Slashdot Mirror
Federal Agents Raid Homes for Modchips
Lunatrik writes "Invoking the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, Federal Custom's Agents have raided over 30 homes and businesses looking to confiscate so-called 'mod chips', or other devices that allow the playback of pirated video games. This raises an important question: Are legitimate backup copies of a piece of software you own illegal under the DMCA?"
The DMCA doesn't prohibit having a backup, just creating, obtaining or distributing the tools to make or to use one. That's the risible position that the DMCA puts us in.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I am going to have to say no... The reason is.... Media degrades over time, and get scratched to hell and such. I own over 500 DVDs, however some of them are "unwatchable" either from storing them in those cheesey folder cases or just letting them sit around on my desk... Some of them are backed up some I bought anew... But I think making personal backups of software SHOULD be legal.... the companies that make this stuff could make money off this by selling an option to make backups for say... a dollar per backup and has to be registered to yourself with a separate backup serial key... DMCA goes too far sometimes....
-- Josh
"Whoopie! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that's a long one for me!" - Pete Conrad
I guess it's back to stealing games the old fashioned way - under a shirt.
Seriously. Persecution of the hackers only makes them stronger.
Is not life a hundred times too short for us to bore ourselves? -Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
If you could make a perfect 1-to-1 copy of a DVD, and have it run, that would still be legal. But since that doesn't work, because commercially available DVD are neutered, you have to crack the encryption - which is what is illegal.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
The fed doesn't seem to want to raid businesses for hiring illegal aliens, but they spend their time raiding businesses and homes for having mod chips. I thought this line was especially funny. [quote]"Illicit devices like the ones targeted today are created with one purpose in mind, subverting copyright protections," Julie L. Myers, assistant secretary of Homeland Security for ICE, said in a release. "These crimes cost legitimate businesses billions of dollars annually and facilitate multiple other layers of criminality, such as smuggling, software piracy and money laundering."[/quote] There may be a tenuous connection to smuggling (i.e. bootleg video games disks), but how in the hell do modchips facilitate money laundering. This is just laughable, if it wasn't so pathetic.
---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
Prohibition in the Roaring Twenties. "Bootleg" discs, Elliot Ness - like tactics. It will never work, it will just alienate an entire nation again.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
It's an important question because that's the motivation for mod chips... so that you can run games on CDs that are not published by an official publisher. This description includes games copied from Blockbuster rentals as well as your own games that are copied for traditionally acceptable use such as "I want my kids to play from the backup because the original is expensive!"
The DMCA has done much to close that hole in the game-seller's net.
I don't think Microsoft, Sony, or anyone really wants to make a game console that has to be connected to the internet, especially the bandwidth hogs they have now. It limits their market too much. They'll add a million features to entice people, but I think they know they'd lose a lot of buisness if we couldn't play single-player games without having the console connected.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
Well let's say you bought a game and make a copy of it for backup. One day you lose the original so you want to use your legitimate backup, for that you need a mod-chip.
Your backup is "legal" since you bought the game and made a copy only for yourself, but you need something "illegal" (ie. the mod-chip) to play it.
Could the use of a Mod-chip only for legitimate backup be legal ? If so how do you tell if it's a legitimate backup ?
I didn't found something funny to put here.
But oh wait... comparing them to the Commissariat of Homeland Security (KGB), Bureau of Security (UB) or Securitate, I should be thankful they're not participating in mass murders... yet.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Correct.
/. editors (?) skim off something like this.
:)
Either a copy is legitimate or it isn't.
One million and one stories floating around and our friendly glue-sniffing
The feds ran a similar bust back in 2001 or 02, as I recall*. They are tied to coincide with Federal budget announcements and chest-beating by whatever politician needs the publicity at the moment. Give it a few days and the other shoe will drop - you'll see.
I recall because I'd purchased a mod chip, off the internet, from one of the major suppliers in the USA. I had it shipped to my office in South Korea, but the feds never bothered to look me up. And yes, I'm sad over it
Since the original Katamari Damacy isn't available at all in the UK, I had to import it from Japan and use a PS2 modchip to play it. The follow-up game was released in Europe months after appearing in US/Japan, so I also imported that one.
The fact that I could do this at all shows that there is no technical reason for the region coding in this game - it's purely an illegal tactic to control market prices.
Rich.
libguestfs - tools for accessing and modifying virtual machine disk images
The (somewhat rhetorical) question is, did they raid those homes to find *one* mod chip or whole bunches of them? You don't need to have hundreds of mod chips to play back your own backups, after all. Unless, of course, said mod chip owners want to claim those mod chips were all backups of their *original* mod chip...
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
The mod chips themselves are a pretty violation under the DMCA:
This raises an important question: Are legitimate backup copies of a piece of software you own illegal under the DMCA?
I believe the more important question is: what's happening to our liberties?...
If we're not losing them in the name of fighting terrorism, then it's in the name of copyright laws. Between Hollywood and the middle east, liberty is bleeding.
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
how in the hell do modchips facilitate money laundering.
Perhaps because people with mod chips are so engrossed in playing their pirate games that they don't empty their pockets thoroughly before dumping their clothes in the wash.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
This raises an important question
Don't you mean, begs the question?
Firstly, in the case of PC games (or indeed any system where games are installed to a hard drive), it should not be obligatory to have the CD or DVD in the drive to play them once installed as this creates totally unnecessary wear on the CD/DVD drive and the disc itself scratches a little more every time it's inserted or removed. Whilst I don't like the "spyware" concept of Valve's Steam, I do accept that being able to load my games on any PC I like without the disk is a good thing - though all praise to Stardock for just letting you get on and play Galactic Civilizations II without the disk once you've registered your product code with them. If every games company trusted me like Stardock does, I'd feel less inclined to rip them off at every opportunity (and, no, I don't work for Stardock).
Secondly, if your original CD/DVD goes faulty, the games company charges you for a replacement. This strikes me as wrong - if they won't let you back it up, then they should provide replacements (within a reasonable amount of time) for just the cost of postage.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
I have a modchip on my Nintendo DS. I don't use it to play games. I have NEVER played a game on it. So why do I have it? So I can run Linux on it. I have no interest playing games, but I do have an interest in a unique hardware device. Should the FBI raid my house?
If they did raid my and drag me into court, I would ask my legal counsel why small portable computers with good battery life is non-existant, while gaming consoles with much more features are. Something is wrong with the market in my opinion. Should it be illegal for me to have the technical possibility of running a rogue game? Should they give me 20 years in FPMITA Prison for it?
Anyway, isn't it the means to circumvent the DMCA they're going after and not the backups.
Since those same Federal Agents are financed from the taxes of US citizens, then the games companies who will be benefitting from additional sales due to the crack down on mod chips & piracy should therefore be taxed at a heavier rate in order to recover those taxes.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
What use is your right to a backup copy if you cannot use the copy, ever? You have to break one law to make use of your rights guaranteed in another law, and that is ridiculous.
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
Troll much?
The DMCA goes hand in hand with Fair Use principles which have time and again been upheld by the US Supreme Court. It criminalizes tools necessary to implement freedoms upheld by previous USSC decisions. The law goes so far as to not only make telling anyone that a Sharpie can beat Sony's copy protection, but make the magic marker its self illegal. It makes the ability to gain a backup copy illegal, and thus in the great 4th grade tradition: 'You have no clue!'
Is it "more illegal" to own 200 modchips than it is to own one? Are modchips like drugs by now?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
In Soviet Russia Julie L. Myers dossier handed to you.
Great to see they needed 'help' from the "software association and other industry members."
Ask about movies and games outside Region 1/A in the USA and its "show your papers".
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I guess while they're out saving the world from mod chips in game consoles maybe they could grab a few of the illegal assault weapons, drugs, pedophiles, and carjackers next door?
It's only a matter of time before Homeland Security gets in on the act, too, raiding the homes of 11-year-old importers looking for WMDs.
WMDs... Weapons of Mass Duplication
Well, it worked for an OS to be connected to the 'net at least once every 6 months, I don't think it's far fetched that they'll require the same for game consoles soon, too. It needn't be a permanent connection, can you see people using modchips when they have to go online once a month (and get "updates" crammed down their throat), or do you think that would be too much a deterrent with WiFi becoming more and more mainstream and consoles (see Wii for reference) being able to use WiFi instead of cable based networking?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
But that's the point. The media industry HATES fair use, always has. They tried to make it illegal in the late 70's and got their asses handed to them in the courts. So they found a way to eliminate fair use by making an end run around it. They found a way to make it illegal to create the backup that you can legally own.
This space available.
AFAIK, "Fair Use" isn't a right, but a "legally defensible position" in that the court will accept "fair use"-class usage as a sufficient excuse. As such, you actually do not have a right to have a backup copy. Furthermore, fair use requires such a backup to be made by and for the owner of the original media. Since DMCA blocks you any way to do so yourself, this basically implies any and all backups of copy-protected media is illegally obtained either because you didn't make it yourself (not "fair use") or used illegal means to make it (DMCA). The heart of the problem is that "fair use" usage isn't a legal right, otherwise publishers would've been obligated to provide means for the people to excersize that right.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
You're the one with no clue.
Let me know how you can play your backup copies without a mod-chip or "magic disk".
The right to copy anything that's no encrypted is moot if everything is encrypted. If it WAS possible to create a 1:1 copy of a game, copy protection and all, it would be quite ok and in sync with fair use. What makes the DMCA break the right of fair use is the fact that exactly that is impossible for most content.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
What about imports? Now I'm told that at least the PS3 is no longer region-locked, but the PS2 was and so were a heck of a lot of PS1 units. (Although more loosely into PAL and NTSC regions.)
I'm in Europe which is mostly PAL, and which also didn't get half of the PS1 games available in the USA in NTSC.
So here's the deal: half the game I owned were US imports. None burned/"backed-up", all original CDs, with manual and box and everything. Sony got my money for every single one of them. Money which they otherwise wouldn't have gotten at all, since they never released those games down here. Yeah, that's the kind of an evil pirate I am: I went and gave Sony some money against their will.
Sony also always acted as if imports are piracy. Again, we're not talking about burned CDs, we're talking units sold. Apparently the fact that I bought some games from them, which they otherwise wouldn't have sold me, counted as piracy to them. Apparently it's soooo much of a similarity between an inconvenience like "yeah, but it screws up our marketting data of how much units were sold in each territory" (which is all that game imports ever did) and pirating that game.
Where I'm getting at is: it's not as simple as "modchips == piracy." There are perfectly non-piracy uses of modchips. One is mentioned in the summary (you'll ideally want your little kid to play with a copy, not to scratch the $60 disc) and another one I just gave you now.
Plus, there's the whole moral issue of criminalizing people for owning a tool, as opposed to actually committing the infraction. If you still don't see the problem, think this: if you're a guy, chances are you have all the equipment you'd ever need to be a rapist. It doesn't mean you're automatically one. How about looking for people who actually committed a crime, instead of those who would technically have the means.
And it seems to me that that's the whole problem here: the summary mentions raiding for mod-chips, not for burned DVDs.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
If you've copied them from a rental CD that is not a legitimate copy. You won't destroy that copy when you return the rental will you?
i don't think your question will get any response other than a dismissal as irrelevant. Dissatisfaction with the market does not act as an excuse to break the law. There is nobody stopping you starting our own computer hardware company, and making the device you describe. The people making the device you modded have done so on the assumption that they can sell complimentary products for it (games). We all know this. They designed, financed and made the product, it's up to them to determine the terms under which they offer it for sale. If you do not like the terms, don't buy one. Punish restrictive practices through the market, not by breaking the law.
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
You are correct. You may own as many backups as you would like as part of 'Fair Use' which the DMCA explicitly states it is not meant to interfier with, and the MPAA & RIAA lawyers argued in front of congress as being acceptable fair use. However, the DMCA does make creating, selling, distributing, and importing the tools to make backups illegal. Additionally, mod chips, which would allow you to use your legal backup - made with illegal tools - are also illegal. So, you are perfectly within your rights to own a backup, so long as you don't posses the tools to make it or the tools to actually use it.
So, while the DMCA explicitly states that your fair use rights are not to be hindered by the DMCA, it simultaniously blocks your ability to impliment those rights by outlawing the tools required to do so.
> Are legitimate backup copies of a piece of software you own illegal under the DMCA?"
The question doesn't make any sense. If they're legitimate, then they're legal by their very nature. If they're illegal, then they're not legitimate. It's like asking `what happens if an irresistible force meets an unmovable object`.
Sorry, but they do raid businesses for illegal aliens
That's just one story. I'm trying to find the stories about the mass raids here in Georgia that went after illegal farm workers. Boy, were the farmers pissed!
Some are going home anyway with the slowdown in the construction market anyway, do I guess the ICE guys are getting bored and justifying their jobs?
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
I find it quite ludicrous. Do you imagine a bunch of FBI agents at your door yelling :"Put your console on the floor! Open it slowly! Oh my God! He's got a modchip!!!!"
Anyway games are too expensive. Just doing some calculations, a 60$ game equals 3.75% of my salary. I like to know that the game I'm buying is a good game before buying it.
The "motivation" for mod chips kind of depends on the person, wouldn't you say?
I bought a Nintendo Wii on launch day when I was living in Japan, and bought 4 or 5 games for it while I was living there. I just returned to the USA about a week ago, and now I want to buy more games, but I can't, thanks to region locking. The only options I have are 1.) Buy another Wii (not really an option, as I've sunk money into the Virtual Console games), or 2.) Install a modchip. The games I want to play on my Wii are indeed published by an official publisher, just from a different region.
Does this mean I should be raided / arrested / tried in court?
I realize that a lot of people who use modchips are only out to copy everything in sight, but hasn't this kind of thing been covered in the past (Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.)?
Bogus question indeed, sirs.
No. You should have the freedom to do what you want with your electronics, this is all totally ridiculous, and you definitely shouldn't be declared guilty before proven innocent. The U.S. is becoming a police state.
Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
More Twoson than Cupertino
it's up to them to determine the terms under which they offer it for sale
Scope to determine terms is not and should not be unlimited. Once something is sold, it's not theirs any more. That is right at the heart of "selling". If they didn't want people to tinker, they shouldn't have offered the device for sale. It's not our responsibility to shoulder the cost of a crummy choice of business model and it's unjust for the law to try and push it onto us.
Punish restrictive practices through the market, not by breaking the law
Bullshit. They're writing the laws. Obedience to unjust law is a fool's game. While copyright and patent exist, a free market doesn't.
OK, so the FBI has just gone and raided a whole bunch of places looking for mod-chips. Presumably they would be looking for installed chips in consoles they raid at homes. How are they detecting these mod chips? Are they running a program to detect modified hardware (I would have thought MS, Sony, et al. would be doing that already). If not that, then they must be physically opening the cases to find the chips... Which brings me to my ultimate point: what happens if their information proves to be faulty, and the console is found chipless. Is the owner compensated for bother? Wear and tear? Damage? Loss of warranty after the console has just been opened? One would hope that the apology would extend to some sort of written proof that the console was opened for legal purposes, so that if that 360 red-rings, they can send it back without MS complaining.
The practicality of the issue, is _nothing_ to do with the law.
All of these companies that want to prevent backups should be required BY LAW to provide multiple backup copies of any content to the consumer with no questions asked and free of charge. Then there would be no need for the consumer to make backups. If I buy a DVD and I want a backup an hour later; dial a 1-800 number and the company should have one in the mail right away.
It is put up or shut up time for the content industry.
Copyright law is much older than the DMCA. My guess is what they are claiming in these DMCA claims are that they are using modchips to break copy-protection built into the systems. Whether you are using backups of software you legally own, are playing pirated software, or running home-brewed apps, if you are using a modchip which can circumvent copy protection of the system, said modchip is illegal under the DMCA, regardless of intent.
You can rent CDs? Where from?
Of course, I live in China, so I don't bother with rentals or pirating- real, licensed CDs cost far less here than in America (some CD singles only cost $2 and albums usually run $5-$7). But the "not for distribution outside Mainland China" limits what I can do with the CDs if I don't want them anymore (apparently eBay counts as "distribution"). Oh, no DRM either (some older Avex or Sony Japan CDs have it, I think, but it's easily bypassed with a Mac).
OSx86 FTW
Now that the FBI is handling this, everyone that knows their neighbor has a CD burner, mod chip, or unlocked DVD player should call and report them. After all, these things can ONLY be used to facilitate piracy.
Maybe after a few hundred thousand calls they'd lay off. Shouldn't the FBI be doing more important things anyway? Like say, busting drug rings, killin' gangsters, thwarting terrorists, and making sure that all those school teachers don't have any child molestation charges?
I don't see how busting people for having mod chips is going to help society beyond MAYBE a few video game purchases. Most of them probably got the mod chips in the first place to back up what they have or to avoid paying $59.99 for a piece of shit game full of bugs..I sure as hell wouldn't buy any more games for that generation if I couldn't make backups like I had done with all of my old ones, and I wouldn't start buying the games knowing that half of them will turn out to suck despite the hype/previews anyway.
Busting a drug ring can save many lives, buttloads of money, and make society safer. Standing on top of a pile of cash/drugs/criminals and having your picture taken is a lot more glorious than busting some 19 year old in college because he pirated Madden '08.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
If you do not like the terms, don't buy one. Punish restrictive practices through the market, not by breaking the law.
Say what? Are you saying "It Is A Violation Of Federal Law To Use This Product Inconsistant With Its Labeling?" Is it also against the law to combine vinegar and baking soda in the kitchen? Is it against the law to use a screwdriver as a hammer? This government is really starting to annoy me if its telling me I can only do what was labeled on the original package.
You earn $1600 a year?
No, a mod chip is "illegal" because you are "circumventing copy protection" which under the DMCA is illegal.
The copy protection is: no non-original games.
And seeing as how you don't own the game, but only a license to play the game, it doesn't matter anyway.
Same here -- I've got three modded Xboxes for the express purpose of streaming MythTV throughout my house. XBMC and XBMCMythTV are the only things that run on them, and wouldn't be able to run if not for the mods.
--Jim (me)
If you have a receipt or any other way to prove the purchase of the original I think you should be OK. If you show up in court with a DVD-R with a game and the original DVD with tooth-marks it should be clear to any judge what your intention is when making back up copies of the media. As for the DMCA attempting to block this, it's the lawmakers of the USA that should be held responsible.
If I buy a Gamecube or whatever then it is my gamecube. Contract law IMHO is being severely abused by corporates. All they have to is put a f***** contract on EVERYTHING to see to it that nobody ever has a shred of rights again. Buy a bottle of barbecue sauce? You agreed to a contract. No rights. Period.
The grandparent isn't pirating games. He's using his own personal private property as he sees fit and under no ethical theory that I can think of does it cost Nintendo anything. If contract law can be twisted to preclude such things then I say it is our sacred duty to violate it at every opportunity.
First off, I sure hope they got legal warrants to do that because if they start doing that to an average citizen in the US, it's a breach of constitutional protections afforded to all Americans.
I can see this if they are going after "producers"; ie people who are marketing the chips, and such especially if it's intent it to circumvent copyright protections.
But that is a big issue. Some of these manufacturers want these software mediums protected such that if it becomes non usable then you have to send it in and get it replaced. This too is an ok platform until the manufacturer begins to determine how long they will do that, and at what cost. Then what happens to a product after it's lifespan has ceased? No more replacements or updates???
"Sir; your product was discontinued last year and we have not yet seen your software disk returned to us. Send your disks back in to us now or face the penalty of the DCMA!"
Just a thought.
All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
Wrong answer: Department of Homeland Security Immigration Services, Customs & Immigration Enforcement.
:-)
It's been brought under the DHS umbrella. From their website: " Created in March 2003, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the largest investigative branch of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). "
Nice try, but no cigar for you.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
complain that its a police state because you cannot play pirated xbox games
There are reasons to use a modchip beyond playing pirated games. There is always the possibility of playing third party games (where do you think new companies come from?), using the hardware for something other than a gaming console (myth tv/cheap handheld/etc), or just tinkering with it. The label on the back of the system says the warranty will be voided by playing with the insides, as it should be, but that is not the same thing as saying "opening this box is reason for your arrest".
Apparently our government (this is sadly not limited to the US) has not yet realized that a majority of the tech companies in existence today got their start tinkering with previous products.
No, but the DHS will be visiting you shortly...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Every time I see a debate about backups, I end up seeing one of the pro-backup people saying that the reason he needs to be able to play backups is that he can't afford full price for games, so he trades them with friends, or something like that.
I think actual backups ought to be legal, but it seems to me that the well's been poisoned.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
You are suggesting that sellers of all products be prevented from setting any conditions on the sale of their products
.. to promote progress in the science and arts by offering a TEMPORARY monopoly which then expires and your work enters the public domain.
Yes. Call me old-fashioned, but I like to actually own the copy that I bought and that includes the ability to modify it. There are already laws in place by society (such as Copyright) which limit what I can do with that copy in terms of distribution. If additional conditions are required (such as NDAs) then these agreements must be established before the time of purchase. Shrink-wrap licenses or EULAs should not be acceptable nor enforceable.
I guess you would also mean that a EULA should be unenforceable, and thus abolish copyright when it comes to allowing you to make copies of digital products?
What does EULA have to do with Copyright? Works, digital or otherwise, are just as protected by copyright without EULAs as they are with them.
If I invent product X, who are you, or the government to dictate the terms under which I profit from my invention?
It is in the best interest of society that knowledge not be held hostage in the silos of their so-called inventors. This is precisely the original reason for copyright
If you don't like it, go invent your own product and stick a big "mod chip friendly" sticker on it.
I'm feeding a Troll aren't I?
DJ kRYPT's Free MP3s!
Actually, that raises another good issue in this case.
With the law clearly infringing upon an owner's right to perform non-infringing activities with his own property illustrates that the law itself is a bad law.
It's a rarely identified fact that when a case is being heard in court, it's not just the defendant that is on trial, it is also the law itself that is on trial. A verdict of "not guilty because the law is bad" often sets interesting precedents and serves to help correct bad law. It's a part of the checks and balances system that are rarely used and either hidden from the public or simply forgotten. (For more information, search on "the powers of a jury" which, incidentally, is a great way to get yourself disqualified from being on a jury as knowledge of these facts of law often gets you dismissed.)
no. get some perspective. hammers and screwdrivers do not have an end use licence agreement. yes of course it is up to the seller to determine the terms of the sale. its called a contract.
Perspective? Why should a blank device with NO COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL have a license agreement? Should a movie projector have one? A pair of glasses? Why should my Nintendo that I want to put MY OWN DAMNED SOFTWARE on it have a license agreement? I don't want it for the games, I want it for the ARM microprocessors and displays, not for the any included software. The first thing I did was wipe off all that crap software off it, because I didn't agree with it. Is that good? Or did the manufacturer squeeze in some FEDERAL LAW that says my door is going to come down one day because I didn't subscribe to their business model?
Slashdot is not the place to argue if a sticker on a box counts as a contract, though. If a company wants to license a product so that it is only used in certain ways, then the contract should be negotiated, up front, before the purchase. After I have purchased the device, I may decide to cut through the cardboard box, rip through the paper that was going to be a license, and then compost the paper without even looking at it.
Who is Dell to say I can not install Linux on a computer I buy from them, they sold it to me right?
Who is Ford to say I can't put after market air filter on my car, I bought the car.
And, to make a direct parallel to your argument, why can't an auto maker force me to only use their car for street driving instead of racing? They would have changed twice the price if they knew I wanted to drive on a track/off road/anywhere else. It's their product, who am I to simply use it as I see fit after I've already paid them for it.
I was going to comment on the $3 billion number as well. Where did they get this from? Are they basically counting all of the illegal copies and multiplying that by what the industry would've made? I only ask, because in my case, when in the past I modded my ps1 and xbox and yes I even copied games from friends and downloaded and burned them out. But the majority of those I would never have bought. In fact the only reason I bought a ps1 was because I could copy games, I never would've bought the console if I couldn't.
So, I mean I realize what I did then was illegal and I'm not trying to justify that by making excuses, but I'm guessing that 3 billion is a bit exaggerated. Just because you find 100 burned copies of My Pretty Ponies in some modders' basement, doesn't mean they would've lost 100 sales had he not been caught.
If GE sold a coffee maker that magically permitted only GE-brand coffee filters, no one would give you a moral lecture for using a workaround and using non-GE filters. It's your coffee maker. If GM sold cars that accepted only GM-designed bolts, no one would lecture you for using an adapter or changing out the bolt thingy so you could use whatever bolts you wanted.
It would never occur to anyone to be so damned stupid as to think that GE or GM or any other company has a moral claim to dictate how you use the product you already paid for--unless it's a video game console, or otherwise involves a computer or, God forbid, the internet. These are apparently magical, and are not subject to the same common-sense, well-known principles by which we have conducted business since, well, forever.
Difference between personal use and intent to supply.
You do not have to sign a contract to buy a Nintendo DS.
I think the lack of information here is letting our imaginations run wild. I seriously doubt that we're talking RIAA-Nazi style "let's pick a few kazaa users at random and drag them to court" raid, my impression is that they're arresting internet & ebay resellers and professional installers of modchips, and the people that sell the modded XBox hard drives with hundreds of games downloaded to them. We're likely talking people that deal in several thousands of chips per year, not a peon kid who thought buying a random modchip to import / download / Linux-ize his system would be cool (so relax).
And the question posed of owning a legitimate backup is a classic catch-22... if you own a legit backup, its legit. But if you made it and have to use it by breaking copy protections, that is a violation of the DMCA. How you can make a legit backup without cracking copy protection is the catch-22...
What really kills me about this is the fact that my tax dollars funded these raids. So I'm paying for FBI agents to kick in people's doors and, OMG! stop them from breaking copyright law! I think I'd rather the President repurpose the FBI copyright squad to fighting terror, thank you very much. I think the RIAA and company should have to pay for their own enforcement efforts.
I've never signed a form when I bought a game console, moron. And I never will because there's no way they could get people to do it.
Seriously, how do you manage to operate a computer with so much brain damage?
The Farewell Tour II
http://www.mhall119.com
"Punish restrictive practices through the market, not by breaking the law."
Individual purchasing decisions have never changed a damn thing. Civil disobediance, however, definitely has.
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
Mod Chips are illegal?
If I want to crack open my PSWii360, voiding the warranty and muck with the innards, since when can they stop me? This is news to me. Does this apply to old radios I used to open up and tinker with? Just silly.
I wonder if that's only in USA...
http://www.mhall119.com
There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
so my question is WTF is any branch of DHS doing enforcing the DMCA? WTF does this have to do with terrorism? do they think al qaeda's new plan for destroying america is flipping burnt video games?
how is it that these dudes can track down mod chips in people's homes and businesses, but can't find osama bin laden? obviously bin laden isn't slinging mod chips or ICE would crawl up his ass in a matter of minutes.
sarcasm:
-noun
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
In any event, I'm not sure that actually having mod chips is a criminal act, though the DMCA may have made it so under many conditions. And if you're merely violating a EULA, that's generally a civil matter anyways -- not something that the police usually bust your door down for, though the RIAA seems to have gotten them to do that a few times lately. But selling mod chips as a way to run pirated games, that would be illegal.
I'm pretty sure the raids were done on those selling mod chips, not end users. But maybe you're next, you criminal Linux users you!
Typical of Microsoft praising thier ability to develop crap machines that scratch our discs, and void our warranty if we repair this defect. Oh and not only that they can raid the house of the person who sells a piece that fixes this defect. I've always made copies of every music CD I bought along with every Game I bought. More often than not I've taken it a step farther and gotten the no CD crack. It's extremly annoying having to stuff your noisy CD drive when you play a game. I bought a mod chip for my xbox so I could copy my games and play them on the road off the hard drive rather than swapping CD's. I pay for it, I should be able to use it in the matter thats consistent with my comforts.
This raises an important question: Are legitimate backup copies of a piece of software you own illegal under the DMCA?
False question. You don't own the software. You have purchased a license to use, nothing more.
I'm much against IP and such, but it is not helpful, at all, to rely upon this very weak, false, argument. You do not own the software!
If you can't figure out the distinction, let me give you an analogy. Pretend you are a stripper. Someone pays you $40 to give them a lap dance. Do they own you while you are giving them the lap dance? Or are they simply borrowing your time?
Now, replace "borrowing your time" with "license to use in a particular manner" and you have your answer. If you owned the software, you could change the license. Who owns World of Warcraft? Not you...Blizzard does. You merely have a license to use, in a particular way. I can't fathom why that is such a difficult concept for so many people.
Heaven forbid he is a student or kid in high school...
No I am not a troll. I have a different view to you, and to the guy who called me a 'moron' and accused me of having brain damage. It's what intelligent, reasonable people in the real world call a 'difference of opinion'. Such things can be discussed and debated rationally and sensibly, except on slashdot, where anyone who disagrees with the /. groupthink is hurled with abuse.
Your post is dripping with contempt for the people who actually make stuff. 'so-called inventors' is a great example. Who did invent the mentioned nintendo games console then? you? your mates? How much of the R&D budget for the device did you contribute?
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
Probably because the sellers think they'll make more money if they try to bind you in contracts. And they spend more money lobbying the government to get laws to assist with this sort of thing.And this sort of thing happens all the time with house sales. One big example? HOAs, and you tend to agree to their rules when you buy the house. If you don't, you can't buy the house. (HOAs are evil, yes, but they are real too.)
There are legitimate uses for mod chips beyond making legal backups. The console makers want us all to beleve that these uses are also illegal, but they aren't.
1) Playing import games. Playing imports has been popular for quite a while. The console makers hate it because it ruins their ability to control prices (even though the import scene has no effect on pricing) but it is perfectly legal.
2) Homebrew games. Many platforms have a decent homebrew game scene (going back to the begining of consoles.) It requires a mod chip to play these games on newer platforms.
3) General experimentation. People like throwing Linux on anything with a CPU. Consoles have some unique features that could be exploited for certain non-gaming applications.
Ever heard of licensing?
Pretend you are a stripper. Someone pays you $40 to give them a lap dance.
Best. Analogy. Ever.
$1600 salary is well above the poverty line, you should be ashamed of yourself. Yes, games are relatively expensive, but "access to games" isn't a constitutional right or a basic need to survive, its a manufactured product!
bullshit.
you think that VHS beat betamax by civil disobedience do you?
On what planet is the market not influenced by the products people buy then?
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
third party games are locked out of the system by design,. this is the console business model. This is how it works. If you want a completely free open gaming platform, you have the PC. The guys making consoles, and spending zillions on R&D do so on the basis that they can control licensing fees and selection of titles for that platform. This is their business plan, it is their product, and their right to do so.
If I lay railway track, I can do so on the basis that I demand a licence fee from any trains company wishing to ship freight on my track. if everyone starts driving on the track, my business model collapses, and has been undermined. This is no different.
I am a big supporter of the PC for being an open platform, that is mod friendly, and open to 3rd party developers like myself. hurrah for the PC. That's why I have a PC and not a console. That's my decision as a consumer. to dictate to a company that you want them to make the investment, but undermine their ability to recoup that investment, is clearly not going to work.
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
Your post is the biggest bunch of tripe I've seen in a long while. How much are the various legal professions paying you to post this crap?
As soon as you sell a product, it's no longer yours and you have no control over what's done with it, nor do you really want to. (Hint, think gun manufacturers)
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
You'd be asking the same questions I've got for this situation- as everyone should be asking those selfsame questions.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Per Milton Friedman, companies have no morals (and I would extend that to the people that run them). However back to the point. If GE or GM or whomever can get the Government to make a law that you can only use their filter or bolt or whichever part then you are in a bad position. These companies then can say it is not their "fault" but the Government said it is so, a very circular argument.
Along this line, I believe that the auto manufateurers one time attempted to get a law passed to make it illegal for person to work on their particular brand(s) unless trained by them. The reasoning they tried to push was that environmental and safety considerations could not be met. The rest of the story would be that you could only get trained if you worked for them or their authorized dealers and you would have to sign an agreement not use this information elsewhere.
I believe the parent was claiming that if you *buy* the house, then *you* should have the right to decide if you have pets, not the seller. Once you sell somebody a house, you no longer have the rights to dictate what they can and cannot do with the house, because you sold the rights to them. Why shouldn't the same common sense apply to electronics?
I guess you've never heard of home owners associations though, where you DO *own* the house but signed away your rights to do certain things. For example, building a fence.
I bought my Xbox in 2001 I believe. To be honest it was an amazing console. I loved that I could insert a CD and rip it to the xbox into a media library that could then be played in my games. What i didnt like was the CD's didnt at the time connect to the CD Database and named them for me. Therefor I learned to hate that feature very quickly. Using the dashboard to type in the CD names and song titles was wretched. Also the miniscule 8 gig drive filled up. With no way of adding a bigger drive...
Later that year I discovered a mod chip that would simply plug onto the motherboard and one screw to secure it to the board. All of the sudden I could drop in a 60 gig drive, later a 120 gig drive. Amazingly now I could store my entire CD collection on my Xbox, 60 CD's in all. I believe about 12 gigs worth of MP3. Add in Xbox Media Center (player back then) and I could pretty much play all my MP3's to my home theater system complete with playlists and visualizations.
Now because of the much bigger drive I copied some of my (Legally purchased) games directly to the hard drive. AMAZING load times were much faster. No more waiting forever to play Mercenaries. My Xbox became the center of my living room with it's feature rich entertainment possabilities. So far the uses mentioned are legal, well aside from this DMCA making it illegal to circumvent copyright.
My POV is simple. MS designed and gave us a game console with quite a bit of power and expandability. The mod community made this better and locked me into using the Xbox. I BUY games for it still to this day (The exception being if there is a PC port). I use my Xbox to play tunes when I dont feel like waiting 15 minutes for my winXP system to boot up and load all that garbage and do checks and stuff before the OS becomes usable.
Microsoft didnt fully "realize" the Xbox potential and underground groups brought that to light making something good better. Is there really anything wrong with that? I love mod chips and really believe they should stay. Modding Cars, Game consoles, houses pretty much everything is what people want, make it so.
(for comparison, look into the Car modding scene, it's HUGE. Now look at the Console mod... small due to litigation.)
No copyright infringement took place. Nothing was "circumvented." So what law would have been broken?
Right. And they did determine those terms, and they did offer it for sale, and he did buy it while complying with those terms, and then modded it after it was his own property, to do with what he wished (i.e., the definition of what "property" is!). So again, what law would have been broken?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Mod Chip Makers vs. bin laden, what a movie that would make.
Morning Edition July 2, 2007 Some 62 illegal immigrants in Beardstown, Ill., who worked for a company that cleans a pork processing plant, are preparing for deportation following an immigration raid. One family anticipated problems and has a house waiting in Mexico. Illegal Immigrants Anticipate More Raids
Do you want to hear a recital of all the stories like this that can be found in a one-minute search through Google?
As the largest investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is primarily a law enforcement agency. In addition to the core law enforcement occupations, there are also hundreds of professional and administrative functions that support the ICE mission. ICE has approximately 15,000 employees working in 400 offices nationwide and over 50 locations internationally. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
Why does it always surprise the Geek that law enforcement multi-tasks? That the game of life hasn't dealt him a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card?
1. Modchips are not "backup copies", legitimate or otherwise. They are, arguably, circumvention devices under the DMCA. Whether some of the games that some people play with them may be "legitimate backup copies" is a different issue.
2. I suspect the number of people using modchips to play "legitimate backups" is small compared to the number using modchips to play pirated copies.
3. If a particular copy is illegal (under the DMCA or otherwise), it is not a "legitimate" backup.
4. When a coordinated raid like this is done, its usually (there are exceptions) done based on evidence of some kind of coordinated enterprise. Even if people use modchips to play backups (technically illegal or not) of games they own legitimate copies of, I doubt very much that that's the focus of these raids.
Key words there, "sales contract". Most (all?) consumer electronics do not come with a sales contract, if they did you would have to sign one every time you purchase the item (and if it's anything substantial better let a lawyer look it over for you, imagine the lines at the store for that!) and it would be illegal for the store to sell it to you without the signed contract. Simply writing on the box "By purchasing this item you agree to ..." does not cut it as a legal contract.
Of course, all that is really immaterial, as the original question was whether mod chips are illegal under the DMCA, and the sad truth is they are (of course, if you twist it enough, just having a brain is illegal under the DMCA, after all it might allow you to bypass a copy protection device). The DMCA is a terrible piece of legislation and I still hold hope that it will be repealed one of these days, although that's probably too much to ask.
Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
I agree that corporations have no morals. They'd be killing homeless people for their organs if it was profitable and they could get away with it. My argument was that we should not allow this level of obligation, not that comapnies don't want it.
NEITHER DOES A FUCKING NINTENDO DS, DUMBASS!
Games have EULAs, but games aren't what the modchip gets applied to!
Hello, Mr. Fucking Pot! I'd like you to meet Mr. Kettle...
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
If I may recommend a modchip, check out the wiikey I use to import american games to the UK, so it should work for you as well. I got a friend of mine who is an electronics student to do the soldering, as I know nothing about it, but he said it was pretty easy.
Exactly how are modchips illegal, again?
Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
You'd think "Immigrations and Customs Enforcement" agents would be out looking for illegal aliens and smugglers, not playing copyright rent-a-cops. From the looks of things, its just easier for them to hunt down people who might have the technical means to infringe someone elses rights than it is to hunt down people who have actually committed crimes.
TFA doesn't have any details. Who did they raid? What did they confiscate? When did they do their investigation? Where were these "homes and businesses" located? Was there any _real_ criminal activity going on?
I'm thinking about modding my Wii so I can run imported games. Still no Super Paper Mario in Europe. Nintendo, I would like to give you my money. Please allow me to do so.
Just adding another legitimate use to the list of legitimate mod chip uses.
Dissatisfaction with the market does not act as an excuse to break the law.
No, but dissatisfaction with an unjust law does, though as Thoreau pointed out, if you're going to knowingly break the law to make a point, you have to be ready to take the punishment. If I want to modify hardware that I purchased, I don't see any reason I shouldn't be able to do that...regardless of my intent. If I want to illegally copy other's intellectual property, that's a different story. That, in itself is illegal, and rightly so, but it shouldn't be illegal to dismantle, modify, drop from the roof, or do anything else I want to do with a device that I have purchased.
ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
Just because something is a business model doesn't mean I have any legal obligation not to break it. A company does not have any legal right to have a successful business model, something the RIAA still hasn't figured out yet.
If I lay railway track, I can do so on the basis that I demand a licence fee from any trains company wishing to ship freight on my track. if everyone starts driving on the track, my business model collapses, and has been undermined. This is no different.This is totally different. If everyone told you to shove your license fee and went and built tracks that ran parallel to yours instead of paying to use your tracks your business model would be undermined just the same, but that doesn't mean anybody did anything illegal. A business model is not a legal right! You do not have the right to succeed, only the right to attempt to.
to dictate to a company that you want them to make the investment, but undermine their ability to recoup that investment, is clearly not going to work.Any company that makes a product (investment) must undertake the risk that they will fail. It's the cost demanded of a free market that success is not guaranteed.
Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
http://www.mhall119.com
Nearly a year ago I witnessed them screaming "put the burrito down!" Interesting mixture of impulse to laugh and urge to cry.
/shakes head at system & walks away
It may sound humorous now, but neither ICE or the console owners are giggling about it.
I'll believe in corporations having personhood when Texas executes one... - advocate_one
I don't get to set terms for what you do with my car, or my house, or my pencil, after you buy it.
Actually, that's incorrect, at least insofar as real property (as opposed to personal property) goes; look up covenants running with the land and equitable servitudes.
geek. lawyer.
Uh-huh. [Stupid] people don't even read contracts they sign, actual contracts -- why would they pay a lawyer?As for consumer electronics, they often have an EULA. Is it enforcible? Should it be enforcible? Should they even have EULAa? I don't know, though I'm inclined to say `no' on the last one. I certainly don't approve of the idea, but to just blindly say that they don't count would be foolish.
People would blindly sign their contracts, especially if they got a free cookie for doing so. Only a few would insist on reading it carefully. I wonder if the iPhone was sold with a contract to be signed? I know that at least for a while, when you bought a Tivo you explicitly signed a contract and agreed to sign up for service for X amount of time when you bought it. You signed right on the sales form, just like you would for a credit card purchase.
Contracts could also be put in with a rebate form -- you get $200 back, but only if you agree to this contract.
Don't delude yourself into thinking they can't make consumers explicitly sign contracts because it's too hard/slow. If they think there's a buck in it, they'll find a way to make it happen.
In your opinion. According to Wikipedia's EULA page, the enforceability of shrink-wrap licenses is still unclear.As a mentioned in another reply, you don't sign away your rights to build a fence, you sign away your rights to build a fence in the HOA's neighborhood. Furthermore, either you agree to give the HOA the right to decided on that when you purchased the house, or some previous owner did and no longer has the ability to give you that right. Either way, the purchase agreement should have declared that the right to put up a fence was not conveyed to you as part of the purchase. If there was no HOA when you purchased your house, then one cannot come along after the fact and tell you that you cannot build a fence, because you already had that right and did not consent to giving it away.
http://www.mhall119.com
You obviously have never heard of the XLink Kai network. You can run a daemon on your router which will redirect all XBOX Live requests to a free online gaming network. This can be used with both modded or unmodded XBOXs.
Would Nintendo license the DS to another company to do exactly what it does now plus run Linux on it? I don't think that's very likely. It isn't like the DS hardware licensing is on the market like Blu-Ray is.
More Twoson than Cupertino
> Are legitimate backup copies of a piece of software you own illegal under the DMCA?"
The question doesn't make any sense. If they're legitimate, then they're legal by their very nature. If they're illegal, then they're not legitimate. It's like asking `what happens if an irresistible force meets an unmovable object`.
That's not quite a fair comparison, but the question is still interesting. I say the the "unmovable object" is destroyed in its place by the "irresistible force."In some areas medical marijuana is legal. If you have a handful plants, you're OK. If you have 500, than maybe you're not in it for the medicinal qualities. There aren't any details here, but in the past when the feds have done raids, its been agaisnt people making and selling the mod chips, not simply using one.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. - Jefferson
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Yeah, pirating is pretty common in the states and everyone has easy access to it with a descent internet connection. People can download ROMS and emulators for basically any system. Sure, you won't be able to play some on-line games, but it won't stop the determined. Try going to the Philippines and looking around for a game or a movie. You won't find a legal copy before you find a pirated version. North America and Europe aren't really the best place to look for rampant piracy.
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
You seem to be forgetting these things called `contracts'.
and i must be having some kind of amnesia as i don't remember ever signing any contract to buy a DS.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Freedom versus the Illusion of of Freedom and all you are losing now is your illusion of freedom. Welcome back to the Gilded Age where all the rights belong to the business interests and where your government uses it's police powers not to find Osama Bin Laden, but to find the kid who has a mod chip in their Xbox so they can play those hideously illegal imported Japanese games. It's not for the common good, it's not the best use of limited resources, it's the use of those limited resources to help protect poor downtrodden Microsoft. It's the use of your government resources for whoever pays your Congressman the most money. Not for you, not yours. Your rights to unionize have been taken away, your jobs have been outsourced to other countries where slave labor wages can be paid and you've been led by the nose to believe it's for your own good and to 'compete on the world stage' and only now is there a tiny bit of noise when your Engineer and IT jobs are being outsourced to India or through those work visas. It ends up sort of being a Nazi paradise with government for the Corporations, by the Corporations with you and I asked to wave the flags while believing we're all suspects and under surveillance for the good of the country. Long live the fatherland and you there with the Xbox, stop or we'll shoot.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
said modchip is illegal under the DMCA, regardless of intent.
which is yet another reason why the DMCA needs to be ripped into little pieces, then ripped into littler pieces, and then burned and the ashes cast into the wind.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
It was less hilarious when "pirates" (not ninjas, mind you) were compared to communists. After all, ideas of communism and "piracy" are somewhat similar. Now, they are compared to t.s, but it doesn't make sense. You see, communists want free stuff, t.s want to kill people. Most modern pirates just want free entertainment at home. True, the obsolete meaning of "pirate" was something like a t., but still... This is silly. Remember, free home entertainment without the fear of getting busted is one of the pillars of an obedient society. I mean, seriously, you govt people need to ENCOURAGE free entertainment, not ban it!
Disclaimer: I am forced to make this disclaimer by the fact that I am in the US right now: I was just kidding. I believe in capital punishment for anybody that copies even a single bit without written permission by the bit copyright holder.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
The point is that companies will, if they think they can get way with it, lock you into their product in every way possible. While it isn't, and shouldn't, be illegal to install other software on a console, you be damned sure that the manufacturers are working their butss off trying to figure out how to stop you.
Even if that doesn mean they sell less consoles...they want to control you, or they won't touch you.
[ cruise / casual-tempest.net / xenogamous.com / transference.org / quantam sufficit ]
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
It is interesting that you comment about all the stuff they are forced to do to stop you from being able to use your system if the game is pirated but neglect to take that into consideration with the 3 billion in costs.
I don't agree with the number either, but it would seem to me that the cost of combating pirating is included in the actual losses from sales. And this doesn't touch on the IFs of would that person buy the game anyways if he couldn't get it for free.
Personally, I don't think people would spend the money on the games. That's why they pirated them. You rarely find a casual thief that can afford to buy something and go through the trouble of stealing it instead. They obviously think the value doesn't match the price and while maybe they would steal it again, they likely wouldn't buy it outright.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
what evil piece of patent tomfoolery means that Nintendo did not invent the wii? I'm sure if you spent the last 4 years working on the design of the thing, you would be very hacked off to hear some random slashdot poster call you a 'so-called inventor'.
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
and i must be having some kind of amnesia as i don't remember ever signing any contract to buy a DS. Indeed, amnesia would explain it. I was referring to the analogy given of buying a house, not a DS.
Let's not forget that HOA contracts often (particularly in Florida, Texas) in fact give them the ability to foreclose on your house if you owe them fees. Remember, you can run up credit card debt in the tens of thousands and your card company can't do that, but if you didn't pay your HOA fees... Actually, some of the acts undertaken in the name of HOAs transcend evil, and are illegal too: towing vehicles that are guests of a property owner, illegal fines levied, as well as good old huge contract violations .
...unless the license to use the book prohibits selling it.
You don't own a copy of the software, you own a cd that has the software on it. If you buy a book, and the publisher somehow had a license that you couldn't resell it, then you could still resell the paper, just not the book. Because yes, you own the cd...just not what is on the cd.
You also need to stop thinking about CDs and such, because if that is what you're going to base an argument on, then your argument is also getting weaker by virtue of the fact that more and more software is, and will be, network-distributed. What will your retort be when you don't even have a physical chunk of media with the software on it?
Instead you should be addressing the underlying issue itself, that of IP. Knocking copyrights and patents down to 10-20 years, and forcing the holders to actually do something with them would be a start...then the Verizon v Vonage thing wouldn't happen, for instant. All sorts of things, really...right now we have a system that does nothing more than stiffle innovation, by preventing people from using the IP.
No! Hardware is not covered by a license and you are not renting the stuff! Hardware is a thing, you buy it, you can do whatever you want with it! Show me, quote for me, any law that states otherwise! True, the DMCA states you can't have any devices that circumvent copy protection. But the device the gp described was being used to run Linux, not to circumvent any kind of copy protection measure!
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
from copying the dance
telling people about the dance
teaching people how to do the dance
because this is what copyright does that is different from your "lapdance" analogy.
I don't live in a police state :)
but your Nintendo DOES have copyrighted software on it, even without a disk in the drive.
No sir! I now have an open source custom bootloader flashed on it. The first instructions the ARM processors run the uploaded program I installed. Lots of good people in the DSLinux community understood the basic hardware and enjoyed making a complete system from scratch. The ARM7 and ARM9 processors are well documented and so is the hardware on the DS. I don't see why it would be a FEDERAL offense for someone to write their own software. Maybe a judge somewhere will listen one day without taking money.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I would say that it's a right since it is an exception to a law (i.e., these practises under the Fair Use section are not considered copyright infringement) and the Ninth Amendment.
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
so my question is WTF is any branch of DHS doing enforcing the DMCA?
which is the same question the GGP is asking.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
You most certainly can sell a house that includes certain conditions that are part of the sales contract.
... ITS NOT A DAMNED HOUSE!
But what I do with my gamecube in my own privacy will not affect the families next to me. I can remodel my device, paint it pink with yellow polkadots, install a new kitchen sink on the processor, and no one will care! Care factor is ZERO! No one buys a gamecube with a mortgage contract. It doesn't need city inspection for safety, gas, or electrical mains. It doesn't need to be inspected for termites, mold,
I didn't sign any contract when I bought my ds or wii. I did sign a contract when I rented my apartment. That's the difference.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
What if you "roll your own" modchip out of a PIC or Atmel chip? It's possible and I have a fair lot of those chips lying around at home, simply 'cause I tend to spend some time toying with them in general. Am I now a criminal mastermind modchip creator, just because I have the tools required to make them?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
How do you rebut the point that the terms of the contract are not disclosed when buying a console? Should one party have the right to enforce a contract that the other party has not agreed to, and doesn't even know about? That seems very authoritarian of you. It's almost as if you believe that anyone with money and power should be able to dictate terms unilaterally to those of us without. That's not really what you believe, is it?
If game console manufacturers business model depends on limiting your freedom to use the device you purchase, shouldn't this be stated more clearly? Especially when it goes against all expectations about what the sale of an electronic device means? But that would hurt their profits.
So really, this 'business model' that you are defending is based on misleading the consumer. You are defending outright fraud.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
In any event, HOAs were only given as an example of where this is done in real life, something people were familiar with. I never claimed it was analagous to Nintendo sales -- that was somebody else's analogy to make. And in the case of home sales, there's nothing preventing a seller of fine mobile homes to include a clause that you agree not to put pink flamingos in front of it, no matter where you decide to put it. Perhaps such a clause would be found to be unenforcible later, but that would be for a court to decide.
Back to Nintendos. Currently you don't sign an explicit contract when you buy one. This could change in the future, and the manufacturers/vendors could make it happen if they felt it was cost-effective to do so. And people would blindly sign without even reading it. If shrink wrap licenses are found to be weaker in the future, we'll probably find more consumer electronics devices require the explicit signing of a contract at purchase, or you'll have to explicitly agree to a EULA when putting it online for the first time, and it won't work until put online and you agree to this.
As for the strength of shrink wrap licenses, the jury is still out. Court cases have found them to be un-enforcible, and court cases have found them to be enforcible. It depends on the specifics. We may not like the idea, but that won't stop laws and courts from doing things that we don't like.
Some contracts are written in such a way that they can be amended in the future, usually only by one party. They have to send you notice, and you can either cancel the service or do nothing, and doing nothing means you agree to the terms. This is very popular for credit card contracts, for example. It sucks for the consumer, as most don't bother to even read the new terms, and even if you do there's little you can do about it except leave, but it's the way things are.I'm not saying that Nintendo is doing this, or that they should do this -- but it's possible.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
What does this have to do with copies?
Oh, right, yeah. I forgot. Even though all the modchip does is let me use my hardware the way i want it to, its only use MUST be piracy!
Guess I better stop using XBMC and start just copying moviez and gamez!
No sir! I now have an open source custom bootloader flashed on it. The first instructions the ARM processors
Actually, your bootloader is probably still copyrighted. Most open source software is still copyrighted.
Allow me to correct your typo:
"in the silos of their so-called investors"
You don't need brains to hold a patent, you just need to write something stupid on the application, and staple your fee check to it.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Mod chips are capable of Substantial Non-Infringing Uses. As such, they should not be banned, should be legal under the Betamax decision, and the federal government has no business protecting corporate profits against legal uses of purchased and owned personal game consoles.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Probably because they have no way of verifying that you owned the original unless you send back an old copy.
Though they would likely charge you a shipping and handling fee as well as a materials fee for the new disk itself.
Some publishers do offer stuff like that.
http://www.mhall119.com
awwww, sorry I forgot to tell that was my monthly salary. Anyway, it's a 3.75% every month assuming you only buy one game which is usually not true.
But there absolutely should not be any such law to begin with. What happened to property rights? He purchased the DS, so he should have the right to take it apart and hack at it however he sees fit. If the people making the device haven't taken this into account, then they need to design, finance, and make their products with the customer's rights in mind. Make a profit through a solid understanding of the market and respect for your customers, not through the ham-handed enforcement of bad laws.
Copyright infringement was already illegal. We didn't need to come up with another law to try to tack one more offense onto the real software pirates' records, while trampling over thousands of legitimate users in the process.
...the feds are going to come knocking at my door because I use a mod device to play import PS2 games. OH-FUCKING-NOES. There are so many things in this world that make me angry, the whole wind-up and cool-down thing in between being pissed off is just too much effort, it isn't worth it to ever NOT be pissed off anymore...
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
Why do you keep talking as though by adding a mod chip to a ds or wii or anything else the company is losing money on the console?
The game company has the potential to lose but Nintendo has nothing to lose by allowing mods. I still have to buy the console before I put the chip in to it. They shouldn't care what I do with it after I buy it from them, sure they can come up with a way to make it so I can't use a burned disc online to try to make sure I'm not pirating a game. It would end up like PC games, I can pirate the hell out of it and play by myself or on a lan but if I try to go online it says sorry no can do until I put in the real thing. Problem solved for 90% of the people.
"However, the DMCA does make creating, selling, distributing, and importing the tools to make backups illegal".
That would include all computers with permanent storage of any kind.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
I object to the notion that owning any amount of modchips, whether for personal use or to sell to others, should be illegal.
Except that you are only buying the hardware.
The firmware/software are licensed to use. You dont actually get ownership.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
why do you pro-piracy, anti copyright buffoons always have to shout and swear on here? it just makes you look like six year olds. Learn some new words kiddies.
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
The house buying analogy might not be the best. I was kinda shocked to find out that many homes you buy new, or even used in a relatively new subdivision may bind you into an agreement to what you can, and cannot do with your house. Some don't allow flags, some will only let you paint certain colors, fine you if you don't keep yard up, etc. I think they are called Home Associations...and you cannot buy the home unless you join, etc.
I don't personally see that this is right, but, then again, I'm starting to see that even in the US, you never truly OWN any land or home....you just rent it.
Just try not paying your taxes (rent) on the property, and see how long you really do 'own' it.....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I still don't see how these things are enforceable. I mean, you supposedly OWN the land the house is on, correct? How can you be forced to sign away rights as to what to do you 'your' land?
I'm surprised there hasn't been some discrimination or other type of infringment suit brought against a HOA which would not allow you to buy a home if you didn't sign a HOA agreement?
Man..when I get lottery money, I've got some interesting cases I want to bring on things....like this.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Why does everyone assume there are/should be laws protecting party X's business model? Nothing in the Constitution says you have the unalienable right to continue making money off of the same method you've always used. Times change, change your model. Civil rights and consumer rights should always have top billing, anything else will lead us to plutocracy.
A libertarian shat on my carpet once. Claimed the free market would sort it out. -Ford Prefect(8777)
Regardless of how much is spent on R&D for the device, you are missing the fact that that cost is covered in the price of the item. What does it matter how much they spent developing it? Did they invent the plastic that it contains? No? But wait, what about all the R&D that GE Plastics or whoever put into years ago to fabricate the process used to create the plastic, did they get a signed contract stating they can use it for the DS? Oh right... they paid for that plastic so they get to use it how they see fit. So to answer your question, he paid whatever percentage of profit they made off of the sale that was allocated to cover the R&D cost.
Walk with Music;
You're right, the legality of a EULA has yet to be proven one way or another, although some recent rulings seem to indicate it's not as enforceable as some companies would like. But as to your two examples, both of those items have a service contract associated with them which makes them a slightly different beast than normal consumer electronics. The catch with both of those items is they are explicitly NOT sold without a service contract, and it's the service that you're signing the contract for, not the item itself.
Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
A government by, for, and of the corporatist-plutocrats is allowed many inalienable freedoms to prosecute Citizens with government assistance for the profit of the few to the determent of the many.
If you don't like it find someplace better to live that is free of oppression and exploitation of the people.
You can't name one place/country/... any better than EU & US can you. So, why whine when we will always be number one at something slightly better than indentured servitude, providing a far better living standard then anywhere in the whole world, and we are alot better off than those girl/woman slavery countries in Africa, Asia, Arabia (we [in the USA] can even export into slavery our beautiful poor girls for profits, ain't no trade balance problem in the flesh/sex trade). Now who do you think is delusional [AKA: Fycking nuts].
It is so very sad that public square floggings, lynchings, and burnings are no longer an option for weekend public entertainment in the EU or US families and children after attending mandatory religious services.
!HAVEFUN!
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
PS. bahhh...replied to the wrong parent before so reposting
Walk with Music;
There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
Could everyone stop with the house analogies? A house sits on property, as of right now there is a very distinct finite amount of property available, and you can't move it. This makes houses (that sit on property) an entirely different animal, and not comparable to consumer products AT ALL, and in that vein even MORE different then completely intangible things like information (ideas, music, software, etc...).
A libertarian shat on my carpet once. Claimed the free market would sort it out. -Ford Prefect(8777)
and since we were originally talking about a DS/otherconsole, the house analogy is completely irrelevant to it. while it is possible for them to make you sign a contract to the effect, they didn't, thus you should be able to do pretty much anything you want to do with it.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
http://www.mhall119.com
This argument about backup copies and "illegal" copies is a strawman. The game companies put those "protections" into their systems to control who writes programs for their computers. (yes, game systems are fully operational computers.) It has nothing to due with copyright other than software companies claim their EULAs are valid because of copyright law.
IANAL, but I do not see how under any legal theory EULAs could be considered valid. First off, you generally aren't shown the EULA before you buy the product, in my jurisdiction that constitutes a blank contract which isn't valid. You don't even sign it anyway, so where is the agreement on the part of the buyer? Secondly, the companies say EULAs are enforcable because you have to agree when you copy the software to your system. In a game console you don't copy the firmware at all. Even if it is copied to RAM, it is highly dubious to apply copyright law because copyright law was ment to apply and applies to distribution, not simple copying.
I have a Nintendo DS, and I want to program it so I can use it as a PDA / portable computer and such. I bought it, I own it. There is no legitimate reason for me to be forbidden to use it in such a manner. In fact, the game companies should be charged with deceptive practices and possibly antitrust voilations for putting such "antitampering" "features" into their products.
With the law clearly infringing upon an owner's right to perform non-infringing activities with his own property illustrates that the law itself is a bad law.
Wow, sounds just like the draconian non-smoking laws that tell a private business that certain legal activities cannot be done on premise...
"But this one goes to 11!"
In the UK some EULAs are illegal. For example, copyright law gives me the right to reverse engineer something in order for it to work with something else. Any EULA that attempts to prevent me from doing that is illegal.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I can't believe this ridiculously poorly written article ever hit the presses. I've never owned a chipped system, but I'd have bought a chipped XBOX over an iTV or whatever in a heartbeat if it weren't for the risk of this sort of petty nonsense and the fact that the open sourced Neuros OSD hit the market and my living room at the same time I last considered such a purchase. Submitted the following to the Associated Press:
I'd like to submit a correction for the article reprinted here, written by one "Federal Agents Go After Gaming Pirates Discussion at PhysOrgForum": http://www.physorg.com/news105194834.html
Your author not only prominently quotes Myers saying that modchips have only "one purpose," facilitating piracy, but implicitly states the same fallacy the paragraph before. The Wikipedia article and every vendor go to great lengths to point out numerous uses that would have been perfectly legitimate and perfectly legal prior to the 1996 DMCA, and still perfectly moral and ethical and permissible in many other countries.
Modchips enable open source developers with every right under their license to Linux to port that operating system to the XBOX, to create full-fledged media players that beat the iTV to market by YEARS, ala the XMBC. Additionally, these modchips have allowed hobby game developers to do just that for decades. Other modchips do NOTHING aside from disable region code lockouts on consoles and DVD players.
This article is a joke. The incredible disregard shown by the facts of the situation shown by your reporter should have serious consequences - Would it have killed the lazy fellow to Google this term that was so apparently new and foreign to him?
Only in America pirating and file sharing placed above other criminal activities, surly this is a mister meaner, oh sry i forgot America doesn't give a dam about its ppl which is why your social care is one of the worst in the world of the developed nations you have no universal health care, you still support capitol punishment but criticise other countries when they use the death penalty and are run by warmongering capitalists.
Q. how much did the operation cost the American tax payer?
The American dream lives on Sieg Heil Bush.
The Truth Is Out There:
Here in the US, the authorities ignore the public interest and cater to corporate interests, while over in Germany they ignore the corporations and cater to the public interest. un-fricken-believable.
I know this is not the case with the Nintendo DS because Nintendo's policy has always been not to do this, but many game consoles are sold to the consumer at a loss. So your PS2 and Xbox actually cost more to make than you paid for them. Same with the PSP. They sell the console to you at a loss under the presumption that you will purchase games from their partners, putting licensing fees in their pockets that will more than make up for the loss.
So, yeah. The companies that make game consoles have a vested interest in not allowing you to just run whatever software you want to on there, because buying games is what gets them their money.
(Again, though, Nintendo's policy has always been to sell their consoles at a profit. So even with the Wii being as cheap as it is, it's not sold at a loss but the Playstation 3 is. Wild!)
There's a difference though. They've designed the product to work in such a way that prevents me from using competitors supplies. However, once I've purchased their product, I'm free to do whatever I want to it, including workarounds to use third-party supplies. With consoles, they have already implemented these features that make it hard to use games they don't want me to buy (region encoding, etc). If I find a means to circumvent this (say, a mod chip) so I can play backups or games sold in another region, why shouldn't I be allowed to do that? Why does the law need to be invovled? Its one thing if I'm caught committing copyright infringement by downloading games I haven't purchased, but possession of a mod chip alone shouldn't be committing any sort of crime any more than putting a third-party ink cartridge in your printer should. Which is, not at all.
The WHOLE POINT of the DMCA is that it does away with the concept of "fair use" copying, for any creative work that's protected by an "effective" (their term) technological copy-prevention system. The "intent" of the modchip manufacturers doesn't enter into it - if the device is primarily designed to foil a copy-prevention system, then it's illegal.
Modchip manufacturers could certainly implement a system where the modchip was linked in some way to the copying system, to prevent secondary copies. That idea has two basic problems:
1. Making the first copy is illegal under the DMCA, so it doesn't actually help their legal stance at all.
2. Eliminating interoperability would take away the primary market for this device - people who want to play copies of games without buying the originals - i.e. "pirates". We all know that there are "legitimate" uses of these chips, but the vast majority of the people who buy them aren't interested in those uses.
You're incorrect on this one.
It only redirects LAN-mode games (from ANY console, not just X-Box)-- XBL modes are not supported at all due to a heavily-encrypted client-server protocol that nobody has really done anything to try to reverse engineer.
It runs on more than just a router, it's also a PC-side application.
Here is a simple solution to the whole problem, QUIT BUYING THE GAME CONSOLES!
If people just quit buying them in protest of this cr@p the maufactures would get the message really damn quick - it would hit them in the bottom line - loss of sales - loss of $$$$.
People do nothing but whine and moan about not being able to "backup" their games, play imports, yada-yada-yada. Show the **IAA, the government, and business you want to be able to do this - it's called choice in competition. Show them things like the DMCA can backfire on them. If the corporations want to give money to the politicians to pass a$$inine laws like the DMCA show them what you think about it - show them how much money they will lose doing these kinds of things.
Simply QUIT buying the consoles, STOP buying the games! Sooner or later they HAVE to get the message...
But, people are too busying sitting on their a$$e$, shoving cheetos in their mouths with a game controler in hand b!tching instead of DOING something about it.
Boycotts DO work if you just stick to it. Don't think you HAVE to have the latest greatest console and game from whatever manufacturer you prefer. If you can't control yourself from buying it, your ADDICTED, just like a crack addict, and it shows they controll you instead of you showing control of yourself.
I quit buying consoles/games years ago, until this kind of cr@p stops - they won't get MY money!
The Truth is a Virus!!!
If your kids tear pages out of some of your books, do you think that publishers should give you another copy for "just the cost of media?"
Your argument is absurd, this was never expected from book or magazine publishers, VHS tapes or DVDs, why do you expect that software companies should give you a disc that got destroyed?
Maybe you should keep things out of reach of your kids if they are that destructive.
You don't see how you've signed away the right to build a fence of the HOA says no? Well you can split hairs all you like, but you still won't be allowed to build a fence. Also FWIW, the association doesn't own the neighborhood; each plot of land is owned by individuals, and the street is public property.
The blanket statement that said "I own it, I can do what I want with it" is what I was addressing. Nothing more, nothing less. I wasn't arguing as to the validity of no mod chip policies, just trying to show that even when you do own something there can be limits placed on you (either by a private party or government).
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Nintendo makes money on licensing of games sold as well. If they force you to buy more copies of games by doing this, they'll make more money, and attract more developers to their hardware by showing that they're hard on piracy and won't put up with we customers trying to think we're more than mere consumers. It's not that hard to understand.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
You got ownership of that copy of the firmware. When selling a console nobody presents a license to which you can consent or reject, they just take your money and give you a copy of a copyrighted work. Period.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Sure, they could present terms to which buyers must agree when offering it for sale. But they don't. They just take your money and give you the machine. There are no terms whatsoever.
They certainly can't dictate terms of use on things that aren't theirs.
The US hasnt been free since before Bush took office.
09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
+2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
The firmware/software are licensed to use. You dont actually get ownership. But that's exactly the point. They're busting people for modding their devices, not for pirating software.
Bullish Machine Tzar
While I haven't bought a console in quite a long time so there is the possiblility that I might be mistaken here, but I don't think you are getting a license to use an XBOX when you buy one. You OWN the damn thing and can void the warranty all you like. If you chose to take it apart that is totally your business what you do with it once EBGames or whoever has put your cash in their register.
If you buy a toatser do they have the right to raid your house if you purchase some magic slot widing device so you can fit a whole english muffin in there, I doubt it.
What amazes me is that from my understanding of the Betamax thing is that from past precident that mod chips should be fine since, as some people have posted here and in the comments on TFA, they the only way to run alternative OS's (Linux) on these systems is to mod it.
I wonder if anyone who has been raided is in this situation and if tha lack of pirated games will be a defence or if they are screwed either way
I didn't use a strawman; I cited an actual case where you can own something and be restricted in its use. I think you should check the definition of the strawman argument, far too many people here use it like you have (which is also part of the definition of strawman).
You really need to go back and read the thread; I was attacking the example of owning a home which itself was a strawman for pro-mod chip argument.
You know backing up is all great and wonderful. But in the end without some trick you cannot play the disc.
Why not invest a couple hundred dollars into a disc buffing system? Honestly there would be no need to keep backups if you kept your discs clean.
You need to read your contract/EULA better.
Its a right to use contract for the $ you paid. You only recourse for not agreeing is returning it for a refund ( also stated in the contact )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Modding normally involves some sort of change to the firmware. I never said 'pirating software'. Just modifying it is against the EULA. Any use of the firmware/software that isnt permitted by them isnt allowed legally.
Now, for the record i personally feel its *my* box to do with as i please once i fork over the cash and take it home. But its not what i think that matters here, its the court.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Of course, if you're, say, a state treasurer, you could always claim that those 200 mod chips were for personal use, since you intended to share them / give them away to people, rather than sell them. Hey, it works for someone who just scored almost 500 grams of coke.
Your post is dripping with contempt for the people who actually make stuff. 'so-called inventors' is a great example. Who did invent the mentioned nintendo games console then? you? your mates? How much of the R&D budget for the device did you contribute?
The entire point of a market (free or otherwise) is that goods are commodities, which means in general that there is no difference between a good created at Nintendo and one created by me. That implies that the same rights apply to a bought game station as one that is home made. Obviously copyright, patent, and trademark laws put some restrictions on this idea, but I don't think that playing games you wrote yourself is a violation of any of those rights, or should be in any possible case.
If you want to be realistic, everyone who has ever bought anything from Nintendo has personally funded their R&D budget. Money doesn't grow on trees, and even investors expect the revenue from customers to pay their dividends.
The EULA is irrelevant. They already sold you that copy of the firmware without your acceptance of any contract. It became yours with no special terms attached. They can't later present a contract which forces you to give back something that is now yours. If you don't think so then I have a contract for you:
You agree to pay me one million dollars in exchange for the continued use of your own computer. If you do not agree, your only recourse is to return your computer to sell or return your computer.
Do you agree?
Are you suggesting that judges become *gasp* activists?
Perhaps that jurists become activists... which seems fine to me. After all, jurists are the citizenry, and the citizenry can be activist -- in fact, they *should* be activist.
i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
If you find the concept of owning property to be irrational than it is clearly you that is the idiot.
Okay for the uninformed and non local to you (mwah), what is an HOA?
Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
Your post is dripping with contempt for the people who actually make stuff. 'so-called inventors' is a great example.
I'm a Computer Engineer. I design (proprietary) hardware. In my spare time, I'm a Software Engineer. I design (open-source) software. I am perfectly well aware of how difficult the design process is from both sides of the equation, and have no contempt what so ever for the hard-working individuals who work night and day so us geeks can have new toys to play with.
Who did invent the mentioned nintendo games console then? you? your mates?
The aforementioned hard-working individuals did. And you know what? They often hold neither the patents nor copyrights to their work (since their development time has been bought) so I fail to see how the actual developers factor into this discussion. The contempt that drips from me is specifically towards "so-called" inventors. Individuals or groups of individuals that claim incredibly obvious or non-original ideas as their own, and end up owning them due to slip-ups in the way the current intellectual property system is structured.
However, you're steering this discussion away from where we started from. I do not believe that anyone (not the inventor, developer, financer, or any other group) has the right to tell me what I can and cannot do with their product (except re-distribution in the case of easily reduplicated products, but copyright covers this).
If they want to impose restrictions above and beyond those which are already offered by copyright and trademarks (NDAs are very common with commercial hardware development packages), these restrictions must be agreed to and signed by both parties before the time of sale.
If modifying hardware breaks someone's business model, they can 1) adapt with a better business model, such as charging more up-front, or 2) cease to manufacture the good.
For a great example of a very poor business model that's been destroyed by hardware modifications, check out Pure Digital / CVS Disposable Camcorders. You are supposed to buy them (cheap), use them, and return them (for resale). I bought 5 of them and modified them to have USB ports (=added/enabled extra functionality, exactly like the modchips we are discussing here) and have no intention of returning them.
Is it your view that I've done something wrong here? I paid them what they asked for the camera, but once I walked out of the store with it.. it's mine.
DJ kRYPT's Free MP3s!
750,000 jobs?? For comparaison: the WHOLE I.B.M. employs only 322,000 people, Microsoft employs 71,000 people, and E.A.(a good-size game development house) employs only 3,600 people. Do they dare claim that Modchips cost the industry losses of the number of jobs equivalent to more then 200 good-size game-development companies?
Now on to profits. 200 billion per year to the "economy"? Assuming this is at 15% sales tax rate, this means that value of games sold altogether is about 1.33 TRILLION dollars. (I assume the sales tax goes "to economy" the rest goes to the game company). Even at $100/game, this is about 13.3 BILLION game sales losses per year, or about 36,529,680 game sales losses PER DAY. To put this in context: if EVERY USA resident has a game console, this means that EVERY day one in eight pirates a game...
I would like to have a chat with the math teacher of whoever came up with those numbers...
-------
1. Enjoy your job
2. Make lots of money
3. Work within the law
Choose any two.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Yes, times change. The Constitution doesn't, unless modified by process contained within itself. It is, after all, the Supreme Law of this Land, and if we don't give it even more importance than any of the various purported "Words of God", we're in for even more grief. The Constitution served us well until we decided to ignore it, and the wisdom of the Founders. The truth of the matter is that you're right, we have changed ... and for the worse, but not in any ways that obsolete the Constitution. Quite the opposite, in fact.
We should get back to listening to the Founding Fathers before we end up another failed, corrupt third-world culture like that of our friends south of the border. It is happening, and the pace is quickening. So be damned careful before you dis the Constitution, bro.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Everyone has to ask a few important questions to themselves here. Are we really in danger from mod chips? Are they ruining our economy? Are there not more important matters to hold the attention of the police authorities? Are we willing to just ignore the fact that big fat corporate dollars are influencing the way in which crimes are handled (or rather real crimes are not handled due to perverted alternations in police priorities)? Are we willing to put into law the necessary laws to stop big corporate from taking away our police authorities from their normal jobs of fighting real crimes such as rape, murder, theft, assault, arson, kitty cats caught in trees (ohhh, sorry that's the fire department), drug dealing, etc?
No way could these guys have been stealing sufficient business away from anyone to justify this sort of raid and the manpower behind it necessary to carry it off. Did big corporate such as Microsoft pay the police authorities (directly or indirectly) to push to stop the sale and distribution of a few mod chips that could barely even create any noticeable impact of crime on any industry.
This raid was designed to make a statement to modders. It is that they are willing and capable of manipulating our police authorities for even the lowest of priority alleged crimes.
To top that off, no crime has really been committed. It is silly to even allow these raids to take place for something that is realistically question of a DMCA violation.
From what I understand the only mod chips are available for xboxes--and possibly not even for the new Xbox 360. So they are raiding these businesses and homes for a few mod chips for a specific machine produced by a huge criminally convicted monopolist that is known for stealing IP and destroying other companies.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
What would make me covered if I bought it used? Nothing. I could never be considered covered by any contract because I purchased the unit at resale. Unless they are willing to say it is not possible to resell a piece of hardware. That'd be ridiculous. They also cannot create a contract with you because you need to agree to the contract before you purchase.
I can't understand how you think that someone selling mod chips are harming anyone. If they are using it to play stolen games then it is up to them to prove the games are stolen. This is an abuse of the DMCA. The DMCA was written with the intent of large domestic and foreign corporates from stealing in this manner. If a large corporate was reproducing the mod chips instead of some poor geeky guys working at home we'd have something to question but we'd also have a group capable of defending themselves from abuses such as these.
Bottom line, these are not big enough to do any harm to any industry. If you want to copy movies you can already do it, period. You don't even need a mod chip. Just download software from somewhere out of the US and you are good to go.
This is simply big fat corporate abusing the police authorities time and money--essentially the taxpayer's money.
We should be complaining more about their abuse than about some poor geeks using mod chips to run Linux or whatever.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
I added them up. Over $1,000 USD spent on XBOX games since we bought our console in 2001. And that was just the discs that I could find. I have discs without boxes, boxes without discs and I know that I purchased some discs that I can no longer find boxes or disc for at all.
But the rough value of what I was able to find and secure through the years is easily $1,000. I added them up. I think I cried a little. Because they were all, ALL of them, irrevocably scratched.
I have children. Children don't do well with shiny plastic. We had trouble keeping the SNES games working, but at least I could order screwdriver bits from Hong Kong, open the cases and brush the food out with vinegar, a toothbrush and some compressed air. The Nintendo 64 was equally difficult to keep operational. When the industry unanimously went to DVDs with the Gamecube, the XBOX and the PS1, I knew we were doomed. But we settled on the XBOX because of Halo.
Five years later, two XBOXes, four power supplies, twenty controllers, four DVD enablers/remotes, four years of XBM with sample DVDs (most missing), and over $1,000 in games, I did it.
I broke the law.
After installing mod chips, I managed to copy some, not all, but some of our dying games up to a Samba share on our network. I spent another $40 on a DMCA device known as a grinder along with some cotton polishing wheels and plastic polish and managed to restore a few more DVD discs to readability. I also destroyed one permanently learning how to do this slowly and carefully enough. We now have about 23 titles "saved" and usable, and at least another 30 waiting for me to attempt to restore them.
Could we go to blockbuster, rent a game, save it and play it forever? Sure, but we don't. Just like I don't run around committing murder with my kitchen knives on a daily basis. We need to teach the industry that capability != intent. You'd think they would figure this out. When our XBOX wasn't working and I was staring at all our destroyed video games, we STOPPED BUYING GAMES.
Now that I have a modded xbox that can make a permanent recording of the games I legally acquire and pay for, I don't mind buying games.
This sort of rationale is why we still play Halo 2 on our modded xboxes. This is why we no longer have an xbox-live subscription (we'd be banned). This is why we have not purchased an XBOX 360. I am very concerned that the next gen consoles will drain my money away through easily scratched polycarbonate game media. It's almost as if they designed them to disintegrate upon contact with children.
I hope someone in the industry is listening. I need a console that allows me to install software, then put the media in a safe place. Without this feature, my kids cannot play for long (some games only lasted one day) and we don't purchase as many games as we otherwise might.
These opinions guaranteed or your money back.
So ICE is trying to crackdown on ICEbreakers. I just had to bring neuromancer into this one.
The reason you disagree is that you don't believe in private ownership and he does. Once it is his it is his forever. Just like a shovel is his and is his forever. The only way to loose it is to have it stolen, given away, or taken away through due process, or it is destroyed. If he agreed to some EULA and then he gives the shovel away (or sells it) he's not obligated to ensure the transfer of the terms of that EULA nor would he. This is precisely what he's getting at.
I did not read contempt in any post except yours. He was simply responding.
The difference between your argument and his is that he's right and you are wrong.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
They are making this out like the money lost is lost from these mod chips. This is not true. This is absolutely an abuse of the system by these companies. As well, what does the department of homeland security have to do with this? Isn't their charter to stop terrorism from happening on our shores? Why are they being used to enforce the DMCA?
They imply that these mod chips are causing $3 billion in damages. No, I know this is not the case but the average reader would make that connection.
Now, if they are worried about such crimes then they would be raiding everyone's home because the computer is more powerful, faster, more flexible and more capable all round for doing the same thing.
This is completely insane to manipulate the system through the police authorities and the courts, and to maybe pervert the charter of the DHS.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
If you break it you buy it; why can't you buy it and break it? They are also laws about modifying vehicles and computer equipment but you don't see shops raided for boring engines, modifying governors, or over clocking video cards. Why? Because nobody fucking cares. They don't care because they have made the sale and it is a done deal. No hardware stores were raided for putty knives to stop people from getting into the Mac mini. If you buy physical goods it would seem logical that your are buying a conglomeration of physical materials that constitute said product. Do you own the product? Or did you just purchase the privilege of using it? Do you have to give it back to the manufacturer if you use it improperly? This is not about 'protecting' ANYTHING except corporate financial interest.
The original poster didn't want to play games. He wanted to run Linux on the hardware. He's free to make a dual-screen touch screen Linux only device and not run afoul of the patent.
IAALS.
Let's give it some more food:
> If I invent product X, who are you, or the government to dictate the
> terms under which I profit from my invention?
Exactly. I invented product Modchip, who are you, or the government to dictate the terms under which I profit from my Modchip?
aye =.- damn proxy
Walk with Music;
Oh, i do believe in ownership. The problem is that you dont own the 'property' contained in the code, They do.
.. )
You own the worthless piece of hardaware that doesnt function without it. Mod that *hardware* all you want, but under the current set of laws, touch the firmware and you commit a crime. ( and if you happen to get a FPGA based piece of hardware, you really have nothing since its almost all code
Now that said, if you read my other post, i actually agree with your view of ownership personally. I also feel its mine to do as i please. The problem is the LAW doesnt. And until you realize the law doesnt agree with you, and you stop using the stupid bizzare excuses to justify it, you remain an idiot. Just because you want to wish away the law and the judge, it wont happen. Only by getting the law change will the rules change, and pretending it doesnt exist wont get it changed.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Yes, I do own THAT specific copy of the code. What I don't have is the copyright on that code. However as far as I know, mod chips don't contain copies of the machine's firmware. On to the real point:
First, what law specifies that sellers may create arbitrary, legally binding terms of use on copies of data they sell after they've sold it?
Second, the law that IS being violated here is the DMCA and it is being violated because the mod chips are a "circumvention device" and these people who are distributing them are trafficking in circumvention devices. It has nothing to do with users of said chips violating some license agreement.
And at any rate, third, I never said anything about any law. I wasn't trying to argue a matter of law, I was trying to argue a matter of general ethics. The law will never be changed and will only get worse if people believe they have no rights whatsoever over intellectual property they purchase except those arbitrarily proscribed by the seller. And the mere concept of the seller being able to dictate said rights AFTER the purchase is simply ludicrous.
Interesting analogy...
After a few minutes the stripper walks away. Everyone knows they have to fork over a few more bills for continued entertainment...
But when one 'buys' a video or software, they get to keep the physical medium and watch it whenever they like -- perhaps more "concubine" than "stripper". Virtually no other household product is like this... If you physically have possession of it, you can do with it as you like. One may not own the software, but they own the medium! So why should they be restricted on their actions toward the medium! Tearing a book in half and giving a half to a friend is perfectly legal. Yet, cutting a Windows CD in half and giving it to a friend probably would be illegal -- (Unauthorized re-distribution of copyrighted software in part).
Of course the trend now is that all software will be rented for a time-limited period... So it seems the software industry is going to the strippers... Thus, Bill Gates is a whore.
Legislating to protect a business model violates every principle of a free market. The DMCA is a stupid law and deserves to be broken.
You're doing it wrong.
Strangely enough, the sole reason I looked at buying a DS (or perhaps a GP2X) is *because* I can tinker with it using DS Linux and other such things. I am considering getting some sort of handheld that can also function as an organizer, and the notion that I can fiddle with the device (yes, at my own risk / cost / expense etc.) is intriguing to say the least.
Then again, I may not have the time to do so. I'm considering just getting something that "just works" for the moment and leave the tinkering for when I'm done university. Then again, you only live once...
In short, for someone like myself (though I am likely part of a very miniscule portion of their marketshare), that would be the sole reason I would wish to buy the hardware in the first place. Why should they care? The company still makes their money, and the government still takes the taxes right off the top.
Sometimes I wonder if I think too much.
Actually I have no idea on US courts, but many many courts in the world pretty much agree that when you buy software or and ESPECIALLY hardware, its yours to do with as you wish. You just cant go selling copies of it (or whatever the local IP laws are). Basically that unless the EULA was presented BEFORE you paid for it, its not worth the paper its written on.
I'd bet infact the US has some similar positions, although those loony arbitration clauses dont give me hope.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Oh, yeah, I ordered that twice, only to have my order cancelled a few weeks later each time. Also, we still don't have Second Opinion, which isn't Nintendo's fault, of course, but is an other reason for a modded Wii.
When I read the title of this /. post I immediately thought.
Damn what an abuse of power, those Federal Agents should just go out an buy the mod chips for themselves, just like everyone else. Every now and then they have the occasional marijuana burn off, but you never see the porn raid or mod chip burn offs.
Even Shakespeare used an Apple, albeit slowler and tastier than todays Macs.
You need to read your contract/EULA better.
what contract are you referring to?
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Any EULA that attempts to prevent me from doing that is illegal.
would that invalidate the entire EULA or just that specific section of it?
if the former, would the "state and federate statutes may override portions of this contract" part cover their ass regarding that?
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Well, unless we prove we're as addicted to games with crappy laws attached as we are addicted to wal-mart. Maybe now we'll start voting with our wallets and simply stop purchasing anything under the DMCA - now we can go get our entertainment from the "real" world. That's really the best way to do it - let them succeed in their "rights management". Let them manage their rights right into their closets. If everyone stops purchasing their spam-walled products (You know, spam is crap nobody needs, and nobody intelligent wants, but people pay for it anyway or it would go away. DRM is crap nobody needs, and nobody intelligent wants, but people pay for it anyway, or it would go away. Spam-Wall(tm) security through annoying the heck out of the end user), then they would get no profits. Then pretty soon they would realize that DRM is a bad idea. But right now, as long as we're making the choice to consume their spam, they can pretend to pass laws for the good of the creator (of the content we want. The laws are good for the creators of their spam) The only way to stop stupidity is to stop paying for it. So please, stop stupidity.
I wish I had a witty
No, the OP made a blanket statement which is what I was refuting. The statement was that "if he purchased a house, he could [always] do what he wanted with it." [sic] I was pointing out that there are times when that is not true, and one of those times is when a HOA is involved. Ignoring that HOA exist is simply stupid, and the statement is equally as stupid.
In other words, his house example intentially leaves out a concept which does exist in order to prove his point. I was just pointing that out. Omission of facts is not a good way to argue.
Another fallacious argument applauded. The modifications to hardware to allow open source programs to operate could be argued to be lawful under the reverse engineering clauses of the DMCA. IANAL so my interpretation of this is less than expert and should not be considered legal advice.
I do consider the arguments of the GP to be inflammatory and prejudicial, consistent with industries who rely on business models founded on specific interpretations of law or regulation. In short, the arguments of distributors, rather than producers or consumers.
The problem is the LAW doesnt. And until you realize the law doesnt agree with you, and you stop using the stupid bizzare excuses to justify it, you remain an idiot.
Excuse me, but *HE* should have been saying that to *YOU*.
US Copyright Law explicitly distinguished between ownership of a copyright, and ownership of particular copies. US Copyright law explicitly says that someone who buys a medium bearing a copyrighted work does not gain any ownership in the copyright, but *DOES* become the owner of the particular copy. US Copyright Law also explicitly says that it is not infringement to run it.
The problem is that you dont own the 'property' contained in the code, They do.
They own the copyright. They do not own the particular copy.
You own the copy. You "own" the right to run that copy.
Going back to your earlier post:
You need to read your contract/EULA better.
You are only bound by that contract if you choose to be be bound by it. Of course if you decline that contract offer, you receive nothing that that that contract offers you. However as I said before US Copyright Law already explicitly says you can run the software without any license whatsoever. EULAs generally offer you nothing you want, much less anything you need. (One of the few exceptions is MMORPGs where you are gaining the right to use their online servers, however you are perfectly free to run the software in whatever limited fashion without any servers, or to fully run the software by somehow coming up with your own server system.)
You only recourse for not agreeing is returning it for a refund ( also stated in the contact )
*IF* you accept the contract, then yes there is a term where they agree to accept it returned for a refund. However *if you decline* the contract offer, then everything in that contract is null and void. You are under absolutely no obligation to return it. You have every right to keep it and to run it.
There are a number of tactics they try to use to get you to agree to an EULA contract, but I won't get into that here. The two main points are (1) Yes you do by law become the owner of a particular copy, and (2) if you have *not* accepted any EULA it is still absolutely noninfringing to install/run software.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
You are suggesting that sellers of all products be prevented from setting any conditions on the sale of their products.
Sellers can decline to sell until they first have a signed contract.
I guess you would also mean that a EULA should be unenforceable
If I decline to accept an EULA, then it is unenforceable.
If they have already sold me a product and it happens to come with a contract offer (perhaps a contract offer that happens to be labeled "EULA") then I have the choice of accepting that contract and receiving whatever it offers, or declining that contract and forgoing whatever it offers.
and thus abolish copyright when it comes to allowing you to make copies of digital products?
That is a total non sequitor. Saying that an EULA contract offer is not enforceable in no way abolishes copyright law.
In fact copyright law explicitly says that it is not infringement to install and run software, that you need absolutely no license at all to install and run software. It is absolutely not infringement to install and run software if you have declined an EULA and declined everything it offered.
EULAs rarely offer anything you want, much less anything you need. A rare exception would be an MMORPG EULA which offers something you might like, but still nothing you need. An MMORPG EULA contract may include an offer of internet server services, something you likely want. However if you decline the EULA offer you can still install and run it in whatever limited fashion without internet service, or you could somehow come up with your own server setup to get the software to run fully and properly. So it's still just a "want" and not a "need".
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Could everyone stop with the house analogies? A house sits on property, as of right now there is a very distinct finite amount of property available, and you can't move it. This makes houses (that sit on property) an entirely different animal
I agree, stop with the house analogies. All analogies should be to cars.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
They might be a little more charitable if someone could come up with a modchip that let you load an alternative OS on the device but didn't allow for pirated games. I don't see how that would even be possible though, so they'll continue to bust mod-chip makers as long as those chips facilitate copyright infringement.
Yes, you need an Internet connection to register initially and to get updates but I have GC 2 installed on a laptop that travels everywhere with me and I can play the game happily with no CD or Internet connection wherever I go.
Things may be different for their application software but I cannot comment because I've simply never used any of it.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
There's a difference though. They've designed the product to work in such a way that prevents me from using competitors supplies. However, once I've purchased their product, I'm free to do whatever I want to it, including workarounds to use third-party supplies.
Actually, the printer example the grandparent used was probably a reference to Lexmark's invocation of the DMCA to stop third parties from making toner cartridges that were compatible with Lexmark printers. As well, the DMCA was invoked to crack down on XBOX mod chips which allow you to play third-party games, backup games, and pirated games. The XBOX action was allowed to stand, but after Lexmark won a preliminary injunction, their suit was tossed.
"The people making the device you modded have done so on the assumption that they can sell complimentary products for it (games)"
they have this assumption, but it is not true for everyone... if I own the hardware I can do anything with it.
as an example, large companies are making clusters of PS3's to make complex calculations that huge mainframes cant to as efficiently. Are they doing something illegal?
Um... I don't see how turning my Xbox into a Media Center is in any way "illegal".
I own the songs and movies I play through there.
I own the Xbox in question, regardless of what some non-legally-binding EULA says.
I own all the games that might be run from the HD.
Okay, so that last one violates DMCA. I still don't think it violates the 'spirit' of the law.
I don't *sell* modded Xboxes. I made it that way for fun and to improve upon the usefulness of the beast.
I also turned one into a Linux File Server... can't tell me THAT is illegal too. Oh the ironic shame. Take that Microsoft.
---
AC is for Cowards...
Actually, I've never seen a EULA for any of my DS games either...
Of course, true to form now, you will weasel out of it like you do every time you ask that stupid question, by claiming that just because you can't buy it at best buy, it doesn't exist.
Thank you. =P
I just wonder how long it'll be before everyone thinks that it's a business's god-given right to do whatever the hell they want to do in order to get money. It's like when the airline companies suffered because of the fear of flying after 911, and the government compensating them because of it. Awwww did your business model fail, weee're sorryyyy here's a few billion out of the pocket of taxpayers. WTF is happening to this country.
Business: "We're going to put this black box into your home that spies on you and forces to to watch the things we want you to see!"
Consumer: "Aww you poor dears, your business model relies on that, it's OK then I guess!"
...is what is slowly happening here. The younger generations grow up thinking this kind of abuse is perfectly normal, and companies continue to get away with it more and more. It's like they're growing up slaves to the system and get used to it.
Message to all businesses: Consumers will share information, especially in this age of information technology, get used to it and adjust as necessary.
You're in the newspaper industry? Adapt or die. Gaming? Adapt or die. Horse and buggy? Good job, you finally adapted or died.
You fuckers can't turn this country into a police state with the FBI raiding some kid's home for sharing a song or movie with their friend just because a fucking industry thinks they need to use some outdated ancient laws that need to be removed from the law books in order to protect their revenue streams. If the government wasn't controlled by lobbyists with deep pockets and actually stood up for consumers, we wouldn't have this mess.
If anyone is thinking about it, don't give me the "Oh, it helps consumers, because otherwise no one could make anything for them that's information-based." I think that's total bull. Companies are very capable of finding alternate models, look at the uprising of the MMOGs, gaming has become a service. Instead of all games being a service, what is needed is for games to be paid for before they are released. The funny thing is, many games already are. Yeah yeah, I know that many games make more money after than before release, especially if they don't have a name for themselves, which is why systems to unify and sample games need to be created so that payment can be made before release. The problem is they haven't needed to since laws have helped them, just like the horse and buggy industry fought to stop the automobile. It's very possible to make these new models work, and I've been trying to work on creating it on my own project I'm working on. Unfortunately, no one else seems to give a damn, lol, so it's kind of slow going. That and I've had no free time. =P
Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
Why should any company be allowed to restrict usage on a physical product after a customer has paid for and bought (not leased) the product?
I will tell you why. Because these companies have bribed our "representatives" heavily to pass laws to make their products more successful and to hinder competition. Products should stand or fail on their own, not because some law limits its use after a purchase.
I wonder how many millions of tax-payer dollars has been spent on this raid instead of oh, I don't know, maybe using it to stop dangerous criminals.
That is text-book capitalism and it doesn't exist anymore. Companies scheme together in areas to limit competition. For example, look in just about any market where there are only a few dominant companies and you will price fixing, no real service differentiation, etc. Restrictive practices are generally adopted in a similar manner by the big players so customers won't leave one to go to the other.
Look at phones for example. Here in the USA I don't know of any phone company that offers a truly competitive customer-oriented service. I signed up with Verizon and got two Razr phones. After 3 months my wife and I didn't like the phones and I went to BUY new phones and keep my account. The only option I had was to pay $175 to cancel my current account, buy 2 new phones and start a new 2 year agreement. I was so PO about this that I went to ever cell phone company in the city. They all WERE THE SAME. The only other "choice" I had was to get a pay as you go phone where they demanded my SSN and charge outrageous per minute fees.
I, as I am sure many others, could list dozens and dozens of examples with these types of restrictions in just about every market here in the USA. I would like to know where this "free" market exists, because it is not here in the USA.
The only thing we have here in the USA is corrupted capitalism backed by bribed representatives.
General, you are listening to a machine! Do the world a favor and don't act like one.