to circumvent technology designed to keep your box from playing pirated or otherwise illegal software. So it's really more like saying you can't modify your car to violate local pollution laws, or that you can't modify your house to violate zoning regulations.

Re:Attack of the Weak Analogies

[Maul]

My memory may be a bit fuzzy, but I distinctly remember paying quite a bit of money for legit import games. A modchip is the only reasonably way for me to play these games that I legally purchased.

I guess finding a way to play game software I purchased makes me a criminal! (Well, it would if I were in the UK.)

Re:Attack of the Weak Analogies

[eV_x]

This is the same uninformed response the courts must have had. Obviously, you are not well versed in modern day game systems and mod-chips.

I'm not sure about the PS2, as I haven't modded mine, but at least on the xbox, I rarely even run games anymore. Linux and a variety of other software are available as homebrew (some legally compiled and some not), so I fail to see your logic as valid.

Why should I and the authors of those software packages not be able to use the xbox for that reason? This isn't stretching the truth - I do this every day as many other people do.

I own the box - NOT Sony or Microsoft. I shoudl be able to do any damned thing I wish to it, including smashing it with a sledgehammer (hardware mod), adding another hard drive to it, replacing the DVD, or running my own software. You cannot convince me that I do not have that right since I own the box, no matter what can be done legally or illegally with it after the fact.

Modifying your clothes?

[burgburgburg]

It's like saying you can't modify your car or your house or your clothes!

You modify your clothes?!? You kids today. In my day, that was a hanging offense. Why the whole Vietnam conflict can be traced to it's root clothing modification basis, essentially.

And as for this house modification notion, I understand that you kids hang out at that "Home Depot" head shop. There are still some people who respect the original conception of the builders and wouldn't think of altering it. I'm proud to be one of them.

Modifying a car? How would one even do that, what with the hood welded shut at the factory, like it is? That's just nonsense.

So what?

[www.sorehands.com]

Does that mean that you outlaw knifes because they not only cut meat, but they can kill?

Just because you use mod chips to make illegal copies do not mean that everyone does.

Re:So what?

[tsm_sf]

Yes, I made up all of my numbers, but the proportions are generally right.

Thanks for contributing in your own small way to the death of Science. Keep it up, and remember to vote Republican this fall.

Re:So what?

[fiftyvolts]

It was Ben Franklin and the direct quote is the following:

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Re:So what?

[N3koFever]

Ditto. I work in a UK game store and we mod PS2s (and will continue to do so - it's always been an under-the-counter thing because Sony reps don't like sending you more stuff when they see you offering mods), but 90% of people who get it done so that they can buy imports which we also sell. We'll stop doing it when Sony give us a fair deal - release more RPGs than just Final Fantasy, give 60Hz options to all games, and don't make us wait a year for a game that's available across the Atlantic now. When they do that people won't have a legitimate reason for modchips and we'll stop doing it.

Re:So what?

[commodoresloat]

WTF does how you vote have to do with the "Death of Science"?

Everything.

Re:So what?

[cc_pirate]

You are either an absolute idiot or someone who doesn't have a clue about history, even incredibly RECENT history.

Some objective facts that are PROVABLE:

All governments lie to their subjects.

All governments become bad/corrupt over time, requiring their removal if citizens want to keep their rights.

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (Jefferson Papers, p. 334, C.J. Boyd, 1950)
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government." (Thomas Jefferson Papers p. 334, 1950)
"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms...The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Letter to William S. Smith 13 Nov 1787 (Jefferson, On Democracy p. 20, 1939; Padover, editor)

" Defenseless people around the world killed in the 20th Century in part because they had no means of self defense (gun control) - 56 million. This total does not even take into consideration the recent genocides occurring in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia." - Unknown

"Number of physicians in the US = 700,000
Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year = 120,000
Accidental deaths per physician = 0.171 (U.S. Dept. of Health & Human
Services)

Number of gun owners in the US = 80,000,000
Number of accidental gun deaths per year = 1,500 (all age groups)
Accidental deaths per gun owner = 0.0000188 (U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
& Firearms)
Therefore, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun
owners." -Taken from the Benton County News Tribune of November 17, 1999.

Re:So what?

[Xrikcus]

I don't believe I suggested that, no. You have little fear of the mugger killing you if they become frightened, there is a big difference.

An unarmed mugger will pick a target he can easily overpower. Give the target a gun and the mugger feels he has to carry a gun also. Give the mugger a gun and put any fear into the mugger and you're at risk of a shooting.

The other issue is that most muggings don't involve obvious approach at distance, this is the only situation under which you're likely to be able to draw a gun to defend yourself, so what good does it do?

With US laws, I would certainly want to own a gun, it doesn't pose any particular moral problems for me to do so. However, I prefer the situation here were gun ownership is low enough that I don't feel that need, and don't feel that carrying one would make me any safer

European harmonisation

[flossie]

Given that the judge ruled that mod chips are illegal due to the European Union Copyright Directive (EUCD) and that other EU nations (Italy, Spain) have already ruled the chips to be legal, is there any scope for this ruling to be challenged in a higher court because of misinterpretation of the directive?

Re:European harmonisation

[Jadrano]

Given that the judge ruled that mod chips are illegal due to the European Union Copyright Directive (EUCD) and that other EU nations (Italy, Spain) have already ruled the chips to be legal, is there any scope for this ruling to be challenged in a higher court because of misinterpretation of the directive?

While an appeal might be possible, the fact that mod chips are legal in other countries doesn't tell much about the chances. The EU directives aren't directly applicable, and it is common that laws in different countries of the EU that implement the same directive differ substantially. So, it may well be that mod chips are legal in Spain and Italy, but not in Britain.

Is that PS2 only?

[KDR_11k]

I wonder if this ruling also affects Gamecube modchips? After all, the GC copy protection hasn't been cracked by modchips and the only thing the chips do is circumvent the region lockout (can be done with a certain disk too). I wonder if region lockout is also considered a "copy protection" under the EUCD.

Huh?

[cK-Gunslinger]

It's like saying you can't modify your car or your house or your clothes!

No it's not! You can still paint your car, add a garage to your house, and rip holes your clothes. But you can't put missle launchers on your car, coat your house with crack cocaine, or staple dead babies to your shirt.

Similarly, you can paint your PS2, add NO2 stickers, and attach a bobble-head doll on it. But you can't purchase MOD chips. See? =P

Anyway, I was just pointing out that the submitter got a little carried away with his/her outrage and over-generalization...

Hey, wait....

[cheeseSource]

I have a Focus. How do I get rid of the rev limiter?

Swap Disks..?

[maskedbishounen]

I have a flip-top case on my PS2, so I can pop it open, drop in a swap disc, and play my imported games. It can also be used for "back-ups", though (never tried it, personally). Would such a system also be ruled illegal? I'd assume so, but there's no physical "modification" except for replacing the case.

There's also another little swap disk solution which involves removing the CD cover and using a little plastik hook to force the drive open. No "modification" there, just a bit of removal. Still illegal?

I'd be quite interesting to know the court's thoughts on these.

Sony has their reasons for not liking mod chips..

[slungsolow]

They take away the licensing fees that they negotiated for that particular region, they also fuck with distribution rights for some games, and they also allow for pirated (and completely unpaid for) games to be played.

Would ford sue you for fucking with your focus? No.. but they would sue the pants off of you if you took a truck load 20 year old Yugos and put focus badges on them just to sell them to the masses. Essentially thats what this judgement defends against. Selling a product that cheats a license holder (or in my focus example a trademark holder) out of making a buck.

Did anyone catch this in TFA?

[thewldisntenuff]

The Messiah chips were offered as a way to allow UK PS2s not only to play legitimate US and Japanese games, but pirated titles and back-up copies made by users, which Sony forbids in the UK.

What the hell? Does Sony allow this kind of crap anywhere else? I suppose they don't forbid this kind of use in Japan, eh? Don't want to piss off the local markets.....

Rant aside, I don't see the problem with modchips. People still buy the games, and no one really loses out at all. If you like screwing over your customers, I guess this is a surefire way to go....

bah

[maxpublic]

Once I buy something, it's mine. Oh wait! So not true anymore; now I don't buy, I *lease* under whatever terms my corporate and government masters deign to grant me. God forbid that I should actually *own* something to be used in whatever fashion I see fit. Oh no, I'm just a consumer peon, I can't possibly be allowed such a right!

Max

Re:bah

[maximilln]

Once I buy something, it's mine

I didn't want to get into the argument about what mod chips are used for, or the argument about rights of companies vs. rights of consumers, or the argument about whose best interest copyright laws are really in. It all really boils down to this point.

Is it really ethical for Company A to lobby for legislation which prevents any anonymous consumer from purchasing Product B? Is it really ethical for Company A to lobby for legislation to prevent any anonymous consumer from physically connecting Product A with Product B?

This isn't about houses (building safety codes), or cars (transportation safety). There is nothing physically harmful about a silicon chip and there's no significant threat in a soldering iron for most people. Regardless of the usage of these mod chips why is it a crime to be in possession of case of 5000 of them? This is not about guns which are easily used as weapons.

This is clearly political graft by a corporation to cement in its ability to continue to ride inflated prices. These are taxpayer dollars being allocated to the benefit of a corporation where any profit will be unscrupulously raided by the CEO, executive board, VPs and major shareholders before the janitor ever sees a $0.10 raise.

If Sony is worried about piracy why not do what the rest of the industry does: DRM the software.

Re:bah

[thpdg]

Do you hate highways, traffic signals, and schools, as well? How about emergency services, snow plows and possibly (depending on your area) garbage service?
Do you hate parks and sidewalks and libraries?
Sure, it's all underfunded. But look at countries with no funding for those things. They all seem a bit, well, third world.

Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[Nakito]

The Slashdot blurb for this article is wrong and makes an incorrect analogy. The blurb says, "It's like saying you can't modify your car or your house or your clothes!"

But if you read the article, the description of the decision is substantially different: "The UK High Court has judged that the sale, advertisement, possession for commercial purposes and use of PlayStation 2 modification chips is illegal in this country."

The distinction is huge. It means that you are allowed to "modify your car" (to use the proposed analogy). You just aren't allowed to commercialize your modifications. You can tinker all you want, but you can't sell the results of your tinkering.

It's still a significant limitation, but we should at least be arguing about the actual limitation, not the incorrect one.

Re:Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[gfxguy]

There are four violations in the statement:

1. Sale,
2. Adverstisement,
3. Possession for commercial purposes, AND
4. Use.

Number 4 is what you are doing if you possess one and use it. So it looks like you are allowed to have one, you just can't legally use it. "Legally" being the operative word.

Re:Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[CrowScape]

But that's an "and", not an "or." Come on, the judge knows he's dealing with computer savy people here so he must know the function of that logical operator, right? Right? Damn...

Re:Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[Kaa]

The distinction is huge. It means that you are allowed to "modify your car" (to use the proposed analogy). You just aren't allowed to commercialize your modifications. You can tinker all you want, but you can't sell the results of your tinkering.

You missed the word "use". It is now illegal to USE modchips in Great Britain.

To continue your analogy, you can tinker with your car all you want, but once you've done it, you can't drive it any more.

Re:Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[Spolster]

There are four violations in the statement:

1. Sale,
2. Adverstisement,
3. Possession for commercial purposes, AND
4. Use.

The whole statement is only true if each and every of the sub-statements are also true. I.e use alone is not enough, you must commercialise it for the law to be broken. On the otherhand, if it said

1. Sale,
2. Adverstisement,
3. Possession for commercial purposes, OR
4. Use.

Then use alone would be sufficient.

Re:Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[YoJ]

There is actually ambiguity in the English language on this issue (natural languages are ambiguous? Who would have guessed?) For an even simpler example, consider the following signs: (1) No eating and drinking in the library. (2) No eating or drinking in the library. (3) Return your overdue books or you will get fined. In the first case, "and" really means "nor". In the second case, "or" really means "nor". In the third case, "or" really means "xor".

Re:Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[Oligonicella]

Ummm, no.

You might pay attention to the commas: "...the sale, advertisement, possession for commercial purposes and use of..."

Commercial purposes and use of. Meaning possession for commercial purposes and use in commercial purposes are illegal.

Elsewise the language would have simply stopped at "possession".

Re:Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[tekunokurato]

Interesting note: the bone to pick is actually with the "is" as opposed to a more correct "are." The way it's written, the only correct meaning is that the sale/advertisement/commercial/use IS illegal--that is, the singular "is" defines the set as one action, and so doing them together is illegal, but individually doesn't meet the judgement's criteria for illegality. If the judge had written "are," then it would be clear that the sale and adv. (et al) are illegal, whether done together or not. This is all regardless of whether there is an "or" or an "and."

Just thought you looked like a guy that cared about his grammar :)

Re:Wait, the description of the decision is wrong

[shades6666]

I believe the ruling can be found here

not surprising

[EZmagz]

Granted I didn't RTFA, but just reading the headline I'm not surprised. The funny thing (to me, at least) is that YES, a mod chip will allow you to technically play copied games, who really cares? What percentage of the general population has a modded PS2 or XBox? Definitely a small, small minority. Of all people I know who have consoles (from little kids to grandparents), I can only think of one or two people who have modded thier equipment.

If so few people do it, why does the government care? Because big companies put big pressure on the gov't to make sure nothing inteferes with their buisness model. And if that means squashing a 1% minority group who decided to make changes to their PS2 or XBox THAT THEY'RE LEGALLY ENTITLED TO DO UNDER FAIR USE, then so be it. "Fuck 'em", the company says. It's their way or the highway.

Welcome to Home2.0

[l0ungeb0y]

Realtor: "This is a modern luxory home built by Home2.0. Pricing for Family Unit Licenses vary based upon geographic location, Regional Demographics, size of Family Unit and estiamted annual income for the course of your License. Base Per Family Unit Licenses start at $750,000.00 in the California Bay Area."

Home Buyer: "Base Per Family Unit License????"

Realtor: "Yes, your mortgage provides you a Family Unit License authorizing you use of the Home2.0 product for 1 Family Unit until transferance of that license to another Family Unit."

Home Buyer: "Use? But I'm here to buy, not rent."

Realtor: "But, you do buy! You buy the Family Unit License to use the Home2.0 product for your Family Unit."

Home Buyer: "So if I'm buying only a license, who owns the home?"

Realtor: "Home2.0 of course. They retain the exclusive right to monitor your home usage and make regular maintenance inspections and install upgrades as needed to insure standards of living compliance."

Home Buyer: "And I always modded those "1984" Posts on /. down as trolls." *sigh*

Legitimate uses

[Xian97]

As the father of two young children, I took what I thought was adequate precautions to protect my game collection. I placed the PS2 games up on a shelf out of their reach and changed the disk for them when they wanted to play. One day a friend was over and while I was out of the room he gets a game down off the shelf to look at the cover art or manual and places it on the coffee table. In a matter of minutes the toddler is attracted to the bright, shiny packaging and the even brighter, shinier game DVD inside. Almost instantly a $50 disk is scratched and unplayable in spite of all the precautions I had taken. I contacted the company to see if I could get a replacment disk for a discounted price and was told that I would have to buy the whole package again for full price. After that I made DVDR backups of the games I had bought and modified the PS2 to play the backups. While I am sure many use modchips to copy games they do not own, don't condemn the technology when it has legitimate uses as well.

US Robotics and Mechanical Men Coorporation.

[Lewis Daggart]

In Asmovs robot stories, it was illegal to perform maintenence/certain modifications a robot because US Robotics never sold their robots, they leased them and retained the rights to those actions themselves.

Microsoft and other software companies retain the rights for copying and modifying their code for the similar reasons. They don't sell you the product, they give you a license to use their product.

This is worse than either of those instances because in those cases, a contract/license agreement is icluded and uderstood at the time of the purchase.

Have we already entered the age when posession of property is no longer assumed by law to belong to the purchaser?

Or, to put it differently, are we seeing the end of our right to own property?

Missing from the Article Write-Up

[goldspider]

Emphasis mine...

"This means all homebrew and hobbyist coders in the UK can no longer modify their consoles to run games they have written, and criminals who violate copywrite laws can no longer play the games they illegally downloaded and burned ."

We all know that these mod chips have limited legitimate uses, but it is intellectually dishonest of the Slashdot crowd to intentionally ignore the primary purpose of these chips.

Re:Missing from the Article Write-Up

[Kirth]

You'll be crying when they outlaw the mod-chips for your PC that enables you to run non-TCPA-compliant operating systems like Linux or *BSD.

Obviously, they're taking away your right to do whatever you see fit with your rightfully bought equipment (playstation) just because some company thinks its a solution for some problem that company has. Do you really think Sony (or insert your favourite other company or association, like Microsoft or the RIAA or the MPAA) should write your law?
--

Re:Missing from the Article Write-Up

[Ogerman]

We all know that these mod chips have limited legitimate uses, but it is intellectually dishonest of the Slashdot crowd to intentionally ignore the primary purpose of these chips.

It is intellectually dishonest of you to make claims that you cannot back up -- such as that most modchips are used primarily for warez and not imports, backup copies, and 'homebrews.' Realistically it's probably about 70/30 or so. And neither is very significant in any regard.

No need to worry, the sky is not falling...

[DroopyStonx]

"This means all homebrew and hobbyist coders in the UK can no longer modify their consoles to run games they have written."

Eh? You do realize that those people represent a very MINUTE portion of modchip users. Let's be blunt and to the point: modchips exist so one can copy and own PS2 games without paying for them. Flat out, that's what they're made for. That's what I use it for as well as almost every other modchip owner.

In any case, this law doesn't matter much. This is just another one of those laws that people make a big stink about that turn out to be nothing to worry about, and rightfully so because if it affects you, just order a pre-modded PS2 from a shop overseas. Problem solved. It's not like they're gonna scan mail and see a PS2 and decide to open it up.

To all the morons...

[Anita Coney]

It does not matter if every single mod chip was used to play ripped games. The issue is whether we own what we buy. It appears that consumers in the UK do not.

Don't give them any ideas

[kaybee]

Would Ford sue you for removing the rev limiter from your Focus?

I wouldn't give them any ideas -- I'm sure they would like to... and I wouldn't be surprised if it became illegal to do so one day...

Re:as my dad always says

[Cymsdale]

"the abuse of something is never a good argument against the use of something"

RFID *snicker*

Sony PS2's now must be taxed as import consoles...

[rapiddescent]

Well this is very interesting because Sony got away with a punitive tax levy on the PS2 being imported to the UK because Sony proved that the PS2 was a customisable computer that could run user programs (not limited to Sony approved games). Thats why the UK versions came with PS2 Basic - to essentially make the console a home computer rather than a games console.

One of the main differentiations between a game console and a home computer is that a game console has a restriction on the software installed on it.

Games consoles imported into the UK from outside the euro zone attract a large import duty. I hope that Customs and Excise will now be retrospectively collecting import duty for every PS2 sold in the UK and interest on the late payment of that duty going back over time.

rd

DMCA came 10 years earlier... In Britain.

[tepples]

In the United States: 17 USC 1201, the DMCA that we know and hate. The United Kingdom was ahead of the curve in some ways; check out section 296 of its copyright act from 1988, ten years before the United States got a DMCA.

Hobbiests no, backup yes

[phorm]

While I don't know a lot of people using modchips in order to play customized or homebrew games, there are quite a few that use them for copied games of owned originals.

I myself just finished dumping a bunch of my old PS1 games to ISO images. The images will go on a single DVD, and I can use them on my emulators etc without the original. I still own the original so I haven't deprived anyone of a sale (and no bitching about legality of emulators, I have a PS2 it's just not as portable as a laptop).

Unfortunately, I'm too late for two of the disks as a few bad sectors bork the extraction on them - however I'm getting a copy of those off emule.

Gee, look at that. I'm downloading copyrighted material, ripping copyrighted material, using an emulator... I could even use a modchip for that - and ya know what NO "PIRACY" HAS OCCURED because I bought and paid for the original media.

If half the people with modchips do any of the above, I'd say there are a lot of legitimate cases of use. So unless you've got proof that everyone using these is definately pirating, I'd suggest that your eyes might be clearer if your head wasn't up your rear end.

*ring* *ring*

[Fortyseven]

While you were out, Jack Valenti called from 1982. He said he wants his argument back.

He's also wants to hire you as his star witness against the VCR.

Go get 'em, Tiger!

I am neutral in this

[zogger]

I really am, just was commenting on the obvious legal hypocrisy with automobiles. I will also ramble here and there some, as I have a brain that apparently works that way....

I wasn't commenting on the modchips per se, I was commenting on the fact that cars are *definelty* sold with the expectations that at least some times the laws will be broken with them. It is 100% undeniable true stuff facts data. and I will repeat, they COULD sell cars that absolutely could not exceed the speed limit, yet they don't, that is pure evidence to show they know that cars WILL be used illegally, at least some of the time. they could mandate a totally legal car, they could make a mandated legal car, yet they do not. there is a reason for it, and that reason is the expectation and casual acception of illegal use of the car, along with legal use.

And it's similar to the modchips if you really want to ask me directly on the subject, not all games played on modded consoles are illegal, just some of them some of the time. Just like some times people drive cars legally, and sometimes they don't. It's one of those deals where the laws are so lame that almost everyone ignores them. I see it similar to these games. I can see wrongness and rightness to it, from both points of view, so that pushes me into a neutrality stance.

And BTW, I don't game, own a console, download MP3s or movies,etc, never have. I'm not a hypocrite about it. I have paid for shareware in the past and actually deleted it if it had a time out period and I really didn'twant it. I'm just a freeking square boy sprout when it comes to such matters, but I also can see when a law is so stupid it will get broken because of it's stupid-ness. I just call em like I see 'em. Similar to what I see happened to the music and movie guys, I have watched them over the years cry crocodile tears over their hundreds of zillions in profits, and every generation of technology is going to "destroy" them they declare, and periodically they get busted for industry collusion and price fixing, but that's about it, so I don't mind seeing them boys get borrowed from with cheap-to-make-copies. They coulda long ago come out with the one or two collar cd and made more money then they make now, but they are so greedy they don't understand this. They don't understand people didn't want to buy an unlistened to pig in a poke, or just this weeks top 40 that they create and push. they don't get it, never got it, and won't ever get it, too greedy, greed lead to insanity, they are stuck rthere. No law says a rich person can't be insane, is there? that's what happens to people who get greedy, they have gone *insane* and they then go on to make other stupid decisions based around their insanity, Political leaders get afflicted with advanced megalomania. Industries get it when it comes to dominance and "making money".

So..when it became easy to do, either modding or copying or whatever, people just did it themselves. I think they broke their trust and ethical and moral high ground a LONG time ago. I don't take their stuff,or buy their stuff, but I feel the same way about them if the hells angels stole something from the devils disciples-ehh, so what, who cares?

I don't believe in IP patents, none whatsoever. If it isn't a tangible,and built,at least a good to scale working model, no patent. That's my idea of a real product worth patenting. One of the dumbest things ever foisted on the US consumer and business world, and ESPECIALLY allowing a so called "product" to be sold with no warranty, excuse me, "licensed to use" with no warranty, is the patenting of intangibles. Hideously lame. Wicked stupid. harmful in the short, medium and long terms for advancing the useful arts and sciences. It's a congame and a scam, and as such, I think it's a fair play to scam them back if they insist on it..but not for me. I just ignore them, boycott, same as I do with overpriced hollywood tripe, "games", and whatever they claim is music. I got better things to do.

Most of you are unqualified

[aussie_a]

Most of the people posting here are unqualified simply because their American. Americans aren't adversely affected by these types of laws as THEIR playstation can play any game they want (most games are in NTSC format).

The people who this law does affect are adversely affected* are having our fair use rights infringed upon. I don't care that the majority of people use it for illegal purposes. Make the selling of copied games illegal, not the tool to use it. It's like banning blank videos. A lot of the use for them is to illegally copy videos.

A lot of people DO import copied games. We might be a minority, but I don't see why we should have our fair use trampled on when we have done nothing wrong. Punish those who commit the crimes.

* Fortunately I'm not a UKian, but if a similar law was brought out in Australia I would be as we use PAL.