Slashdot Mirror
Judge Berates Prosecutors In Xbox Modding Trial
mrbongo writes with this excerpt from Wired:
"Opening statements in the first-of-its-kind Xbox 360 criminal hacking trial were delayed here Wednesday after a federal judge unleashed a 30-minute tirade at prosecutors in open court, saying he had 'serious concerns about the government's case.' ... Gutierrez slammed the prosecution over everything from alleged unlawful behavior by government witnesses, to proposed jury instructions harmful to the defense. When the verbal assault finally subsided, federal prosecutors asked for a recess to determine whether they would offer the defendant a deal, dismiss or move forward with the case that was slated to become the first jury trial of its type. A jury was seated Tuesday."
And tomorrow the feds drop the case since they don't want to set a precedent, and try again next month with a friendlier judge.
more likely he realizes the court has more valuable things to allocate time and taxpayer money on than going after some kid who hacked his xbox. Or maybe he saw that their argument was pushing beyond the confines of the allegedly broken laws, and he wasn't about to let his courtroom be a tool for them to advance their agenda.
Whatever his motivation was, good for him!
federal prosecutors asked for a recess to determine whether they would offer the defendant a deal, ...
“I apologize to the court,” Chiu said at the end.
You know the prosecution will offer that the defendant plead guilty to some bogus made up horseshit charge so that the prosecution can appear not to be morons.
I would counter,
"I would want all charges dismissed as well as my legal fees paid, one million dollars for time and suffering of which, $50,000 come out of your personal account, Mr. Chiu "
Often the side that gets the most serious sledging is the one that the judge thinks is likely to win, because he wants to make sure that he has addressed any points that could be appealed.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by competence.
Unless of course they are committing unlawful behaviour and tampering with jurors. Oh wait.. RTFA.
Also keep in mind the reporter could be exaggerating and sensationalizing a bit. Wouldn't be the first time.
Denny Crane, Quickly!
Whoa ... lets get the facts straight here :-)
:-)
The judge initially dismissed fair use arguments by the defense, but now seems to be reevaluating that decision. Probably because he too the time needed to understand all the technical and legal details of the case. The DMCA is not a 1-pager you read overnight and its implication on other lega areas is huge.
And the kid absolutley did not just hack his X-box. He had a small business selling modded X-boxes to other people, and was recorded by an agent doing exactly that.
I absolutely think that modding should be allowed for several reasons - so I am not siding with the prosecution here. I am just trying to make the facts clear to everyone.
- Jesper
The quotes seem pretty direct. He has some valid points. You're going to bring into open court two witnesses that had to break the law to get your evidence and then seek to have that fact kept from the jury? This is no different than getting warrants after the fact or say a vice cop not just propositioning a hooker but going ahead and sleeping with her, paying her, then arresting her and seeking to keep much of that out of court.
As much as I want people to be able to jailbreak their own devices and despite my prejudice against the prosecutors' case any judge that lets lose with a tirade in a court room needs to be removed from the bench. Nobody should be subject to a verbal assault by a judge or other public employee.
There are rules to follow in the legal system. In this case the judge believe that the prosecution may have seriously failed to follow those rules - in spite of the fact that his job is to know those rules very well indeed. And if the judge suspects your failure to follow the rules are deliberate or due to laziness you may be found to be in contempt of the court - something which can have serious consequences for your case and perhaps even your job in the legal business.
If you show up in front of a judge with a blatant disrespect for the court, the court will give you a hard time for it.
What is the surprise here?
- Jesper
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
Nobody should be subject to a verbal assault by a judge or other public employee.
Conversely, I find it hard to believe that a lawyer has ever received more than 1/2^64 of what they had coming to them in the ass-chewing department.
Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
I hope it does get heard, this would be a great time for jury nullification. Hopefully, the Fully Informed Jury Association will be around to educate jurors.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
is full of beans
You obviously have no idea what the fuck you are talking about. Read and comprehend.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
The article on Ars Technica has a few extra details as well as links to further material.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/12/judge-in-xbox-modding-trial-berates-prosecution-halts-trial.ars
- Jesper
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
You own what you buy. That's why you pay for it. If you don't want your customers to mod your stuff, don't sell it. Nobody can complain if I sell my boiler modded to fit British plugs on ebay. On the other hand, I would sue that Rosario guy for infringing my privacy by recording me on video at home.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by competence.
You mean incompetence. That is a stupid quote by the way because sometimes people are both incompetent and malicious.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Prosecuting people for modding a video game console seems like a total waste of time, energy and resources.
Shouldn't we be focusing our attention on the Wall Street crooks who stole money through the home mortgage scandals?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
I didn't see it shared in the comments, but regardless of the tirade, the prosecution has decided to move forward with the case:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/no-deal-in-xbox-modding-case-trial-begins/
I don't think this is a case of rage. I think this is a case of a judge expressing his opinions of problems in the prosecution's case. And they are serious problems.
Sent from my CR-48
This is no different than getting warrants after the fact or say a vice cop not just propositioning a hooker but going ahead and sleeping with her, paying her, then arresting her and seeking to keep much of that out of court.
... if that was possible I would seriously consider a change of career ...
- Jesper
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
He's just trying to get his own TV show, like Judge Joe Brown.
In your case, I'm pretty sure it's just incompetence.
If somebody fails at being evil, do they really look like an evil failure to the outside world?
Somebody may be both incompotent and malicious, but we'd never notice.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Shouldn't we be focusing our attention on the Wall Street crooks who stole money through the home mortgage scandals?
No, because they've got a powerful lobby. Plus they pay taxes on their ill-gotten profits. So fuck you John Doe! You are going down, you insignificant piece of shit! Come back when you've got a few millions to "donate" to relevant politicians!
Just a quick reminder that you're reading /. comments.
Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
Yes, that was the joke, thank you.
Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
Having been prosectued under the NET act and DMCA the judge in our cases expressed conserns as well. While the goverment had a better case, the judge felt this was closer to a civil case then a criminal a case, and went on to explain the futher education is required by the goverment of what this legislation means for the average person. In the end I plead guilty, as we were one of the first cases to go and had no money for a real attorney, plus probation is much better then 3-5 years in jail.
I think the goverment should prosecute in severe cases where monterary gain or where there is conterfit good involved. But for modders of an Xbox, that is like prosecuting a mechnanic for installing upgrades to your car. At best a Civil case, at worst a waste of federal tax payers dollars and judicial resources
"Please place the weapon the floor, pretty please, and then we'll put you in these nice, shiny handcuffs"
"I would very much appreciate it if you didn't cross that safety barrier that you're now crossing, thank you very much."
Nobody should be subjected to anything *unnecessarily* but this is a judge dealing with witnesses who broke the law while collecting evidence, jury-tampering and a prosecution that doesn't see the harm in what they did and continually asserts that to the court and doesn't see the severity. He's probably also extremely annoyed at how a valid court case in quickly turning into a farce at tax-payers expense.
Shouting is not about aggression - it's about tone of voice, volume, and choice of words. If you're shouting in someone's face directly, or pushing forward towards them, that's just rude and confrontational. But it doesn't mean you can't *shout* at them without doing that, only making them realise your displeasure through their own obstinacy and yet not feel threatened.
Shouting at someone, especially someone who should know how irate people behave and be performing their *own* simple professional duty, won't kill them. Teachers shout at kids in school. I shouted at my letting agent last year (and without that, I wouldn't have working plumbing, or my landlord removing their contract, reporting them for breach of contract, extracting *my* deposit from them via a legal process, and dealing with me direct for even the most minor of problems and actually doing a better job). Parents shout at their children in supermarkets. I'm actually *glad* when some kids get told off because it means that the parent is paying attention to their actions and cares about the outcome for everyone - those parents who just say "Come on, now. I won't tell you again. No, really, come on. This is the last time I'll ask you. Please come on, Jack. Jack, if you come now, I'll give you sweeties" REALLY, REALLY need to have a room full of other parents shout at them until they understand why that doesn't work.
It's not a first resort, but it's the last (legal) resort of the ordinary man. We can't all be martyrs and speak perfectly calmly no matter how annoyed we are, and the *WORST* we can do without committing a crime is shout at someone. It's also, generally, incredibly effective. Try politely asking someone on a complaints desk to get their supervisor. In quite a lot of cases it won't happen, especially if they know they are in the wrong. Without shouting, you end in the the same position. Now try shouting only AFTER they refuse to do that. Now try being obstinate and refusing to leave the building until your problem is solved. Now try shouting some more. Nobody gets hurt, injured, threatened or abused, they just get talked to in a loud and certain tone. It has a surprisingly greater result at no significant psychological cost and it's the most you can *legally* do (I do not in any way condone actually threatening or hurting people - by that point, you've lost the argument and sight of what you're trying to achieve).
If you're really that devastated by someone shouting at you, it makes me wonder just how much of global life you're ready for, what your parents did when you ran into the road, and what attention your teachers were paying to you at school.
Shouting *is* the non-aggressive alternative here. The judge is showing that the lawyers are on their last chance and if they don't buck their ideas up, he'll be seeking sanctions against them. This is his way of warning them, and if it was done in a polite note about "The court disagrees with the prosecution", no-one would pay it any attention and if sanctions were then applied, the lawyers would claim there was no way they could see it coming. The judge has been definite, assertive, perfectly clear, aired all his concerns, indicated the seriousness of this to everyone and yet NOT ONE PERSON has been hurt in any way. I just wish a few more parents were like him, really.
I assume you are a hooker who uses this as a test for vice cops?
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
LOL 'democracy' and 'freedom' are an illusion
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
No. I sell life insurance policies to cops.
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
More Story
Some additional story from Wired on the case. From this Article:
"He produced a pirated video game. He placed it into the ROM he had just worked on. He initiated the game and it played. He showed me that the actual game would play," Rosario testified.
But on cross examination, Rosario conceded he did not write that fact on any of his notes or reports. Nor did it appear on a secret video he took of the encounter.
Tony Rosario is an investigator for the Entertainment Software Association. (Obtained from article posted in summary)
Can I introduce you to the point? I don't think you two have met.
You are welcome on my lawn.
*sniff* aahh ... your wittle fewings hurt ? someone "yelled" at me...and now i feel threatened....
GROW UP.
The modded XBox will be used almost exclusively to run stolen software.
You may be right about the Xbox 360 platform. But if it were a modded Wii or a modded original Xbox, there might be more evidence of actual substantial noninfringing use. Unlike the Xbox 360, which has XNA, these older consoles have no official environment for running original software developed outside a traditional corporate environment, and for this reason they have picked a vibrant modding community for running such "homebrew".
The modded XBox will be used almost exclusively to run stolen software. I don't believe you can say the same thing about vehicle customization.
O RLY?
From A Brief History of Nascar From Moonshine Runners to Dale Earnhardt Jr.: "Its roots go back to Prohibition when runners—people who delivered moonshine, a home-brewed whiskey distilled from corn, potatoes or anything that would ferment—souped up their cars so they could give the slip to the federal tax agents determined to bust them.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
I'm pretty sure if a judge has lost his cool, there's a damn good reason. In this case, all of the above anomaly stated - literally the government has broken the law on this.
You think a judge is going to be happy/calm about that?
that's like me saying hey, I broke into your house and raped your wife, and someone else saying it's wrong for *you* to be angry over that.
it's not exactly reasonable.
I foresee a career in the private sector for the prosecutor.
Im surprised the defense hasnt considered a "substantial non-infringing uses" defense. For instance playing backup disks and homebrew. The well known issue of scratched disks, and the desire for interoperability with non-microsoft approved software. This is separate from "fair use" in that the illegality of the mod chip itself is challenged.
May i introduce you to Judge Judith Sheindlin ...
She's got no issues with berating people in her courtroom whether they be plaintiff, defendant or some random member of the audience. Granted, her show is dramatized for daytime tv ratings purposes. However, she was given the show because of her outspoken nature.
Whether you like it or not, when you step into a courtroom you're in the judge's domain. S/he has rule, and if you are wasting time I'd let you know about it too.
No, it's more like buying a high performance car, then chipping it to remove factory imposed limitations like a speed limiter.
Sure, people will argue your just going to break the law and speed excessively now, but that doesn't negate your right to do it. That whole innocent until proven guilty thang.
Actually, the fact that they slept with her and paid her really doesn't having a bearing on the case where she is being convicted for prostitution. Nor would I consider the fact that a cop bought drugs from a drug dealer, tried them out, said that it was some "good shit" and then arrested the drug dealer. All of the above are arrests for people performing illegal acts. The cops in these cases also performed illegal acts, none of which have a bearing on the original legal act and should be prosecuted on their own. None of the actions in these examples seem to prove that the evidence was obtained illegally. The defense in the case you mentioned simply wants to paint the police in a bad light, saying that hookers wouldn't exist if johns like the cops wouldn't be there to pay them money.
Inadmissible evidence cannot be presented and if the prosecution cannot show a case (because, for example, their proof was inadmissible as evidence), then there's no defence to make.
I'm sorry you don't like it that way, but that's the law.
All of the above are arrests for people performing illegal acts. The cops in these cases also performed illegal acts, none of which have a bearing on the original legal act and should be prosecuted on their own.
WOOOOOSH!
When was the last time^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H first time an officer of the law was prosecuted for breaking the law in order to catch someone breaking the law? Your post is flawed. Haven't you ever been to the movies? Only Steven Segal is ABOVE THE LAW.
As far as I'm concerned, anybody guilty of the criminal stupidity displayed the the prosecution in this case deserves not only to be chewed out by the judge, but to be thrown in jail for contempt. However, I myself am not a judge; I'm just Lilith's heart-shaped ass.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
After all, there's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government actually has is the power to crack down on criminals. But if everybody is a criminal, what can the government do? If the government tries to cash in on guilt, what will it do if the "criminals" feel no guilt over bullshit crimes?
I write sci-fi for metalheads
You're not free unless you're willing and able to kill anybody stupid enough to try to command you.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
Why are our tax dollars paying our lawyer to press criminal charges against one of our citizens on the behalf if a multi-billion dollar multi-national corporation for altering legally purchased private property?
I remember when AT&T was forced, gasp, to use non AT&T phones on their service because the government protected its citizens. It seems we've come reversed ourselves.
Nobody should be subject to a verbal assault by a judge or other public employee.
The tirade could have been very methodical and deliberate. Nowhere does it say that he turned purple, yelled, and blew spittle all over the bench.
OTOH, public employees have every right to "verbally assault" people who are just boneheaded and interfere with the proper function of government. As a public employee I have every right to "assault" you if I tell you the rules, ask you to follow them, make sure you understand them, and then you still come into my construction site and put yourself and my crews in danger. I have every right to "assault" you for behavior that causes the government to waste resources on your boneheaded actions. Especially when you're another public employee!
Psycho much?
Apt sig.
Does the new fcc phone hacking law have any bearing on this case?
As you are breaking the part of the DMCA to use the DMCA Exemption to have your phone to run any network / run software out side of the locked down app store?
Also what the xbox mods let you do this run software out side of the game / MS store and also let you use your own network and not be locked into live.
Just like modding an XBox. You can mod it so you can use out-of-region disks you own legally. You can use it to access homebrew games. You can use it to ignore the non-skip issues with movies. Or installing a different drive in the device to play, for example, BluRay.
All without the purpose of breaking copyrights or any other law, and some are even altruistic.
Just taking Mao's Law to its logical conclusion: all political power comes from the barrel of a gun.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
Wonder if you could expense it.......
Its work-related, so of course it can be expensed!
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
Oh, you must not be familiar with the State of Arizona and Maricopa County's Sheriff Joe Arpaio? He had deputies in a prostitution sting operation receive 'happy endings' and those cases got thrown out.
When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
"Never attribute to incompetence that which is adequately explained by greedy self-interest." -- me
Free Martian Whores!
If he really got it he'd be ruling as a matter of law that the exemption for jail-breaking a phone applies to this as well, because the purpose and actions are the same.
If I were the guy I would not accept a plea and I would appeal repeatedly if I lost.
The DMCA exemption for modding an cell phone applies completely to modding any other device you own or someone gives you to work on.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
No, it isn't. The 2 witnesses in question aren't officers of the court, thus they do not suffer the same risk that those who are law enforcement officers, lawyers, or court intermediaries who are bound by legal oath.
I always see this statement that the playing field is fairly level across the board for this in, and out, of the legal game. The legal pitch is far from level, and if you haven't discovered that by now, if you ever get hit by it, and I hope you don't, it will be a very rude awakening.
For example, there are several people serving serious time for reselling prepaid phones.
So the argument that "you bought it, you own it" that several here seem to be making (and that I personally believe is the way the world should work) is not the way the world always works.
If he were to do that, he'd also be displaying his idiocy to the world.
Modding an XBox360 is neither the same action, nor the same intent (as the exemption).
Prosecution: "I didn't expect the Spanish inquisition.
Judge: NOBODY expects...
That's a reminder that you're reading slashdot comments!
Free Martian Whores!
The purpose and actions are most certainly not the same. As I understand it, modding Xbox 360 drives doesn't even enable you to run homebrew (except through obsolete hacks that no longer work on recent Xboxes). Same with modding Wii drives. They don't even let you use imported games. The only two purposes for drive-hacks on secure consoles (which sign code and region restrictions) are piracy and backups, and you can take a guess as to what the actual, practical percentage of people doing either of those is. The age of modchip = copies = homebrew was last generation. This generation people who want to pirate games just compromise drive security, which is useless for homebrew because the code is signed.
It's easy to compare all "mods" to iPhone hacks, but the majority of jailbreak users do so either to run unofficial software or to unlock their phones, while the vast majority of console modders (especially hardware modders) do so exclusively to pirate games.
Now, if this were about PS3 hacks (which are software-based), or Wii homebrew (software-based) hacks, both of which can be used for homebrew or piracy, then you'd have a point. But it isn't, it's about drive hacks attacking the weak point in media security, doing nothing for homebrew.
The issue is that it calls into doubt the trustworthiness of the witness testimony. If they're prepared to break the law, what else might they be prepared to do? Lie under oath? Does it mean they have a grudge against the defendant? Might there be a financial incentive that makes their evidence dubious? Of course, even if these things exist it doesn't necessarily mean their evidence is bad, but trying to hide this sure sounds like it's trying to artificially add weight to their evidence or remove any traces of such doubt.
You would be unsurprised then, if you had read the fine article.
The judge on Wednesday even backtracked on an earlier ruling that had prohibited Crippen, 28, from raising a "fair use" defense at trial.
Crippen was hoping to argue to jurors that it was legal to hack the consoles because the modification had non-infringing purposes, like allowing the machines to run homebrew software, or permitting limited fair use of copyright material such as backup copies of video games.
While the judge ruled last week that such a defense was not permitted by the DMCA, he seemingly changed course during his speech.
"The only way to be able to play copied games is to circumvent the technology," Gutierrez said. "How about backup games and the homebrewed?"
Of course, while I'm delighted that "the homebrewed" will no doubt be entering the online vernacular in short order, I still want to cringe that they actually referred to it as "homebrew" in a court of law. How about "independent software" or "user content" or basically anything other than slang, which only undermines the legitimacy of the claim.
"Your honor, defense moves that skiddley be bop da booba dee doo!"
"Excuse me?"
"Skeet skeet skeet!"
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Parents shout at their children in supermarkets. I'm actually *glad* when some kids get told off because it means that the parent is paying attention to their actions and cares about the outcome for everyone
As expressed quite lucidly in the first 5 minutes of this episode. Definitely a depiction of the vast range in, er, parenting styles.
as the old judges are retiring the new ones just as tech savoy as us are looking at this stuff and going wtf.
Im surprised the defense hasnt considered a "substantial non-infringing uses" defense. For instance playing backup disks and homebrew. The well known issue of scratched disks, and the desire for interoperability with non-microsoft approved software. This is separate from "fair use" in that the illegality of the mod chip itself is challenged.
It's such a good idea that the defendant was already planning to use it in his defense:
The judge on Wednesday even backtracked on an earlier ruling that had prohibited Crippen, 28, from raising a “fair use” defense at trial.
Crippen was hoping to argue to jurors that it was legal to hack the consoles because the modification had non-infringing purposes, like allowing the machines to run homebrew software, or permitting limited fair use of copyright material such as backup copies of video games.
"Without the Death Penalty there can be no justice."
With no Death Penalty, there can be no state sanctioned murder of a wrongly convicted innocent person.
Yes, it's off topic.
Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
If you were a Judge and had to listen to the silly Bullshit people and lawyers slung around the courtroom day in and day out, you probably blow a nut every once in a while too. Besides he lambasted the Prosecutor, do sub-humans like a lawyers who is a fellow public servant and officers of the court, count as bodies as in People?
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
The examples you gave are clear cases of entrapment. Vice officers will do controlled buys of drugs in order to obtain a surveillance warrant but in most jurisdictions the sale to an officer who asked for drugs wouldn't be considered evidence of intent to supply; the defendant could argue that they were simply in possession and wouldn't have sold had the officer not asked and it's up to the prosecution to show, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the defendant would have sold.
That's why undercover officers who nab dealers for selling to them are careful to never actually ask for drugs, they allow dealers to offer them and then accept the offer. That distinction might seem meaningless to you but it's the difference between simple possession and intent to supply.
Nick
No, it's not that they pay taxes. It's that they contribute to a politician's election campaign. That's so they can get the politician to give them lots of tax breaks. Politicians don't care if anyone pays taxes except their enemies.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
Keep in mind, we provide every judge with a hammer to pound on the table when he gets upset.
Way back when I w0rked in construction, I knew a guy that did the same thing when he would hit his thumb, except he would swear as well. I suppose that's why he was so much more efficient than the court system. In court, they tend to swear first, then hammer.
I think the goverment should prosecute in severe cases where monterary gain or where there is conterfit good involved.
I think they should prosecute Microsoft too; none of this could have happened without Microsoft trying to pretend it still OWNS something it sold.
tomorrow who's gonna fuss
I am willing to bet that if you were there, you would not call what the judge actually did, "abuse" or a "tirade". Most likely he did use pretty strong language. Most likely this was also still appropriate to the situation AND professional.
My guess is this got coverage because you almost NEVER see a judge sternly reprimand a prosecutor. You have to mess up really bad to deserve one and any competent attorney is going to prepare ahead of time to avoid any such situation. Most likely they simply would not bring the case to trial if they thought such a situation was going to arise.
Even the example language quoted in the summary is reasonable and mild, "serious concerns about the government's case."
Not like you are showing yours.
It is exactly the same thing. In task and intent.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
... hookers sleeping with vice cops besmirches the good name of hookers everywhere ...
The purpose and actions are exactly the same. In fact, the intent is exactly the same. The jailbreaking of the iPhone can be used for undesirable purposes just as the jailbreaking of an xbox360 can be used. The fact that you can run unverified software from another source on the iPhone is exactly like running unverified software on the XBox360.
Listen, any denial this (of their same purpose and intent) is almost criminal in itself by denying people the right to make an informed decision. It's a freaking computer that's locked down. The iPhone is a computer that's locked down. The iPhone may be used to make calls but it can be used to install software such a new OS, games and applications. Jailbreaking (hacking) the XBox360 is the same thing. It's a computer where you are gaining access to the internals to perform actions that the hardware developer didn't intend (their purpose was to protect their market-share rather than copyright).
What can't you figure out? You can't come to grips with the fact that it's a computer? Or that it's a computer with software, or that it is locked down to protect the market of the developer? Or that it can be used to do things that would violate someone's copyright? Both devices can be used for the same intent and purpose.
Your whole post is extremely short-sighted.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
I have a launch day 360, which has been repaired (by me) for RROD 2x, and last night the optical drive gave up the ghost.
I'm not a gamer, we're talking maybe, maybe 2 hours a week MAX, with periods of time measured in months where the stupid thing doesn't get turned on at all.
The thing that burns me, I just bought the new NFS a week ago, which worked great the first few days, but definitely was the nail in the coffin for this 360. If I didn't enjoy that game I would bail on the platform.
What would I rather replace this with, another 360 or a PS3? Honestly, I'd rather be adding a PS3 to my collection rather than throwing more money at MS for a new 360, kinect or not. I'd get the PS3 and enjoy it's BR player but I don't want to replace my 7.1 receiver with one that supports audio over HDMI, so the appeal of the PS3 goes way down due to not having 7.1 analog out.
I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't. Who's to say the newly revised 360 isn't going to suck as bad as the original? I mean, what, they revised the original design 4 or 5 times before it stopped RROD'ing.
Ocean is land, covered with water.
Having been prosectued under the NET act and DMCA the judge in our cases expressed conserns as well.
The judge in your case had previously been prosecuted, and that formed the basis for some of his concerns? Sounds like you should have been the concerned one...
Gramps has a black belt in ass whuppin. And that is IMNSHO, one of the better shows on TV when dealing with typical stereotypes from any racial perspective.
An innocent verdict is not subject to review because of double jeopardy. It cannot be set aside, redone, etc, etc. Once someone is found innocent it is over for that alleged crime. Well that means that regardless of the reasons they rendered it, the verdict stands. Even if it was real flimsy reasoning, there is just no way to review or change the verdict since double jeopardy applies.
That makes nullification a de facto ability. You can tell jurors not to do it but you can't prevent them from doing it. If they come back with an innocent verdict it is done and that is that.
That's what it really comes down to. People can argue till they are blue in the face about the original intent, how things apply today, the ethics, etc, etc. None of that shit matters. Nullification is something juries can do because of double jeopardy. Unless the fifth amendment is modified or repealed, it will remain a power of all juries in the US.
What abuse? It was a tirade., Basically the judge saw this flimsy case and spent 30 minutes telling the prosecution that shouldn't be there wasting the courts time. They basically don't even have the minimum to be in court.
Nobody was subject to verbal 'assaul't' here. In fact, I don't even think you know what verbal assault is.
At no time was the Prosecution threaten with physical harm.
Here:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Verbal+assault
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
No, because iPhone hacks can be used for copying copyrighted software (legally or not) and for running unauthorized software. Xbox 360 drive hacks can only be used for copying copyrighted software, legally or not. If you want to run unauthorized software you need an entirely different class of modification, which as far as I can tell is not what this guy was performing.
And after patching the drive firmware, it's still locked down, and you still can't run your own applications or improve functionality in any way. All you can do is copy games. This is not comparable to iPhone jailbreaks in any way, shape, or form.
Your whole post is extremely misinformed. What can't you figure out? You can't come to grips with the fact that drive hacks can only be used and are exclusively performed for the purpose of copying games? This is a technical issue, not an argument or an opinion. It's not that people do this mostly to pirate games (which, in my opinion, they do); it's that that you can't physically do anything other than copy games. The only technical use for drive hacks is copying games.
You take an Xbox to this guy's shop. You get it back. There are only two functional changes to the xbox after coming out: it can run games burned to DVD-Rs, and it's likely to get banned on Xbox Live. Nothing more, unless we're missing information and he was also performing other classes of modifications. It won't let you run Linux on it.
FYI, I'm one of the people responsible for enabling and encouraging homebrew software on the Wii, so I think I know a little bit about secure systems with signed code. On the Wii, buying a modchip will gain you absolutely nothing with regards to running homebrew software. Or even imports. Period. The only reason why people buy Wii modchips is to copy games, because that is their only technical purpose.
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/7043931/detail.html
So I guess move to Virginia.
Anyone know more about this case? Why (and how) is a defendant from the Southern district of California being hailed into court in the Central district of California?
I'm almost more interested in the civil procedure / section 1391 (venue) issues here, than the actual case. Also, this seems like pretty normal behavior for a judge to me; they berate prosecutors for sloppy cases all the time. Just because the judge and the prosecutor both work for the government; it does not mean they are friends or something.
Also, the locution "I apologize to the court", is about the only thing you could reasonably say after a judge busts you like that. You can't very well argue with him in open court. The guy is a federal judge...
Does anyone know where I can see a copy of the state's complaint?
Crippen is charged with two counts of violating the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and faces a maximum five years for each count if convicted. The government maintains Crippen, a hotel car-parking manager, ran a small business from his Anaheim home modifying the firmware on Xbox 360 optical drives to make them capable of running pirated copies of games.
The judge on Wednesday even backtracked on an earlier ruling that had prohibited Crippen, 28, from raising a “fair use” defense at trial.
Crippen was hoping to argue to jurors that it was legal to hack the consoles because the modification had non-infringing purposes, like allowing the machines to run homebrew software, or permitting limited fair use of copyright material such as backup copies of video games.
Firmware modifications to the Xbox360's optical drive do not allow the device to play homebrew, only backups. There is no issue wirh "non-microsoft approved" software here. For that, you'd need to do a more sophisticated J-TAG mod or maybe a modchip. Any mention of homebrew in his defense is utter bullshit.
... And then they gave up.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/crippen-dismissed/
Several dedicated bluray players support this and are probably cheaper than a dedicated dac. Regardless it chaps my ass to be replacing the 360...
Ocean is land, covered with water.
Go and read up on the law. Judges can order a retrial or set aside a verdict in a guilt case, because that doesn't affect double jeopardy. However an innocent verdict is not subject to change. That would be double jeopardy and that is not allowed. You have one and only one shot at convicting someone of a crime. If they are found innocent, or the case is dismissed after trial as started or any of that shit, it is over. Innocent findings are immutable.
A car which will never be used on public roads, does not have to conform to safety regulations, has no externally moving parts, does not move, and does not carry people or cargo.
It'd be more like a mechanic overclocking your sundial.
I've been dying to see a good case study about device modding and its correlation with law breaking so please do provide us with data. Myself and the other ~11,800 users of my site ( http://alldroid.org/ ) are on the edge of our seats to see results that differ so much from what we know. The irony of such a statement is that I can only imagine (which leaves room for shortcoming of course) it coming from 3 perspectives: 1) Someone that has or wants to mod a device in order to pirate software in which case they're a hypocrite and have no business speaking on the issue, 2) Someone that doesn't/hasn't modded anything but is likely speaking based on judgments seeded from their own subconscious (thieves expect people to steal, etc), or 3) Someone that has/does/will mod devices without any intention of piracy and is playing devils advocate in which case I respect your intentions but think your post was a waste given the quality of the discussion above. Myself and 10's of thousands of people I know of mod our phones for the joy of it. Some like the challenge, some like the customization ability, some (developers) are actually improving on the platform, etc... I don't doubt that people abuse the system once it's modded (rooted as we call it in the Android community), but you can't penalize everyone for what some MIGHT do.
;)
How about this logic: You're not allowed to drive a vehicle because some people would use it as a weapon thus breaking the law. The fact that you have no malicious intent or other valid purposes is irellivant. Now take that a step further and realize that what's being done hear in the worst cases (playing pirated software as opposed to backups aka FAIR USE) in many cases still isn't theft in the sense that nobody is being stolen from. The fact is that much software is "stolen" by people who could never afford it, or have too little interest to pay for it to begin with and that means that no revenue loss could even occur.
Now we're left with an even smaller group of people who would mod their box, could/would pay for a game, but choose not because they have another option. Let's go ahead and penalize everyone else because of that group.
Great idea. I'd love to live somewhere that operates on that logic!
NOW if you know anything about IP, you understand that companies must appear to try and protect their property or they lose rights to that property. MS MUST do something like this, but the cost and responsibility should be theirs entirely and not on our government, the jurors, etc (yes I realize that's another can of worms entirely, but I think it's relevant).
By the way, I'm a software engineer/developer so don't think I say any of this half-cocked. I don't want anyone cutting into my bottom line either, but I'm also sane. Now I'm off to go try and root the Logitech Revue that just arrived at my door for free courtesy of Google Device Seeding program, so I can develop for/on it as I see fit. Not that they mind as they realize the benefit of letting consumers have a say in the products they use. Android is proof that the idea is not only viable, but a complete success. Right Apple?
You are an douche, but I will respond anyway. The only thing you run, is your hand up and down your 2 inch shaft. You sell shit. That's your problem, not theirs. The only thing you have that needs mods is your dim witted so called brain. LMAO.
That just makes it worse. If a police officer had probably cause he could obtain a warrant for this type of work, perhaps. But having someone break the law to obtain evidence still puts them in jeopardy. And not prosecuting them to obtain that evidence is something that should be cause for a mistrial. This judge is doing a good thing. Frankly, the prosecution should have been reprimanded.
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1891254&cid=34413838 TheEndOfDays likes stalking and trolling others (as well as starting it up as shown right there)? I like how he was put into his rightful place here in the end http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1891254&cid=34418274 where TheEndOfDays ran like the trolling little coward he really is, unable to back up his trolling and stalking crap. TheEndofDays, it seems that You like starting up hassles, but in the end, you always "eat it", LMAO. Why else did you run like the cowardly little stalking troll you are then? You have no good reasons, but letting you expose yourself for it, now? That is priceless.