Slashdot Mirror
Xbox Live Class Action Being Investigated
eldavojohn writes "Were you negatively affected by the recent ban on Xbox Live for modifying hardware you own? Did you modify yours for homebrew or altering things you paid for and not to engage in piracy? Abington IP would like to hear from you and may be able to help. From that page: 'If you are an Xbox Live subscriber, had your modified Xbox console banned from Xbox Live, were not refunded a prorated sum for the time left on your subscription, or have experienced other problems as a result of being banned, and would like to participate in a class action against Microsoft, please submit your information below.' Someone is finally standing up for the legitimate hobbyists. Should Microsoft worry?"
These class-action lawsuits only serve one purpose - to make the lawfirm originating the class action a boatload of cash.
The DVD drive mods that people got banned for were all about playing 'backups' which really means pirated games in 99% of these cases.
Hell, I know people who had their consoles banned for no reason and MS told them to go take a leap.
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
Why would people need to hack the Xbox when Microsoft provides the XNA development environment?
No.
They should not worry.
Nothing will happen here. The terms of service clearly state that to play on Xbox Live, you are not allowed to modify your xbox360. The accounts are still present and valid. The consoles are simply banned from accessing the service. Hobbyists can still be hobbyists. The Xbox360 will still work, but the Xbox Live service will not.
Should Microsoft worry?
Not in the least. Microsoft did not tell you that you cannot use your modded Xbox, nor did they do anything to it that prevents you from using it. All they did was said you can't use it on servers that they own. And there are rulings all the way up to SCOTUS that says he who owns the servers controls who is allowed to use them.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
Microsoft is not bricking your modded console. They are banning your modded console from their private network which they set the rules and the modded console owners broke. The reason for the modification is not relevant. Those 360s will stay play your games perfectly you just can't access Live. As an owner of an unmodded 360 who is a paying customer for live I appreciate and applaud this move since other people like to mod their boxes for making online experience worse for others (i.e cheating).
As for the prorated refund do they have any legal reason to do so? I've seen many places state if you get kicked out (bars, amusement parks, etc.) if you get kicked out you get no refunds.
And for those that really want to mod their 360s and really want to play on live buy another 360.
No, it states you are not allowed to modify ANY of the hardware.
Third party battery pack? Modified hardware - banned - give us more money now to keep playing.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Hobbyist support my ass.
As a lawyer he's thinking "Ooh! 100,000 people banned, that's a big target to profit from!"
As a hobbyist, if I want to run whatever software, I pay: $100 for a motherboard, $130 for a small case and power supply, $50 for a hard drive, $30 for an optical drive, $0-200 for an operating system, $50 for a wireless keyboard and mouse, $80 for a wireless gaming controller, $15 for a DVI cable.
Anybody guess what I bought to run homebrew software? A fecking computer!
An xBox is not a computer, and if you want to change that, Microsoft is well within their rights to say they don't want xbox-like computers on Live!
OK, not the best analogy. But I'm only on my first cup of caffeine. Bottom line is that any time I mod a console (going back to the Famicom aka Nintindo) I no longer expect the developer of said hardware to support me and in fact I expect them to actively oppose me.
Over the years Sony has been a better supporter of hobbyists, even going so far as to release a home brew PS1 (NET YAROZE).
Ah well.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
The terms of use seem pretty clear:
The Service may only be accessed with an original Xbox, an Xbox 360 console, a personal computer, or other device authorized by us, or by logging into your account via Xbox.com . You agree that you are using only authorized software and hardware to access the Service, that your software and hardware have not been modified in any unauthorized way (e.g., through unauthorized repairs, unauthorized upgrades, or unauthorized downloads
Refund Policies. Unless otherwise provided by law or in connection with any particular Service offer, all charges are non-refundable and the costs of any returns will be at your expense. There are, however, certain circumstances under which you may be entitled to a refund for certain Services.
So what part of that seems unclear enough that it warrants a lawsuit? If you don't agree with terms of use, don't sign up for the service then whine when they catch you violating the terms of service and terminate your account.
Yes, Microsoft should be worried.
"The Xbox360 will still work, but the Xbox Live service will not." --- False. Parts of offline play are disable.
If you READ the class action lawsuit, it has nothing to do with the banning from XBL, but rather the offline features that were disabled/modified as a result.
Very interesting article regarding the bannings: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2397134/analysis_why_microsofts_plan_to_ban.html
"I was at GameStop the other day and listened to a customer's questions about Microsoft's banning of modded X-Box 360s. The worker tried to explain that this banning was for those people that hacked their X-Box 360. The customer was worried that if her child downloaded any kind of content through the X-Box 360 that this might constitute a reason for a banning for her son's system. She was confused, so she decided to purchase a PS3 instead. I was told by the manager at that GameStop that this was not an isolated incident. They had received over 50 calls that day about the banning.
What Microsoft appears to have forgotten by earmarking this time of year for the banning of modded X-Box 360s is that most of the systems that are purchased this time of year is by parents and grandparents. The game systems that are purchased this time of year are usually done by those that do not have a firm grasp on the industry. Simply put, the systems are usually purchased by people that are fairly clueless about video games."
before signing a form admitting one's xbox was modded in the first place.
I'm no legal eagle... Can you explain why a company can ban you from service because you modified your machine? It makes sense to ban if they were connecting to their live network using dubious means, or trying to use the network in illegal ways... But I don't understand why a fourth party can ban how you using a third party's product?
Live is not responsible for pirated content. MS isn't liable for what you do to your machine (and the warranties expressly state it). Does it seem ethically gray to ban people from using your network based solely on something that isn't about how you're using the network?
[scratches head]
If they bricked the console? Sure, sue them for that if they do it.
Banning you from a service? Lol, right. Im going to go to a 5 star restaurant in jeans and t-shirt then sue them once they kick me out. Same deal here.
Seriously. If you want to home brew fine, there is NOTHING stopping you from buying a second console to homebrew on as long as you keep it off THEIR network. Microsoft wants to have a service that is run on "secure" Xboxs to prevent hackers, cheaters, and pirates. This is something that is in YOUR interest, unless you think C.S. 1.6 was fun when some guy (not you) is running with the knife speed hack. This is also something you agreed to.
However, you KNOWINGLY (or should have known) violated a written contract with Microsoft. What's next, are you going to complain when the bank reposess your house because you don't pay? You have a contract, you violated the contract, Microsoft is taking steps that YOU AGREED IT COULD TAKE when you signed the contract. Even this law firm knows there isn't a case here, however they are now using YOU to get loads of free advertising. Wake up, grow up, or shut up. Pick one.
I've been reading the argument that people have just been banned from XBL, because modifying your console somehow violates the TOS of XBL.
However, this time the ban does not just kick you off online multiplayer, it also disables functionality to install games on the included HDD! Games already installed on that HDD will not be accessible anymore. Also, any savegame you continue playing with on the banned console will get tagged with the result that you can't copy it to any other (banned or unbanned) consoles anymore.
Since a lot of people bought the Xbox360 with the ability to install games on the internal HDD right out of the box it can be argued that MS impaired the users' hardware in some way.
Also: it is rumored that it is possible for MS to band your console through future (mandatory) updates on game discs, even if you never played online. The technical capabilites are there, but if they ever start doing that their XBL-TOS-argument will be seriously flawed.
Should Microsoft worry?"
No...they will just hire Johnny Cochran and use the Chewbacca defense....nothing to see here folks.
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
By signing up for Live, they agreed to Microsoft's terms and conditions...period...end of story.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Surely Microsoft could then pursue every named person in this class action for the value of the library of pirated software they have? Those who have been blacklisted would do well to STFU and not stick their heads above the parapet.
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
"5 star restaurant " is not a good analogy.
It's more like if you payed for a room at the Waldorf Astoria [*], they took your money, and then they told you that you couldn't stay there because they didn't like the way you looked (your haircut, or whatever) and didn't give you a refund for the nights you had already paid for.
What you are describing doesn't leave you out money you paid for a service. What is going on here is people paid for access to a service, and are being refused access to it without being given a refund.
[*] I only single the Waldorf because I once was put up there by Money Magainze while working on some software for them and the hotel told me I was not allowed to enter the lobby since I was wearing Birkenstocks. My good shoes were in my room upstairs. Quite the pain in the ass..
Never trust an atom. They make up everything.
Can you explain why a company can ban you from service because you modified your machine? It makes sense to ban if they were connecting to their live network using dubious means, or trying to use the network in illegal ways... But I don't understand why a fourth party can ban how you using a third party's product?
There is nothing preventing you from modifying hardware you own (the xbox itself), and that is both legal and MS can't really say squat about it (Specifically, they can say all the squat they want, but have less than no legal backing)
However, as xbox live is a subscription service, they can set forth rules to follow in order to be allowed to use it. Typically this is called Terms of Service, or ToS.
Being a service, they can dictate any rules they want and choose whom to do business with, at lease as long as that choice isn't based on one of the few things you can not legally discriminate against like age race etc.
Legally modifying hardware you own is not in that list, so they CAN discriminate all they want.
Yes, they might be in some trouble for not refunding prorated payments back, but the only legal result of that is to be forced to pay them back (Which personally I think they should be doing anyway)
My setup used two xbox (xboxes?) one modded for homebrew that never connected to any MS service, and one unmodified for playing games online.
(In the mean time, I stopped playing games online, and now that second xbox is sitting waiting to be modded too... Just haven't had the time to mess with it)
The 4th party you mentioned, I'm not sure where that came from so can't quite answer it.
There are only two parties involved here. The people whom got banned from xbox live, and Microsoft.
Does it seem ethically gray to ban people from using your network based solely on something that isn't about how you're using the network?
Ethically, maybe. Probably not.
If you ran a service, you would want the same right to choose whom you did business with or not.
Leagally, they are 100% in the right (With exception to not refunding unused prorated costs back, which I don't even know if they are really doing or not.)
Even slashdot has a TOS and they can ban your account for violating it. Nothing immoral there either.
They also forgot that ebay will soon be flooded with cheap Xbox system that are only good for playing pirated games. Doh!
I love the way they ask "Did you modify yours for homebrew or altering things you paid for and not to engage in piracy?"
Thats a laugh. Now that they have been booted off live I bet everyone is claiming they did not do it for piracy. When they were paying the money for someone to modify a new $200 piece of hardware and void its warranty were they so sure they were never going to play a cheap knock off game then.
I know if I was going to risk someone trashing a new console under those circumstances I would justify it to myself by saying that it might save me money as I could buy cheaper games for it.
I dont read
Agreed, and here's why. All they need to do is walk into court and say, "We can only guarantee that hardware we built will operate properly with XBox Live. Additionally, allowing user modified hardware to operate on our network may adversely affect other paying subscribers and therefore cannot be allowed." Case dismissed. This will go nowhere.
Look - it comes down to this: To get on Xbox live, you have to agree to the terms of service. The terms of service is a contract. The banned users agreed to it. If anybody violates the terms of the contract by modifying their Xbox in any way, Microsoft is more than justified in enforcing its contract, meaning they can cut off violators of its TOS.
It's simple contract law. The service requires an unmodded xbox. If a consumer doens't hold up their end of the contract, Microsoft has no obligation to hold up its end.
It's no different for other services - Telephone, internet, Cable or sattelite TV, etc. If you violate the contract you made for the service, then you have absolutely no right to force the provider to continue providing the service.
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
Except the case has nothing to do with access to xbox live. Microsoft has disabled features that are used while the box is OFFLINE. I didn't sign any agreement about what I will do with the box while I am not connected to XBL.
What is going on here is people paid for access to a service, and are being refused access to it without being given a refund
No, it is not like that. No PERSON is being refused service - the XBL account is still there. They just have to use a different console to access it.
To take your hotel analogy to the limit, it's like you booked the room and prepaid, but also signed a contract promising that you'd only arrive in a green car, because only green cars are allowed at that hotel. Then you turn up in a red car, and they point to the contract and ask you to go away until you have the right color car. Plain and simple breach of contract, you don't have a leg to stand on.
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
Actually, aside from the unreasonably high amounts of RROD's, drive failure is also an issue with 360's. The problem is that the hardware - although they're fairly standard drives - is also locked to the motherboard. So a regular SATA DVD-drive will fit into your 360, but doing so without re-tying the hardware/serial will get your a permaban from XBL pretty much immediately.
There *are* ways to update the firmware on replacement drives, but I believe this requires fairly specific models of drives and a fair bit of hackery to do so (and/or also having access to the old drive to get certain details from it's firmware, so hopefully it's just a dead/scratched laser and not a fried board).
No its more like you payed for a room at the Waldorf Astoria, then they threw the girl you brought with you out on the street cause it looked, convincingly like she's a whore.
About 2 people were having sex with their slutty looking wives, the other 600k people were having sex with prostitutes.
No, you certainly can continue to use XBox Live with the account just not the modded xbox. To continue your analogy, you're welcome to use your room to fuck someones brains out, you just have to bring someone else, the prostitute isn't allowed back in.
All things considered, since you broke the rules, they are being entirely fair. If it were myself I'd ban your account completely regardless of xbox, probably any known credit card or bank accounts used with the account as well since you are clearly breaking the rules you agreed to, entirely acceptable rules by any sane definition.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Seriously?
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
The only reason for modifying your Xbox is to engage in acts of piracy, obviously.
I'm sure it clearly states in the Xbox Live user agreement that moding is cause for a ban. If you agreed to the user agreement then you're just shit out of luck, end of story. I think people should be more concerned as to why you are forced to have an Xbox Live account (or PSN account for the the PS3) to play games online.
I use my 360 to play certain movies from my media repository. Doing so requires codecs that don't come standard on the 360 (DivX, whatever). There is no easy way (actually no way I know of), to update the codecs on the machine without using XBL.
OK, so one's thoughts would be that once you've updated the 360, you don't need XBL anyhow. But unfortunately, it seems that the codecs are tied to the XBL account. I can't play my vids without logging into that account whenever I need the codecs. I'd imagine that if it were banned that would be something of an issue.
4th party = XBL, 3rd party = Altus, or whoever you might have copied software from
Now, I know that a TOU can let you restrict who has access to your network. But there aren't reasonable restrictions on that?
You used slashdot as an example. What if slashdot said we're only allowing accounts that connect to slashdot with , and I logged in while using my own distro? Is that an acceptable TOU policy?
Unless these modified consoles modify how the network is accessed or affects gameplay (ie, you hack your software so medics can one-shot everybody) in an unintended manner, are they allowed to write a TOU that band something that doesn't directly affect usage on their network?
How should Microsoft handle cheaters?
They're features that were only enabled by being on XBL. The features I hear people complaining about (like copy to HD) were added by MS through XBL. If you'd never taken it online and signed up for an account, they wouldn't be there. You'd want to check the TOS agreement you clicked through to get those features installed.
That might dissuade them from pulling that crap again in the future.
Or not; being ordered to pay billions for infringement isn't stopping the fuckers from supporting software patents.
In nearly all cases, the result of a class-action is a settlement
For one thing, what percent is "nearly all"? For another, the settlement might well include revisions to the EULA.
The money will come from the consumers of future products and services that MS will pass the costs on to.
The Service may only be accessed with an original Xbox, an Xbox 360 console, a personal computer, or other device authorized by us, or by logging into your account via Xbox.com . You agree that you are using only authorized software and hardware to access the Service, that your software and hardware have not been modified in any unauthorized way (e.g., through unauthorized repairs, unauthorized upgrades, or unauthorized downloads), and that we have the right to send data , applications or other content to any software or hardware that you are using to access the Service for the express purpose of detecting an unauthorized modification. Any attempt to disassemble, decompile, create derivative works of, reverse engineer, modify, further sublicense, distribute, or use for other purposes the Service, any game , application, or other content available or accessible through the Service, or any hardware or software associated with the Service or with an original Xbox or Xbox 360 console is strictly prohibited and may result in cancellation of your account and/or your ability to access the Service, and the pursuit of other legal remedies by Microsoft.
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
This is like taking your car to the demolition derby, and complaining that it got smashed up. And then trying to get a 10 month refund from Sirius/XM because you don't need a satellite radio subscription anymore now that your car is totalled.
It's very simple.. If you don't like to see your Xbox get bricked, don't connect it to networks run by unsavory companies (Microsoft), while agreeing to ridiculous TOS in order to do so. If you simply buy the Xbox, mod it, and never connect it to Xbox Live, none of this would have happened.
However, I wonder about a different scenario that would make MS even more money. A 15 year old kid wants a 360 for Christmas, so he tells mom and dad "make sure it's a new one, because a used one might not work online." Mom and dad don't really understand why, but they know a used system will dissapoint junior, so they spring the extra few bucks for a new system that generates revenue for MS instead of saving a few bucks and getting those used consoles that are going to be collecting dust on GameStop's shelves. I think it would be interesting to see which of the two situations happened more, but I suppose there's not a good way to gather that data.
I'm using all of my mod points to mod ancient memes down. Please join me.
Try reading the article sometime, it's informative.
There is a war going on for your mind.
"Lol, right. Im going to go to a 5 star restaurant in jeans and t-shirt then sue them once they kick me out. Same deal here."
Are you stupid? It's not even close to the same thing. It's like not being into a restaurant because you modded your car, and then when they didn't let you into the restaurant, that also broke functionality in your car.
That's about as close as you can come with a restaurant analogy, and even then it's still lame.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
There is no reason to mod an Xbox360 unless you are pirating games. Anyone who says otherwise is a disingenuous tool. I could understand if it was the Xbox 1, because the mods for that allowed you to run Linux, Xbox Media Center, and a host of classic game emulators (which are also in a legal grey area). However, the only mods for 360 are about letting the DVD drive run pirated games. That being said, I have a modded Xbox 1, just for XBMC, but I'm not dumb enough to try to get on the Live network with it.
You agree to not mod your console when you sign up for Xbox Live.
You should see what happens in China if you aren't dressed appropriately.
The manager comes out, asks what you need, does whatever he can to get it for you..after he escorts you back to your room.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Seriously, what part of subsidy do people not understand? You don't build, ship, stock and sell an Xbox 360 for under $200. Microsoft doesn't want to sell a ton of new ones because they don't make money on them. It is honestly because Microsoft doesn't want people to pirate games because they DO make money selling them.
Whale
I wonder how many M$ haters are going to buy/mod and Xbox just to be a part of this suit...
War as we knew it was obsolete
Nothing could beat complete denial
- Emily Haines
They provide a service which is a selling point of their box. One could argue that the requirement of using an X-Box with their service might be an illegal tie-in to their hardware.
What if I do an Y-Box that has a protocol that is compatible with the X-box, but has 25% more performance for 25% lower cost?
How does it break functionality? All it does is prevent you from accessing the service. The xbox itself works -just fine-.
You can even use a different xbox to go in. There's just certain types of xbox (which, out of the box, none of em fall in that category, so you have to make a conscious decision to change it) that are not allowed.
So I'd say my analogy is actually pretty darn good. Use an xbox thats still in the state they will allow, you can go in. With the same account too!
Right. Some woman ("her") had that concern? That's because someone put it there, and confused her about it.
What the article fails to mention is that the kid's will ask for the Xbox 360, or PS3, and the parents and grand parents will go out and buy it. Maybe one out of ten will have a marginal understanding of the goings-on of the industry. The rest will be at the behest of the salespeople, or the few articles, like the one mentioned above, which they happen to read.
Any article that is decently written will explain the issue clearly; the referenced article is not one such article. It provided one example of an interested customer who had a salesperson poorly explain the last issue, which they (neither one, apparently) did not understand. Explaining the difference between legally downloading something and modifying the system is not exactly the difference only known to rocket scientists. It all boils down to actively trying to change the system in an unintended manner. Downloading anything provided by the Xbox Live service would not qualify as unintended changes.
This will not hurt Microsoft, and actually, I am pleased and more willing to suggest the service to others as a result of it.
I am tired of cheaters, and modders are the bulk of them (the remainder are modders that go uncaught, and those that just abuse bugs in the game, rather than something even more devious). They killed PC gaming for me (non-subscription based services anyway, such as Counter-Strike), and Microsoft needs to do stuff like this to stop it from destroying their service.
4th party = XBL, 3rd party = Altus, or whoever you might have copied software from
Ahh, I see. No, XBL (which is the same party is MS) is 3rd. Altus does not come into play as far as that goes.
Now, I know that a TOU can let you restrict who has access to your network. But there aren't reasonable restrictions on that?
Not exactly.
The only restrictions in the USA by law are that you can not base your choice to provide service or not on one of the following: age, disability, national origin, race, religion, genetics or sex (gender)
Based off anything else is perfectly legal however. If you consider that reasonable or not is up to you (Personally I think a few other things should be on that list, but the list as-is is reasonable, just not complete IMHO)
You used slashdot as an example. What if slashdot said we're only allowing accounts that connect to slashdot with , and I logged in while using my own distro? Is that an acceptable TOU policy?
Acceptable? It wouldn't be to ME heh. Legal however, it 100% is.
TO answer you directly, I would say it is not acceptable. Others I have no doubt would see things differently and to different levels of being pissed off at it.
Unless these modified consoles modify how the network is accessed or affects gameplay (ie, you hack your software so medics can one-shot everybody) in an unintended manner, are they allowed to write a TOU that band something that doesn't directly affect usage on their network?
Yes. Legally they can say you are not allowed to use their service if a butterfly landed in your yard today. Not very enforceable on that silly example, but the law would back them 100% and support them banning you as long as they could prove that a butterfly did indeed land in your yard that day.
Both are very silly and stupid examples, and no one with an IQ above 60 should think that is a good idea for a business model, but it would be 100% legal, and the courts would back that TOS up fully.
Legally speaking, the only things you CAN'T 'ban' someone for or put in a TOS are in that list above.
Technically, you CAN put it in the TOS, but then that entire line item becomes void.
Morally and acceptably is a different matter. I'm no MS lover by any means, but if a hundred years of case law is turned on its head and thrown out just to punish MS for this, that would pretty much shut down most non-national businesses in this country.
Imagine a world where if someone commits credit card fraud on your online web store (or even in the real store), and could sue you and WIN because you chose not to accept their money.
Or losing in court for asking someone to leave your shop because they are loud and drunk and upsetting everyone else there.
Or losing in court because you were sick and stayed home from work, and someone felt you choose not to do business with them, thus sued.
Screw that world. Id rather have the right to do with my stuff as I please, even if that means giving everyone else that right.
Exactly. Especially since the service is definately not actually denied, only the console is... The 5 star restaurant will not refund the cost of my jeans when they say I need a suit to go in :) I can still use my jeans, and I can still get in that restaurant. I just can't do both at the same time.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I just tagged this puppy "snowballinhell" because that's the chance such a suit has. Plaintiffs agreed to the terms of the service. Plaintiffs agreed that termination by terms of the service was "at will" for "any reason." There isn't a court in this country would find for such a Plaintiff.
You don't have a right to "XBox Live" and your hardware still works for any other purpose. They didn't brick your box, did they?
I sympathize, but ultimately, IMHO, this isn't remotely actionable. IANAL.
--
Toro
There seems to be an overwhelming consensus here that Microsoft is trying to protect its interests by preventing piracy. This is, of course, true. However, someone above mentioned a mother buying a PS3 instead of an XBox 360 because she was concerned about the banning, etc. The argument then is that Microsoft loses revenue by scarying people away, while all the banned people continue to refuse to buy games. In other words, they see Microsoft taking a net loss on this.
However, aside from preventing piracy, Microsoft is trying to prevent cheating. People are throwing around a number like 99% of people are doing this to pirate games. However in my experience there are as many people who mod in order to cheat in multiplayer games as there are people who do it specifically to pirate. I'm sure that the cheaters ALSO pirate games, but for a large number of people it is not their primary goal.
Lots of gamers will be turned of XBox Live and buying 360 games in general if they encounter a large number of cheaters while playing online. I've encountered more than my fair share. Microsoft gains from protecting legitimate customers from cheaters, keeping those customers playing and buying new games (and XBL subscriptions).
Actually, if you look in to the issue of cheating, you'll see that cheating on Xbox Live is in the form of modded 'rapid fire' controllers. Currently MS can not detect those, and no one gets banned for using them. That's why I'll stick with my comment about a modded 360 is for piracy.
A modded controller is for cheating, but they don't seem too concerned about that. This is about money. They really don't seem to give a shit if you have rapid fire, when you're not supposed to.
Look, this isn't all that different than restrictions placed on motor vehicles. You can remove the restrictor plates from your sports car, but you can't drive it on public roads for safety reasons. If you "mod" your car then you don't get tax dollars back from the government because you violated the law. I am constantly amazed at how the internet community seems to think that nothing is taboo, and that they can justify their crappy behavior by blaming corporations. Piracy... it's not wrong because game companies make too much money. Hacking... it's their fault for not securing their servers. All this lawsuit is going to do is force MS to clamp down even harder, which will hurt the MAJORITY of people who just want to enjoy the service without some jerk with a modded box cheating on games. But then again these people have already proved that they don't care about anyone but themselves. Let's not pretend this is some altruistic fight-the-man scenario.
All of what you said was correct except when you buy an xbox you do not sign a license agreement. So it is fine for them to cut you off from the contracted service (xbox live) when you break your agreement you made with them. However you never agreed that they could go and take away functionality that is xbox live neutral. That is where the issue will be. They should of just banned the users from xbox live, instead the "damaged" the users consoles and took away functionality.
There is no reason that they should prorate the price of the accounts.
The person paid for the service, agreeing to the terms of service, and then violated on the agreement in about the most egregious manner possible (short of hacking Xbox Live itself).
"The customer was worried that if her child downloaded any kind of content through the X-Box 360 that this might constitute a reason for a banning for her son's system. She was confused, so she decided to purchase a PS3 instead."
So GameStop deliberatly confused that customer by omitting that there's simply no way you could ever 'mod' your console by accident? Clearly, Microsoft is at fault here...
"if you modify your console, and try to play online, your CONSOLE will be banned, you can simply go and buy a new one and your live account will work fine on a new one" these are the exact words every site says that i have found that give a tutorial on modding an xbox 360.
and plainly, the hobbyist isnt the one being victimised here, the hobbyist wouldnt mod their console to run homebrew on it, then play pirated games online, if your doing that, thats all your doing.
this is simply a cash grab, because everyone knows that a settlement is cheaper than going to court
portfolio
(runs off to Ebay). Since I have absolutely zero interest in online gaming, a banned console would be perfect for me. Maybe I can get it dirt cheap.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
It's worth noting that the features that were revoked *ARE* connected to the Live service. You need a Live connection to install a game to the hard drive, to use the media extender, or to check your Netflix queue. If you don't believe me, please unplug your xbox from your network and try to use these features. They haven't removed any functionality from your console that you had when your ethernet cable was unplugged. Whether or not those features should be gated on being connected to Xbox Live is a totally different discussion. However, after the 'loss of these unrelated features' argument has been dissolved, the overall case is sincerely weakened. Corrupted save games are a valid concern, as are unrefunded subscriptions (though it's possible that TOU handle the latter with ease).
P.S. Is 20 gig hard drive too small?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
The 360 arguably has a larger user base than the PS3 partially thanks to pirating. It's funny to see this bite them in the ass.
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
You misspelled "pirates".
Just call Visa and reverse the charge.
What's the problem?
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
According to this article, ~40% of class action lawsuits are dismissed, and virtually all others are settled.
According to that article, Compliance Week wants money before I can even read it:
Subscriptions appear not to be priced for individual casual reading; this page lists even a 30-day subscription at $149. So would you please summarize what the article says about "virtually all others [that] are settled"?
I was an XBL Silver member, never having played a game over the XBL service. I used my system for single player games and local multiplayer. In order to get updates for your xbox, you are required to have an XBL account (or buy a game that has the updates on the disc many months later). I also enjoyed modding games with my PC, so my system was modified. Last week I found I was banned and thus am unable to obtain any further updates on my system.
If this ban wave was made to keep the XBL service free of people altering gameplay in multiplayer games, then why would they bother banning a system that has never once been involved in a multiplayer game?
You tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson: never try.
Should MS worry? Just take a look at all the MS shills and astroturfers around.
Just notice the gazillion claims that if you mod your xbox it violates the Xlive TOS and you have no legal recourse. How many times does it has to be repeated that they went far and beyond their legal ground banning offline abilities aswell until they stop saying this?
The answer is null, these commenters are not going to get that because they are paid not to get that.
Now shills, let the flaming begin.
But... the future refused to change.
Someone is finally standing up for the legitimate hobbyists. Should Microsoft worry?
Nah. It'll probably be really easy to just buy off both legitimate hobbyists.
Thank you! It makes sense now. (But, like you said, doesn't necessarily make it acceptable.)
I'd mod you up ad informative, if I have any of those to give out.
16. Service Operation and Equipment. The Service may only be accessed with an original Xbox, an Xbox 360 console, a personal computer, or other device authorized by us, or by logging into your account via Xbox.com . You agree that you are using only authorized software and hardware to access the Service, that your software and hardware have not been modified in any unauthorized way (e.g., through unauthorized repairs, unauthorized upgrades, or unauthorized downloads), and that we have the right to send data , applications or other content to any software or hardware that you are using to access the Service for the express purpose of detecting an unauthorized modification.
You're only partially right. The EULA says they can cut off access to the Live network, so fine, no argument there.
But they didn't stop there. They also crippled other parts of the software-- parts that have nothing to do with Live, and are not covered by the Live EULA. For instance, much of the hard drive functionality is gone. A "banned" console will no longer install new games to its drive, will not transfer savegames or other data from its drive to another console, and so on. The plaintiffs argue that nothing in the Live EULA gives MS the right to damage your local machine in this way, and that they should therefore be compensated for this damage.
Microsoft isn't coming down on "hobbyists", they are coming down on folks that choose to violate the terms of service for XBox Live, that's all. I say "hobby away", just don't violate the terms of service on XBox Live. Keep an un"hobbied" Xbox around for that.
Well then. If the only issue is that M$ is blocking a modded unit (which is a lost leader to begin with), and the end user could continue getting service normally by using a system they hadn't modded, I'd say the people upset about it are a bunch of whiners.
Never trust an atom. They make up everything.
Are the locks on your porsche designed to lock YOU the owner out? If you remove the ignition lock, will Porsche deny you access to the road or indeed refuse to service the rest of the car?
But why I am talking to you, Bill Gates is here and I see you have already assumed to position. Have fun.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Everyone knows the one reason people mod Xbox360. Piracy. There aren't more than a handful of legitimate homebrew Xbox360 apps, and many of those require downloading ROM images. So yes, please go ahead and join this lawsuit and submit your personal information. Doing so amounts to little more than admitting to copyright infringement. Just don't be surprised if you get a call from gaming industry lawyers looking to sue you for pirating games.
They could ban you because you are using a modded Xbox, or because you used a dirty word in chat, or because saw your cam feed and they think you're ugly. Xbox Live membership isn't a government program, so they can use pretty much any reason whatsoever to ban you or your console from using the service. Hell, even the protected statuses like sex, race, or religion aren't protected for private services that receive no government funding.
The offline usability angle may have some merit if Microsoft can't sell the court on the idea that Live access is necessary to have those features once they are enabled. The loss of account time that had already been paid for may also be actionable despite the claim that the account is still usable with another console, due to Microsoft knowingly introducing the expensive barrier to reentry of having to acquire another Xbox in order to use that remaining service time.
Microsoft disabling certain offline capabilities of modded consoles still isn't a lawsuit-worthy offense. The entire device and all the functionality contained therein is their baby, not yours, until you mod it. Then it becomes your baby entirely. Want to save games to the console's HDD? Write a patch to make it happen. Want to get your Netflix streaming working again? Write the code for it. You still have ALL of this capability, but Microsoft simply isn't going to let you use the functionality they built in - if you want to mod the console, then you get to figure out how to make those things work all by yourself.
Is that petty? Absolutely. Is it illegal? Not a chance. Illegal would be fining you for modifying the hardware, or somehow permanently disabling ALL functionality remotely such that you couldn't even turn it on.
Also, there has to be a line drawn somewhere on the "EULAs are legally binding contracts" vs. "EULAs are just junk and not binding in any way, shape, or form" argument. You can't sign away your civil rights by agreeing to an EULA, but at the same time, a company has to be allowed to set forth conditions upon which their services depend. To say that the EULA shouldn't be binding, even though it explicitly states that you are not entitled to using a modded console on their network, is to say that Microsoft should have absolutely no say in how their network is used. That would mean that they'd have to allow modded Wiis, Playstations, heck, even iPhones... to use their service in its entirety. They have zero obligation to allow this. Short of making you sign a full-blown, notarized contract before you are allowed to use XBox Live, the EULA is their only method of making you aware of their terms of service and thus having something to back their decisions in regards to denial of service.
You're not entitled to anything by the copper and plastic that makes up the console. What you do with it is your decision, but allowing you to use Microsoft's services or perks is solely at their discretion.
How does banning the console from XBL fight piracy? I mean for most people there are only a few games they play on XBL. There are many games they play offline. So why wouldbn't someone who is pirating or using "backup" copies of games, spend the few bucks to buy modded xbox or a banned xbox and play all the off-line "back-up" games on it they can figure out how to get there hands on. So I would think people are still going to pirate the majority of offline games and play them and by a cheap legit xbox to play there few online games on...... I think the most this will do is PISS OFF alot of people and make them pirate even more games to play offline and maybe cut down on the "shared" copies of a few popular online games.... AC II and L4D2... are great examples of two awesome "offline" games you could use you "backup" copies to play offline on a banned xbox
That being said, I have a modded Xbox 1, just for XBMC, but I'm not dumb enough to try to get on the Live network with it.
If you're smart enough to run and write your own code for the 360, you're probably smart enough to know not to plug it into Live, or be surprised what happens when it goes ON live.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
I thought the homebrew argument had no merit because of the X-Box SDK and it being free to download from Microsoft, and you can distribute your applications... so the only reason to mod a console is to play pirated games.
It's no different for other services - Telephone, internet, Cable or sattelite TV, etc. If you violate the contract you made for the service, then you have absolutely no right to force the provider to continue providing the service.
Okay, but that still doesn't give them the right to take a shit on your telephone, computer, television, etc. Microsoft did more here than just terminate Xbox live service to these consoles.
It's called homebrew...
Brew something up to emulate the service on a private network...
Try learning more about what Xbox Live provides, and what being banned means:
* Xbox Live involves more than the subscriber "gold" level. The "Gold" level enables a number of things, but guess what? The "free" level is required for a great deal of other xbox functionality. Lose that, and you're going to miss out on much of what the Xbox can do.
* "Disabling Xbox HDD Functionality." The DRM requires that the xbox connect to Xbox Live for this to work. It checks the DVD, then checks the serial of the DVD, verifies it's not in use elsewhere (simultaneously), and then it will let you play. Oddly enough, Valve's Steam does the same thing for steam games. You may not like the way the DRM works, but that doesn't change the fact it requires Xbox Live (though not the "gold" service) to work. For non-banned consoles, games installed to the HDD don't work if you swap the hard drive to a new console -- you have to delete & re-install the game. (Having done this in the past week, I know this for certain). Yup - if you install the game to the hard drive, it gets the Xbox Live DRM, so if Xbox Live doesn't work, you're out of luck.
* "Netflix, game add-ons, music, and arcade games for example" - all of which are obtained through Xbox Live, and have the same DRM. Xbox Live's DRM is pretty strict - those of us who've replaced an Xbox 360 have found out that all of those things are locked to the console, and require xbox live service to function. If you replace the xbox, you have to get the DRM moved to the new console, then delete and re-download all of your xbox live content. All of the downloads (netflix, game add-ons, music, and arcade games) are also subject to the xbox live terms of service, at least on the xbox. Break the terms of service, and you forfeit the ability to access the content. Nothing new here.
* "Obtaining information from Xbox consoles without permission of the owner" - this permission was given when you signed up for Xbox Live. Xboxes are pretty chatty, if you care to look at their traffic. So are windows machines, talking back to the mothership regularly...
In other words, I don't think anybody should be surprised; Microsoft has long been a proponent of strong DRM (and their DRM at that), and closed non-open appliances. Even with the "original" xbox, it's been accepted that modding the xbox can get you banned. The whole issue has already happened before with the original Xbox.
If you want a hackable machine, build your own PC, and run a "Free" OS like Linux. Don't buy a heavily DRM'd appliance like the Xbox, and then complain that it is disabled when the mothership finds out you didn't use it in the prescribed way.
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
Should Microsoft worry?
no. you entered into an agreement with MSFT. you broke that agreement. it doesn't matter if you committed further crimes (pirating xbox software) after you broke the agreement, that's that the issue. you can mod your console any which way you like it is yours after all., but MSFT can put any terms they want on you using their online service. if you don't like the terms, don't use it ... and accept the consequences for breaking the terms of use.
.. that thinks that modding their XBOX is a legal, entirely brilliant thing to do that has no repercussions. As has been said, for hobbyists there are kits already out there that don't involve modding. And if you do have to break the TOC for modding, then you're likely to be interested enough to have both a Dev / QA box (that you're modding on) and a Production box (unmodded to ensure your creations will work for all). I agree that hardware should be free. And in this case, it is. It's entirely free. Just don't try and connect some random hardware that you've soldered all manner of crap onto to someone else's network. You wouldn't allow that on a corporate network, so why should MS have to allow it on their gaming network?
--- Band: Joey Ultra
You buy an Xbox 360. You plug it in. You go through the setup screens, then crate an Xbox Live account, which binds you to Microsoft's EULA, which specifically states that you are not allowed to mod the console. You mod the console anyway. You get banned for violating the EULA.
Simple, logical, legal. Lawsuits like this simply clog the American legal system.
Bull. Shit.
My Xbox hasn't been online in months and I have both installed and played games from the drive while it was offline. Try again.
Nah, it's fine. Since you can't get on Live you can't download stuff to fill up the drive anyhow.
you mod the console you can't use live there are no legitimate hobbyists running modded consoles on live either to run pirate software or cheat a game you want to play on live and console mod get 2 one to play one to hack or stop being surprised when you get banned and shut the fuck up
You need a Live connection to install a game to the hard drive
No, you fucking DO NOT. You only need to be signed into an account. I've already tried it after reading some of the posts in this thread and it works just fine without the ethernet cable being plugged in. "Informative" my ass.
Precedents for this have already been set, look at the iPhone 1.1.1 update. Unlike the XBox update that has disabled any functionality directly (or artificially - like HDD installed games) tied to XBL, that actually bricked the phones. Or the OSX update that stopped Atom-based hackintoshes from working.
The reason things like netflix and HDD install were 'artificially' tied to XBL should be blindingly obvious, it is that you have a full copy of the game/movie on your hacked system HDD and all you need is a DVD/CD/Authentication crack, which is extremely easy but something you cannot do on a legit, unmodded system.
So the end-game is preventing both piracy and cheating.
You buy an Xbox 360. You plug it in. You go through the setup screens, then crate an Xbox Live account, which binds you to Microsoft's EULA, which specifically states that you are not allowed to mod the console. You mod the console anyway. You get banned for violating the EULA.
Simple, logical, legal. Lawsuits like this simply clog the American legal system.
So after they accept your money they get to tack on additional conditions to the use of the product you already paid for...and that is simple, logical and legal.
Yay for the american legal system indeed.
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.