Slashdot Mirror


Mod Chippers Ordered to Pay $9 Million in Fines

GameDaily is reporting that that ESA is announcing a major victory against game software piracy in California. A judge has handed down over $9 Million in fines to Divineo Inc., some employees, and international subsidiaries. From the article: "The defendants had apparently violated the DMCA by trafficking mod chips and the HDLoader software application that enables users to copy whole video games to a console's hard drive ... Mod chips then can be used to allow a console to play illegally obtained/pirated games. Both the mod chips and HDLoader application therefore circumvent the copyright protection technology built into video game consoles and video game software and are in direct violation of the DMCA."

6 of 94 comments (clear)

  1. Reasonable doubt? by Temuar+Skylari · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From TFA: "Once the entire video game file is on the console's hard drive it probably isn't too difficult for a hacker to transfer it to his PC and then illegally distribute it on the web." PROBABLY? I'm no cracker, so I have no idea how easy or difficult this is, but COME ON. I seriously hope nobody got fined for theoretical damages caused by distributing a game online when the only evidence was that they had copied it to their console's HD.

    --
    USE colorful confetti ON heavily-armed clown
  2. I have a dream... by dolson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I dream of a day when I won't have to get off my couch to put the legally-purchased games I own into my game console, stream video, pictures, and music from my Linux PC, check the weather, etc. all without the use of these law-breaking modchips. I guess the Wii has a lot of that covered, and probably the PS3 and 360, I don't know. But for me, I really am THAT lazy, that I don't wanna switch the discs. :) That's a benefit of using a modchip even to those who don't pirate software.

    1. Re:I have a dream... by Some_Llama · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "That's a benefit of using a modchip even to those who don't pirate software."

      Or have kids who regularly play on a console swapping out discs 3 or 4 times a day and manage to sratch them to the point of unreadability in a matter of weeks.

    2. Re:I have a dream... by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It also makes it easier to run Linux. But the biggest reason that these companies are so strongly against modchips is because it allows software developers to write games for their hardware without paying a royalty to the console manufacturer. Nothing to do with piracy at all, really....

      Next stop, 9th circuit, where I suspect this will be overturned swiftly as anti-consumer.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  3. We no longer own the things we buy. by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These firms are being punished in the same way a lockpicking tool company is being punished in that the tools they sell can be used for evil.

    However, modding has not started with computers, people have always modded. They modded cars, their houses, their radios, their tools, and anything else they have bought. And all of these mods have potentially illegal uses.

    Imagine if Honda struck back against Aftermarket makers, using the DMCA, and telling people that only "Honda certified" parts are allowed in the vehicles honda bought.

    I can't help but think that electronics companies are getting a free ride from the government here.

  4. I'm surprised... by Gadzinka · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm surprised that no one picked up the fact that it is Japanese company suing French company in US court.

    They won. SFW? How are they going to enforce this ruling in France? From the coverage of this ruling on Ars Technica I know, that the company is still offering those modchips on their web page. And they will. The only thing they can't do now is to visit US. And maybe Iraq or Afghanistan. All of the international treaties about enforcig court rulings abroad have one basic assumption written into them: no party to such treaty shall enforce a court ruling for something that's perfectly legal in the country of residence of defendant party.

    Nothing to see here, move along.

    Robert

    --
    Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162