Slashdot Mirror
Tecmo Sues Game Hackers Under DMCA
blueZhift writes "This Reuters report on CNet states that Tecmo has filed a federal lawsuit in Chicago under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act accusing the site owners and perhaps some users of game hacking site www.ninjahacker.net (now offline) of knowingly infringing on their game software. This should be another interesting test of the DMCA and just how far it can be pushed to restrict what end users can do with/to their software purchases. This might ultimately affect the legality of cheat devices like the Game Shark and even the mere sharing of cheats or exploits."
Considering how most American slashdotters (myself included) consider the DMCA to be a violation of our rights, I hope everyone will understand the urgency of my plight...I need somewhere to post this cheat code...
;-)
left-right-left-left-B-A-left-down-trigger-left-B
I can only hope Slashdot has the resources to protect my free speech.
Really, though...the DMCA sucks, but I can't see cheat codes being a violation while game makers keep putting them in on purpose. Aren't they the ones writing code to do different things when we enter the codes in? What next, prison time for opening an easter egg in Word?
Here's a link to the archived site, before it was taken down.
IDDQD
Now sue me.
I hope at this point, some enterprising and idealistic lawyer will finally take a stand for the right of the individual to use and modify his property as he sees fit.
MacroHard - Boning you in a big way! (TM)
Hooray for google. Click on the caches.
Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
Nowhere in TFA or the ninjahacker page (Even though I only skimmed it) are cheat codes mentioned. The article says "hacking into popular games... to change their codes" which doesn't have ANYTHING to do with cheating, sounds more like cracking/reverse engineering. You guys are exactly right in saying using the DMCA against cheat codes is ridiculous - hence why this has nothing to do with it.
to stop using proprietary software. There are a lot of amazing free software game projects that need our support (like e.g. WorldForge) that not only allow but in fact encourage hacking. Proprietary crap is good for uneducated people who want to have a one-size-fits-all black box. For thinking people who want to learn by tinkering, free software is the way to go.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
If you look at those caches, the greatest number of people on the site was 88 in mid-2003. The lawsuit is almost certainly designed to test the boundaries of the DMCA in courts, rather than to stop 20-odd people from fucking around with their DOA costumes.
a couple of hundred people sharing nudey skins for Xtreme Volleyball now becomes the WHOLE INTERNET!
way to protect your IP there Tecmo...
Clearly, this is a pathetic attempt to stir up a bit of froth for what is essentially a dog-shit game.
no-one will get sued, 14yr olds will break their xboxes trying to make the naked women do handstands.
I.e. you can't drive your car at 200MPh - that is to say, you can. But it's against the law.
You can't mod your car with a spoiler that's twice the width of your car - that is to say, you can. But it's against the law. At least driving on public roads with one is.
What's being argued here, now, is that you can't hack the game and distribute the hack. That is to say, you can. But it may be against the law (the DMCA one).
Btw.. the article referred to is rather short, and people seem to think this is about sharing cheat codes. Not quite.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/02/09/news_6118
Is something similar happening with America's Army?
Someone enlighten me as I don't choke under pressure.
I haven't been able to access the site, and the article doesn't say much, but how is hacking games to have new graphics breaking copy protection? Or is there another part of the DMCA they're using? Unless they were distributing hacks to disable CD checking, then maybe, but if they're just altering gameplay, how is that breaking copy protection? Heck, if the patches are done normally, they wouldn't even need to contain any copyrighted material.
Digital Franklin says: He who would give away essential software liberty for a temporary safety from l33t h4x0rz deserves neither.
If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack
The DMCA notice was due to cd check removers or some other thing to allow the games to be pirated.
That these people also have cheat codes is irrelevant.
Aren't you contradicting yourself ?
You just said you can do whatever the etc. you want with your car. Next you say that you can't endanger other people with it.
What if I -want- to endanger other people with it ?
Oh shit. I can't. Rather, it's against the law.
That's the whole point - you CAN'T do whatever you want with your car, as there are set limits within the law within which you have to operate - or risk the consequences.
And no - naked skins on your own x-box won't endanger anyone*. That's why the DMCA is being invoked here, and not e.g. reckless driving. Any more than that state troopers would call upon the DMCA when you're speeding.
* Tecmo obviously argues that it hurts their public image, for one, so that's open to intepretation.
They aren't being sued for the cheats, they are being sued for making skins (including a bunch of nude ones that TECMO doesn't seem to like) for these games.
Apparantly they had to reverse engineer the games to make these skins and therefore they are being sued under the cover of the DMCA (natch).
Personally I think it's a bitch that modifying something that you've paid for, to add value to it so that others are more likely to want to pay for it in the future is seen as a suable offence by TECMO. Bioware, Id, Valve and others make it as easy as possible to make mods since the community efforts can add considerable value to the product at zero cost to the developers.
Counterstrike anyone?
The Ataris named a song after that cheat code. Are Konami going to sue The Ataris? Will the RIAA step in to protect their artists rights? What about Atari? Who are they going to sue?
Oh God, I'm being sucked into a whirlpool of recursivity!
No one should be made a criminal in this case. No one is getting hurt. The game makers aren't losing any money. The gamers aren't doing any harm as I can see.
Does anyone know exactly which hacks Temco is suing over? Hacks that only affect how you experience the game is one thing, hell, I own a Gameshark myself simply because I hate the 20 hours of leveling you have to do in RPGs. Hacks that affect online play are a completely different ball game. Online gaming can be ruined when codes hit the wild. I'm sure a lot of people remember when the SOCOM gameshark codes were released and suddenly there were thousands of invulnerable players running around firing automatic sniper rifles.
Yes, developers can implement systems to combat online game cheating but to be honest, they shouldn't have to. Unfortunatly we live in a world where a good percentage of parents never successfully taught their children to grow up and stop acting like idiots. It's a shame that going after individual cheaters isn't viable and cost effective, like gun manufacturers, the people who release these codes shouldn't be held accountable for what people do with them.
This is one of the reasons I will never buy a console. Console games are geared to be throw-away games. i.e. You spend $50 on a FPS, and you are stuck with whatever maps the publisher sees fit to let you have. Even those games on the Xbox that have downloadable mods. Mods on Xbox live see: here are limited to publisher produced material. This means that you will never see a candyland map for Uneal Championship, or the gigantic burger joint map for that matter.
I have a few hundred megs of Maps for games like Unreal Tournament, Doom 3, Red Faction, Starcraft, etc, etc, etc. that were created by fans. I have a friend who is really into Morrowind, which is over 3 years old, and mods that offer nudity, god mode, extra locations, extra equipment, skins, and anything else some fan has the imagination and inclination to produce. He has been playing this game off and on for 3 years... I'm still playing Neverwinter Nights.
And for the game companies: attack your customers at your peril... We don't care about IP, we don't care whether you are too puritanical for nude skins, or whatever. A new game is a toy to us that will be used as we see fit. If you want to clamp down, many people simply won't buy from you. I sure as hell won't. And furthermore this makes me feel like I have made the right decision in avoiding the console market altogether.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Be careful or you'll have an IDKFA suit launched against ya!
Have you metaroderated recently?
Surely you mean Up, Down, Left Right, A, B, C, Start and listen for the "ring" sound?
We are the target market for these companies and you should take your outrage to them. Here is some contact info. Remember to be polite but firm :)
Public Relations
PublicRelations@tecmoinc.com
Customer Service
CustomerService@tecmoinc.com
Game Counselor
GameCounselor@tecmoinc.com
Business Accounts
BusinessAccounts@tecmoinc.com
Public Relations
PublicRelations@tecmoinc.com
Corporate Opertunities
Jobs@tecmoinc.com
Webmaster
Webmaster@tecmoinc.com
Contact Us Via Snail Mail:
Tecmo Inc.
PO Box 5553
21213-B Hawthorne Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90503
Contact Us Via Fax or Phone:
Phone: 310.944.5005
Fax: 310.944.3344
Contact Us Via Email:
Contact@tecmoinc.com
Source: http://forums.xbox-scene.com/index.php?showtopic=
The Faceless Master
I figure its worth pointing out that the statement that this will be a test of how far the DMCA can be applied to software people purchase is inaccurate. Its a test of how far the DMCA can be applied to enforce the fact that people have purchased media and an associated license for the software, and as such have no rights beyond what are granted by the software owner. I'd doubt very many people on /. have ever really bought software.
The publisher can't tell you that you can't use their CD as a coaster, or pop it in a microwave because you bought the CD. They can restrict in any way they want what you can do with the software, however, because you do not own that.
There are bad aspects of the DMCA, but people need to keep in mind that the means of protecting intellectual property and enforcing licenses may be wrong, but the concept is quite valid.
TECMO seems to think that their characters wholesome image are being corrupted. The Ninjahacker site hosted files that allowed for the modification of "packages" that contained graphic files, and some teen pervs made some nude skins with it. The majority of the skins were tastefull and some even surpassed the quality of the ones created by TECMO, only a small amount were nudes but those always seem to get the most attention. They claim that the package files that were used to package said graphic files were protected and considered "source code" thereby the protection had to be circumvented in order to be modified. I thought a copyright didn't give you a right to keep that IP from being used by fair use? Which obviously said protection is doing?
Mattel has been suing people for doing this for a long time now. They often lose but they don't care; they keep doing it.
Perhaps you want to get your eyes tested then?
Noticed that thay have a petition up at that site as well at http://www.petitiononline.com/tecmomod/petition.ht ml
I find it hard to believe that a program for modifying savegames can be viewed as copyright infringement. Fine, the savegames were created by the program in question, but this is made possible through the skill and dedication of the player in question. And if I've understood correctly, the Gameshark is nothing but a savegame editor for various console games.
On the matter of hacks/mods to games, I find it rather rude of the creators of said games to deny players this possibility, whether or not this is actual copyright infringement.
If I hadn't been modded down, you'd be reading this right now.
Nice of Temco to put up the cash, time, and potentially negitive publicity to test out a US law. Another case of the world just trying to make us look dumb?
The law restricts the use of your property on public roads in those cases, it does not restrict your use of your property on private land.
But most important to this conversaion, you have every right to do whatever you want with the physical goods you purchased. Burn the box, microwave the CD, use it as a coaster. The CD is yours.
The contents, however, are not yours. Software is licensed, not sold, and you do not own it. You do not have the rights you seem to think you have around it becuase of your mistaken assumption that you own the software. (Although in most cases I think its a deliberate side-stepping of that fact, not a mistaken assumption... 90% of the posts on here so far are from people who know perfectly well they do not own that software).
I think the idea is wrong. People should be able to do whatever they want to the software on their systems. Although, this becomes an issue if modifications to software interferes with the experience in, lets say, a not-so-perfectly-designed online game. That's the only reason I would like to see things like the GameShark disappear; aside from the fact that I view "lets plug in the codes and never die in game x" as totally stupid, which I do understand is different from what these guys were probably doing.
How much bandwidth do you have available to you in Scotland? If thats the law there, that means you could rip every CD and DVD you get your hands on, and put them online for the rest of us.
Got the rest of the season one episodes of Battlestar Galactica taped? I assume you weren't forced to sign anything before buying a product with a tuner in it, right? Those should be free game, too, then.
...like it wouldn't have been "offline" anyway after getting front-page mention on /.!
This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
As for Microsoft's involvement in the case (as the claims revolve around only those games released on the Xbox platform), apparently there is none. Inada said, "I understand why they can't come and rescue us. I know they have a full team of lawyers [for game and Windows-related issues." He added, "These [hackers] must have a modified Xbox--it should be of great concern to them."
When I read that they could of convinced me this was satire.
Speaking of Tecmo Bowl and Tecmo Super Bowl (the pinnacle of Pre-Madden Football Games), there are a bunch of ROMS floating around with updated rosters for every team. I'm wondering if Tecmo will follow that up under the DMCA.
Does anyone remember ye old Sega Vs. Accolade case? This seems kinda similar...
Why am I not rapping? I am rapping with you in a way.
The idea is, the precedent has been set that modifying your own property, when it doesn't impact others, is not illegal; if modifying your game code impacts others, that's one thing (ie. if you take your modified code out on "the open road" and game online with it, potentially using it to cheat; much like speeding, though without the possible death part).
So yeah, maybe it's a bit against the DMCA . . . but, laws contradict eachother all the time nowadays, the idea here is to establish that by prior laws and values set, it shouldn't be illegal, thus, regardless of whether the exact literal wording of the DMCA ends up backing up the lawsuit or not, it shouldn't be illegal.
To say "it's a statement of fact" is to take it too far; and after all, there is such a thing as civil disobedience (even if, yes, it's illegal, so if we want to live in a black-and-white world we can just use that as an excuse to stop the argument now), and it's definitely true that some laws are stronger (more enforced, more respected, more likely to stay in their current forms) than others.
So in conclusion, I declare that your attempted analogy works against you!
I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
Maybe he could escape using either IDSPISPOPD, IDCLIP, or ultimately IDCLEV## ?
Trolling using another account since 2005.
If your car was a techmo game...
Techmo Autos'r'Us
Legal Department
101 Somelane Anytown USA 54321
777-123-4567
Sir or Madam:
It has come to our attention that not only are you selling an aftermarket radio system for our automobiles, you have also launched a website in order to tell others how to replace the radio system in their automobiles.
Prepared to be sued.
- Techmo Autos'r'Us Legal Department.
Absurd, isn't it? Dodge isn't going to sue a store for selling naked-lady mudflaps and a "don't come a knockin' if this vehicle's a rockin'" bumpersticker for my truck, no matter how distasteful they may find it. If they even attempted to sue the store, the case would be a laughing stock. The store could give me step-by-step instructions on how to remove the old mudflaps and install the new mudflaps without any fear of being sued.
Yet there is no outrage when Techmo tells gamers that they can't distribute or tell others how to put the digital equivalent of naked-lady mudflaps on their games.
This is the worst thread ever.
If you think car companies don't sue each other left and right constantly, you're living with your head in the sand. They sue from things as trivial as naming (Porsche 911 has a "1" in the middle digit because Peugeot owned car names with zero as a middle digit -- the original 911 was a 901)
Car makes sue over grill designs, interior designs, ergonomic innovations, brake system designs, motor design. The lists go on and on.
And clearly nearly 200 years of industrialized history has demonstrated your conentention that those laws can't be passed or enforced are completely incorrect. There are lots of good books about IP cases in the 1700's and 1800's. Hell, the history around the invention and implementation of the telegraph puts all this stuff around the Internet to shame.
Sure there are nude skins for Americas Army, how else would you stage an Abu Ghraib style prisoner pyramid?
.."
"Videogames don't hurt people, it is people
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
If you provide software on a disk to your customers then someone somewhere will hack it, fact of life.
Of course the difference is when the people who hack it post details on the Internet. I have a problem with current titles being hacked and details posted on the net, but not with old games.
I guess when the DRM pushers have their way we will all be prevented from hacking code. Maybe sometime in the future people won't be able to repair, resurrect or emulate old systems. The machine code debugger will be a musuem piece.
The point of DMCA is to restrict what end users can do with/to your software purchases...
Note: *YOUR* software purchases.
The way it is going, it seem that in the future, you will not own what you pay for anyomore, you will just pay for the right to use somebody's product, what you can do with your stuff depends on the manufactor's good will.
Please mod parent up.
Actually that's not what I stated. What I stated was that the type of game exists. That being a 3rd person shooter type of game. I'm really not into the whole third person thing, as a matter of fact the new Vampire:Bloodlines annoys the shit out of me in that the game keeps shifting me out of first person during play. Thief: The Dark Project is also in the same grouping as Metal Gear Solid, as in it is 3rd person shooter game. Thief is probably a better comparison to Metal Gear. However when I wrote the original reply, Oni was the only third person game that came to mind.
That, and Nintendo v. Galoob, the Game Genie case.
You're right. I've printed out that post and had it laminated already, quite a singular intelligence at work there.
That was classic intercourse!
I'm suprised nobody's mentioned this, but why don't they start hosting the data from a Canadian server? I mean, we don't have the DMCA or any equivelant, and our federal courts have a recent history of finding in favour of consumers in these cases. It seems like a dead-easy solution, although maybe a little too late for this specific site.
-- sudo.ca
DOABV was just a precursor to what would have been a more adult game in the future, and the patches beat them to the punch?
Actually I've wondered about this myself, what determines where the court proceedings will take place in regards to websites?
Nationality of infringers?
Location of infringers?
Location of hosting servers?
Location of "infringed" product?
If I as a Canadian were to post such patches on my server, if there were a law shared between Canada in the US that made it purportedly "illegal," where would I be tried?
Look at the all time best sellers and most persistent games (The Sims, Quake series, Unreal Tournament series) and you find that they all not only allow you to modify them, they actively encourage it! Hell, UT 2004 comes with a powerful scripting language that lets you do everything short of change the engine, a free version of Maya to do graphics, a level editor that is absolutly top notch, and shitloads of free training materials on the web to learn how to use the. Then, they run a contest and give money to the people who modify it the best.
All that, and they make money doing it.
I've never understood the need some companies have to try and lock people out of their games. If there's one thing game fans seem to love to do, it's to give you free content. They will spend an amazing amount of time to produce free addons for your games. I have no idea why anyone would want to prohibit that.
Welcome to the United States of Intellectual Property, where ownership is everything. Our surveillance cameras observed you taking photos of privately owned structures through the airplane window, and the in-seat microphone recorded you repeating part of Letterman's Top Ten list from last night. Here's your copy of the DMCA. The lawyer assigned to you will be contacting you shortly regarding the initial series of lawsuits you'll be defending yourself against. We hope you enjoy your stay.
Oh Crap! I put a window in my Antec case! Now Antec's going to come after me! Uh oh... I hope Microsoft doesn't find out I skinned Windows.. Man I'm screwed!
mount
contact@tecmoinc.com
SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO::
host mailfilter4.tecmoinc.com [64.78.61.233]:
550 : Recipient address rejected:
User unknown in relay recipient table
customerservice@tecmoinc.com
SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO::
host mailfilter4.tecmoinc.com [64.78.61.233]:
550 : Recipient address rejected:
User unknown in relay recipient table
gamecounselor@tecmoinc.com
SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO::
host mailfilter4.tecmoinc.com [64.78.61.233]:
550 : Recipient address rejected:
User unknown in relay recipient table
businessaccounts@tecmoinc.com
SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO::
host mailfilter4.tecmoinc.com [64.78.61.233]:
550 : Recipient address rejected:
User unknown in relay recipient table
PublicRelations@tecmoinc.com
SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO::
host mailfilter4.tecmoinc.com [64.78.61.233]:
550 : Recipient address rejected:
User unknown in relay recipient table
Just when you make it idiotproof, some idiot builds a better idiot.
...Japanese automobile manufacturers have launched a coordinated legal attack against car owners that modify their vehicles.
"Adding nitrous systems to the fuel injection and 'coffee can' mufflers to the exhaust systems are clearly actions that violate the DMCA," said Hiroshi Yagasaki, lead attorney for Toyota.
Taking a page from the RIAA, investigators have been hired to watch for teens entering automotive parts stores to purchase after market parts for compact vehicles. Fake auto parts websites have been set up to net offenders who would order parts online.
"These young hooligans are clearly stealing from the car companies by circumventing our state-of-the-art protection schemes, which we call 'The Hood'."
Commander Taco was not available for comment.
*** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
Kevin Poulsen provides some more details on SecurityFocus.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040210040258/http://w ww.ninjahacker.net/
All your Sybase are belong to us.
i think the posting of such modifications is similar to the posting of Game Genie codes (which another member has also mentioned), which can alter the course of gameplay by either directly altering a game's code or it's RAM.
The Game Genie "codes" were just a means for obfuscating the true nature of it's game alterations, but in essance it was doing the exact same thing as the posted modifications.
NES WORLD, which summarized the Nintendo vs Galoob Game Genie case, offers this information which (to me at least) seems very relavant and perhaps in the least not bad news for NinjaHacker and co?
http://www.nesworld.com/law-0005.htm
"After trial, the district court found:
(1) The "Game Genie" does not create a "derivative work" within the definition in 101. "[I]nherent in the concept of a `derivative work' is the ability for that work to exist on its own, fixed and transferable from the original work, i.e., having a separate `form'. . . . The Game Genie does not meet that definition." Id. at 1291. (emphasis in original).
The court distinguished Midway Mfg. Co. v. Artic Int'l, Inc., stating that "Midway's result, if not its analysis, appears to have turned on the fact that the licensee arcade owner, not the copyright holder, was making money from the performance of the altered game, a violation of section 106(4) (copyright holder has exclusive right `to perform the copyrighted work publicly')." Id.
Under the facts of Midway, that court "was willing to `stretch' the acceptable definition of a derivative work." Id. The Galoob court, however, was not willing to "stretch" the definition of "derivative work" where the performance was non- commercial and was confined to the homes of purchasers of legitimate copies of the videogame.
(2) "[E]ven if the Game Genie did create a derivative product, the doctrine of `fair use' enables consumers to use the Game Genie for their personal enjoyment, 17 U.S.C. 107, and therefore allows Galoob to sell it." Id. at 1286. In its analysis of fair use, the court "relied extensively," id. at 1292, on Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. -- particularly in its emphasis on the first statutory fair use factor, the purpose and character of the use. The court found that the non-commercial, nonprofit nature of the use by the alleged direct infringer, the videogame purchaser, created a presumption of fair use. Id. at 1293.
On the fourth fair use factor (effect on the work's potential market or value), the court said it had not been shown that the use supplanted demand for Nintendo's works, that any actual or reasonably likely market was injured, or that use of the Game Genie in ways that arguably infringe Nintendo's copyrights would diminish the overall demand for Nintendo games. Id. at 1294-98. Nor did the remaining fair use factors weigh in favor of Nintendo. Id. at 1293-94.
(3) "Galoob's use of copyrighted video games for purposes of testing or marketing the Game Genie does not violate any of Nintendo's rights under the Copyright Act." Id. at 1286.
(4) A permanent injunction in favor of Nintendo would not be warranted even if the court had found copyright infringement because:
"1) Any presumption of immediate and irreparable harm resulting from the alleged infringement was rebutted;
2) The presence of the Game Genie in the market benefits the public by expanding personal consumer utilization of purchased games; and
3) Assuming infringement, adequate remedies exist at law." Id. at 1298."
"Progress comes from the intelligent use of experience."
From 1999-2000, I was one of three hackers working furiously to uncover the inner workings of Monster Rancher 2, another game published by Tecmo. After the months of work, Tecmo made it very clear to us that they frowned upon our activities. I personally had a very cordial relationship with Tecmo's PR dept. through my Monster Rancher fansite, and though the PR department admitted that there were developers who appreciated our level of enthusiasm and work, the official company stance was quite the opposite as they were afraid that we would somehow reveal trade secrets to their competitors. Though we continued to actively post information about the game's internals on the monster-rancher.com message board (now defunct, as the domain has since been acquired by a competing site), Tecmo forbid us from posting similar information on their own message boards.
Some time after I had left the scene, I visited with the old board briefly to find out that the game hackers were now asked to not mention specific memory locations (you could refer to the "lifespan register", but not to "0x800B...."); I do not know what inspired this new policy, but knowing the site's owner and board administrator personally, I suspect that Tecmo's dissatisfaction of hacker activity had grown more vocal. Never once did we make or distribute new skins for monsters or any game modification other than altered save files, so our situation was a little different than that of www.ninjahacker.net, but this is indeed sad, and rather chilling that this could have happened to us had people been using the DMCA in such a manner at that time. In the past, Tecmo has had an amazingly good relationship with owners of fansites across the web, and domains like "monsterrancher.com" still remain in possession of the fans. Why they would sue fans for making game skins... I don't know. All that I can say is that for years, Tecmo as a corporate entity has never been happy with those of us who want to explore their products a bit more thoroughly.
Microsoft seems to have had quite a bit of luck here too. You cannot find walkthroughs or help for a number of their games. Only links to purchase strategy guides come up no matter how you search. ex. Age of Mythology Titans = nothing useful at all.
Its like the old Wolf3D cheat where you had to add -goobers to the command line argument
The funniest thing about it is that Tecmo is actually upset about the nude patches. They can develop their own women as close to naked as possible, but I guess that's alright as long as somebody doesn't remove the pasties. They probably spent hundreds of hours alone just on their boob jiggle animations, and they are essentially calling a couple of hackers the perverts? http://images.google.com/images?q=doax&hl=en&lr=&c 2coff=1&sa=N&tab=wi
(Quoted from my post at forums.xbox-scene.com)
Just to add my two cents...
I was reading the front page article (again, I had already read the thing in this post), the section where cypher's summing up the lawsuit or whatnot. That Pfeiffer guy says, well, we spent all this money developing the game, it's illegal for people to edit the code. That doesn't really make sense to me. Isn't that like taking some publishers magazine, crossing out a word you didn't like and replacing it, and reading it that way. So they decide to sue you, since they spent money producing that magazine, and you aren't allowed to enjoy it the way you want.
Now, I can see if they rewrote some articles and starting selling it at the newstand, but that's not what's happening here.
So yeah. The end.
Nick
Just because someone bought a copy of a book, doesn't mean they can change a few words and modify a couple of chapters, then release another version of it and not expect me to stay quiet.
True enough. On the other hand, if someone chooses to highlight/underline/cross-out passages of the copy of your book that they own, they are well within their rights. And if someone found some typos or grammatical mistakes in your work, or even had some suggestions for an alternate ending, they can legally post such things online. All of these cases are much more germane to the topic than your example.
Yeah, I must be an awful person because I do like FPSs. And it's impossible for a good RPG to be good because it has a story (aka production values).
Actually, the games that have seen the most playtime from me recently are Metroid Prime 2, Katamari Damacy, NCAA 2004, Bridge Construction Set, and EV Nova. There isn't a FPS in the bunch (no, Metroid is *not* an FPS, despite having a first person vantage.) I'd be playing more RPGs if I: had more time, had seen anything worth buying last time I was at the store 2 or 3 months ago.
Tecmo is a bunch of assholes, but most open source games just aren't that good.
---
Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
(I read with sigs off.)
It's actually B-A-select-start, and the select is optional.
I honestly can't believe that it took half a dozen slashdot viewers to get 30 lives in Contra. What a sad world we live in today.
-----
jonathan barket
They are not doing this for interoperability purposes, so they actually are in violation of this "law". That being said, I do think that this aspect of the DMCA is unjust and a load of horsepucky, but the current state of the law is on Tecmo's side.
The way this is supposed to be set up according to actual fair use rights is that reverse engineering should be overall legal with the exception of if it is being done to commit copyright infringement. As the DMCA stands, reverse engineering is overall illegal with the exception of the specific, narrow condition of interoperability purposes. That is what is wrong with this part of the DMCA.
We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
it's called modding!
;-) or a modchip
you can do this with an exploit
i can have custom add-ons for a whole bunch of games, check out the xbox scene
i must admit i mainly use it for xbmc though
Its not a narrow exception. Your statement about how it should work is pretty much correct. Making a skin is, essentially, making a computer program. Not to a CS major, maybe, but to a lawyer its just binary code executed on a computer. Making a skin work with a game is interoperability.
I've been following most DMCA decisions because I do reverse engineering for a living. Look at the Lexmark decision:
"Congress did not intend to allow the DMCA to be used offensively in this manner, but rather only sought to reach those who circumvented protective measures 'for the purpose' of pirating works protected by the copyright statute."
Basically, if you aren't reverse engineering to crack the copy protection, then you are safe, according to the Lexmark decision.
This forum thread was started about this topic and the owner (whose screen name on this forum is cypher35) ends up posting details about the suit. A very interesting disscussion.
Physics makes the world go 'round.
There were more skins then just nudes, Street fighter, MGS, and some original ones too. Plus, to use the skins, you need a mod-chip, and the skins were loaded on the HD.
You are right, this is an exercise, but Chi has some good IP lawyers, so hopefully these guys can get one.
I've played Netrek on and off for years (mostly off, for the past few). It's fun. Xpilot was too. I've been video gaming since 1986 or so. Computer gaming since I first got a computer, an Apple II. Don't talk history to me without knowing something yourself.
Gee, isn't Nethack itself a copy of earlier commercial games, like (e.g.) Rogue? Isn't that why the entire class of games is called roguelikes? And was Rogue commercial? (Answer: yes. It was sold as part of BSD UNIX, distributed freely with the system but binary only, then commercialized for profit by the authors, and is not considered open source.) And didn't Rogue have randomized maps? Yes. It did. You have no sense of history, and are completely full of shit.
Claiming that Diablo was just "Nethack with 3D graphics" ignores all the work of the artists, musicians... and the game designers who put quite a bit of time into making the game enjoyable. Not just good looking, but enjoyable.
What you're seeing with proprietary games today are cookie cutters with improved graphics.
Yes, because Katamari Damacy was a cookie-cutter. So was DDR (which I personally hate, but lots of people seem to like). And open-source definitely originated the RTS game. Civilization was totally an open-source effort. MULE, too. The RPG as we know it owes a lot more to Final Fantasy, Ultima, and Wizardry than it does to anything open source has put up. Let's not forget Infocom, for that matter. FPSs were started by open source.... oh, wait, no. Name to me one significant genre of game that open source developed. Go ahead. Occasional innovations that then spread to other games in the same genre (ala the addition of build queues to RTSs, textbinds to FPS comms systems, observer ports for net games) does not mean open source gaming did more than commercial gaming; the fact remains, ask most any gamer - even the ones who *do* like open source - what games most advanced the state of the art, and they'll talk about commercial games. They'll talk about the genre-definers, games like Rogue, Civilization, DOOM, Dune2, Warcraft, Ultima, Wizardry. Open source games, alas, are really just reimplementations of these.
---
Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
(I read with sigs off.)
Perhaps I'm a bit fuzzy on this, but exactly when did companies get the rights to tell me what to do with something I bought with my own money?
I go to work everyday so I can buy myself the few nice amenities that I can afford. After I've paid for something, that should be the end. We made an agreement. I paid money for something, now you give it to me. End of story.
Once I've purchased something, that's it. The company has no right whatsoever to tell me what I can or cannot do. If I do something illegal, I should get arrested. If I take it apart and turn it into something better, good for me.
The software/music/movie companies are trying to have it both ways, and their winning because people have become apthetic to fundamental concept of owning something.
For example, the companies treat file-sharing as property theft. However, when it comes to making backup copies or reversing, it's no longer property but a liscence. The best of both worlds; they have you give them money then they can tell you what you can do. Talk about the perfect little money maker.
Does this seem normal to most people? Does the average Joe think this is okay?
Let's apply this model to other property we buy.
Could grocers slap a liscense on a bag of apples stating that if I agree to use this product, I cannot plant the seeds to make more of this product?
Can a grocer put an EULA on a tri-tip steak saying that if you agree to eat this you can only make the meat medium well and must marinate it for two hours?
Can a car manufacturer send a notice to you after you bought the car saying that by purchasing said car you agree to only travel on roads in Boston at speeds no greater than 20 mph?
Can a manufacturer forgo product testing merely by stating that they cannot be held liable for any damages caused by a defect in their product?
Then what is so fscking special about software and media that it is exempt from the normal rules of capitalism? Why do I have to pay money to give up my rights to owning a piece of property that apparently I don't own at all?
And people wonder why I advocate open source.
~X~
~X~
Making a skin is, essentially, making a computer program. Not to a CS major, maybe, but to a lawyer its just binary code executed on a computer.
Do you seriously think a lawyer can't find an expert witness to testify that there's a difference between data and code?
-mkb
Hmm.. Actually The printed manual for Halo 2 and mechassault 2 (the one that comes with the game case) are available free online for printing in the xbox.com site (I was surprised too) they are both published by MS.
The walkthrough and cheats for those and the games you mentioned are available in www.gamefaqs.com and in a ton of websites aroudn the net where were you looking them anyways?
Go ahead MOD my day!
More opinions here
If you've bought it, surely you can modify what you own for your own personal use? Does this mean that I can no longer colour in the White nike symbol on my nike shoes and wear them out, because it makes it look (to the public) that they are something that is not representative of what nike really does? Could I go further to say that I could get sued by Adidas for wearing my old shirt with lots of holes on it, out in public, giving them a bad name? Modification of tangible items you own has been done for forever and a day. Why should this not apply to software? Microsoft/Bungie has not taken this action with the Halo/Halo2 mods out there!!?