Are you kidding? It is against the terms of XBOX Live when you have this modded xbox, the name is not yours, it is their's you use their service and should do it right. Those with modded Xbox 360s SHOULD be banned, how dare you think you are special and get things that others do not have in your region. Enough is enough, play fair or don't play at all. You mod your Xbox, your PS3, PSP, Wii...you SHOULD be banned, you are paying for a service that is being provided by someone else, it is not your service, you are just paying to use it.
Its not special treatment. Your not paying for the service your paying for the hardware. Once you own the hardware its yours do do with as you please. And as far as your next post. This is why copyright laws need to be reformed until they are I forward you to revolutiontt
On a side note, the game companies cant control us, they have no right to. If they keep shoving crap out their doors and hoping people will pay money for it, they are gravely mistaken. Ill continue to pirate my black heart out until games start being released that are worth the money spent.
You modded software not hardware, that software was part of the hardware granted and prevented you from playing suspect copies of games the resulting mod xbox is the same physically as it was before at least in terms of function the difference is the firmware and or software on it so yes you hacked a bit of code in one way or another to allow you to play stolen IP. The fact that you bothered to steal the IP proves that it is worth something. The most likely reason you stole the IP is that it was easier and or substantially cheaper to steal than it was to buy that or you just want to think your cool. Hence the ideology behind most anti-piracy options the goal is not to make something impossible to get at but rather to make it cheaper and or easier in general to get it the right way; its a game not the national defense center after all.
Any one who steals be it a candy bar, a car or some ones intellectual property should be treated as a theft and should be punished according to the crime.
As to MS actions well I personally don't agree with much of anything MS does their timing I am sure was in their favor and at the cost of any one but them but it is their IP and they have to right to snatch it out from under you; you do not own the IP you own the plastic, silicon and copper that it runs on yes but not the code, not the game and not the service you are simply paying or other wise being permitted to use it for a time.
As to your comment of thinking its okay to pirate because you don't agree with the cost, by this thinking it should be okay to jack a car because I think its worth less than the dealer is asking, why not just shoplift the game after all they are asking to much for it so its okay to steal it.
If you don't think its worth the cost then don't play it, use, etc.
You meantion stealing, and thievery. What if someone got banned who had only modded their xbox, but did not pirate any games right after shelling $150 for COD4 and XBL subscriptions?
When you break the rules you forfeit your already spent money.
It's not like Microsoft raided these people's houses and took back the modded 360s. They banned them from a service after they blatantly broke the rules involved with using that service.
Don't break the rules then cry that you got caught and punished, anytime you break any rule you do so at a risk. So tired of people not taking responsibility for their own ridiculous and stupid actions.
The question is whether MS knew these people had broken the rules, but delayed the enforcement of said rules to ensure they still got money off these people due to COD4s release.
The argument isn't about whether these people deserve their bans.
I say it doesn't really matter why they chose the date they did, perhaps moraly its wrong most every thing MS does is moraly suspect in one way or another its MS after all but morals and laws are not the same thing for that matter one persons morals and another persons morals are not the same thing.
You modded software not hardware, that software was part of the hardware granted and prevented you from playing suspect copies of games the resulting mod xbox is the same physically as it was before at least in terms of function the difference is the firmware and or software on it so yes you hacked a bit of code in one way or another to allow you to play stolen IP. The fact that you bothered to steal the IP proves that it is worth something. The most likely reason you stole the IP is that it was easier and or substantially cheaper to steal than it was to buy that or you just want to think your cool. Hence the ideology behind most anti-piracy options the goal is not to make something impossible to get at but rather to make it cheaper and or easier in general to get it the right way; its a game not the national defense center after all.
Any one who steals be it a candy bar, a car or some ones intellectual property should be treated as a theft and should be punished according to the crime.
As to MS actions well I personally don't agree with much of anything MS does their timing I am sure was in their favor and at the cost of any one but them but it is their IP and they have to right to snatch it out from under you; you do not own the IP you own the plastic, silicon and copper that it runs on yes but not the code, not the game and not the service you are simply paying or other wise being permitted to use it for a time.
What makes the "crime" you're commenting on in your first paragraph fundamentally different to the "crime" refered to in the second paragraph? You take a very relaxed view in Microsoft taking money off people who did not get the services they paid for.
Would it be right for a police officer to steal money off a criminal after he robbed a bank?
IF (big IF) MS did fleece consumers they're no better than the pirates they're fighting. I
What makes the "crime" you're commenting on in your first paragraph fundamentally different to the "crime" refered to in the second paragraph? You take a very relaxed view in Microsoft taking money off people who did not get the services they paid for. The did get the service they paid for. The broke the terms and then lost the service for breaking the terms. Would it be right for a police officer to steal money off a criminal after he robbed a bank? This analogy in NO WHERE NEAR what MS did. The didn't take ANY think they didn't have a right to. They have a right to take money from a potential customer. They have a right to remove people who break there ToS. There is NO WAY MS could have banned them BEFORE they paid MS because UNTIL the pirates gave them their money there was NO violation of the TOS. Do you MS to ban them before legally can?
You modded software not hardware, that software was part of the hardware granted and prevented you from playing suspect copies of games the resulting mod xbox is the same physically as it was before at least in terms of function the difference is the firmware and or software on it so yes you hacked a bit of code in one way or another to allow you to play stolen IP. The fact that you bothered to steal the IP proves that it is worth something. The most likely reason you stole the IP is that it was easier and or substantially cheaper to steal than it was to buy that or you just want to think your cool. Hence the ideology behind most anti-piracy options the goal is not to make something impossible to get at but rather to make it cheaper and or easier in general to get it the right way; its a game not the national defense center after all.
Any one who steals be it a candy bar, a car or some ones intellectual property should be treated as a theft and should be punished according to the crime.
As to MS actions well I personally don't agree with much of anything MS does their timing I am sure was in their favor and at the cost of any one but them but it is their IP and they have to right to snatch it out from under you; you do not own the IP you own the plastic, silicon and copper that it runs on yes but not the code, not the game and not the service you are simply paying or other wise being permitted to use it for a time.
What makes the "crime" you're commenting on in your first paragraph fundamentally different to the "crime" refered to in the second paragraph? You take a very relaxed view in Microsoft taking money off people who did not get the services they paid for.
Would it be right for a police officer to steal money off a criminal after he robbed a bank?
IF (big IF) MS did fleece consumers they're no better than the pirates they're fighting. I
hope they get just punishment if that's the case.
Well, the second part is not actually a crime, though it is morally reprehensible.
As basic as it gets, it's about responsibility. By modding the Xbox, people knew that it was against the terms of service and that MS could ban the console from Xbox live. They took the risk and probably didn't sweat it because it didn't seem to be enforced that often. Now that it was enforced, people are crying about the timing and the timing is quite suspect. The cop demanding money from the bank robber isn't a good analogy. A better analogy would be the bank taking money from the bank robber for robbing the bank, since Microsoft owns the IP and the service that the people paid for.
While I'm hardly going to defend MS and think that what they did was wrong, I do not necessarily believe that the people who modded the Xbox should be refunded. What they did was wrong and they got punished for it. As far as what MS did, I am of the opinion that they get fined rather than refund money, so that the modders don't get 'rewarded' for modding their xbox.
There is NO WAY MS could have banned them BEFORE they paid MS because UNTIL the pirates gave them their money there was NO violation of the TOS.
You might be right about this, but you might not be. MS could well have known that people were breaking the terms of service, but not have enforced bannings so as to not harm the sales of COD4 and associated XBL subscriptions.
While I'm hardly going to defend MS and think that what they did was wrong, I do not necessarily believe that the people who modded the Xbox should be refunded. What they did was wrong and they got punished for it. As far as what MS did, I am of the opinion that they get fined rather than refund money, so that the modders don't get 'rewarded' for modding their xbox.
Morally, that actually sounds pretty fair to me. Legally, who knows?
You modded software not hardware, that software was part of the hardware granted and prevented you from playing suspect copies of games the resulting mod xbox is the same physically as it was before at least in terms of function the difference is the firmware and or software on it so yes you hacked a bit of code in one way or another to allow you to play stolen IP. The fact that you bothered to steal the IP proves that it is worth something. The most likely reason you stole the IP is that it was easier and or substantially cheaper to steal than it was to buy that or you just want to think your cool. Hence the ideology behind most anti-piracy options the goal is not to make something impossible to get at but rather to make it cheaper and or easier in general to get it the right way; its a game not the national defense center after all.
Any one who steals be it a candy bar, a car or some ones intellectual property should be treated as a theft and should be punished according to the crime.
As to MS actions well I personally don't agree with much of anything MS does their timing I am sure was in their favor and at the cost of any one but them but it is their IP and they have to right to snatch it out from under you; you do not own the IP you own the plastic, silicon and copper that it runs on yes but not the code, not the game and not the service you are simply paying or other wise being permitted to use it for a time.
What makes the "crime" you're commenting on in your first paragraph fundamentally different to the "crime" refered to in the second paragraph? You take a very relaxed view in Microsoft taking money off people who did not get the services they paid for.
Would it be right for a police officer to steal money off a criminal after he robbed a bank?
IF (big IF) MS did fleece consumers they're no better than the pirates they're fighting. I
hope they get just punishment if that's the case.
Well, the second part is not actually a crime, though it is morally reprehensible.
As basic as it gets, it's about responsibility. By modding the Xbox, people knew that it was against the terms of service and that MS could ban the console from Xbox live. They took the risk and probably didn't sweat it because it didn't seem to be enforced that often. Now that it was enforced, people are crying about the timing and the timing is quite suspect. The cop demanding money from the bank robber isn't a good analogy. A better analogy would be the bank taking money from the bank robber for robbing the bank, since Microsoft owns the IP and the service that the people paid for.
While I'm hardly going to defend MS and think that what they did was wrong, I do not necessarily believe that the people who modded the Xbox should be refunded. What they did was wrong and they got punished for it. As far as what MS did, I am of the opinion that they get fined rather than refund money, so that the modders don't get 'rewarded' for modding their xbox.
I hate to keep sounding like I am on MS side here but yes they have the right to ban you at any point (early or late) i fyou break the TOS without refunding you the diffrence that is part of the TOS that was aggreed to and a risk that both parties agree to take hince the TOS in the first place to describe the terms of the service such as to mitigate both parties risk i.e. MS cant just ban you for no good reason after you pay and you cant break the TOS then sue them for the diffrence which is what they are trying to do.
Now I have not read this particular TOS but like most of you I have read more than my fair share of TOS and thats how it usualy goes all MMOs are this way as well, you pay for your month you get band on day 1 you get no refund you brok the TOS you forfeted the service that you paid for. Lets take a look at you bank rober thogh I know you alredy adjusted this is just for fun; your a crack dealer cops bust you and take your stash and 100k in cash . . . you think they gona give that back? unlike your bank rober where the rober is taking the property of the bank and the cops must return it to the bank the crack heads property is forfet as it was illigaly aquiered and is the property of the goverment in the first place so ya they gona keep not that cop as an indavidual but yes the establishment will keep that 100k.
MS did not still the diffrence in cost of the remaining term of there subscription, they forfeted it by breaking the TOS as is defined in the TOS I would be willing to bet. Simple fact of the matter is they where in the wrong, not saying MS isnt a jack ass or didn't time it for max profit on there side but ya they are pirats they stole, they broke the TOS and they got ban, lucky if they dont get suied for damages by the game developers as well or are they? they should imo hell music and move (and book im sure) industry sues people for it why not game industry; they stole a very valuable asset they diserver harsher than what they will get I'm sure since all im aware that they got was a ban.
Regardless of how this trial turns out or who is guilty of what, this is just going to fuel the next step of console modding. People are already working on a hack to get around the ban and I'm willing to bet that in the future we will see a pirate Os replacement that can bypass the need for Windows Live entirely.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
Regardless of how this trial turns out or who is guilty of what, this is just going to fuel the next step of console modding. People are already working on a hack to get around the ban and I'm willing to bet that in the future we will see a pirate Os replacement that can bypass the need for Windows Live entirely.
True it wont stop piracy,
The only way to stop piracy is to make it more cost affective to get your games the right way, lower the cost of the game where possible, remove region resrictions if possible, incress the finacial impact of piracy through fines or jail time beyond lawsuits between private parties. Unfortunetly what they are more likely goign to do is further resrict the system over all as we have been seeing with DRM here resently this hurts every one pirate and valid gamer in terms of anoyance and since it does not make it any mroe costly to pirate or cheaper to do it right it wont help any thing if anything it will make piracy worce if its a pain in the ass to play the game you own and its only a matter of annoyance to pirate the same game then why wouldn't they pirate aside for moral reasons which they have alredy proven they lack.
I'm not so sure why everyone is so concerned about whether modding is justifiable ban or not... The case isn't about that, but about MS being selective about when they ban to maximize profits. It's one thing to have a set of rules, but it's another thing to only enforce those rules when it's convenient.
Why shouldnt it be allowed to modify something you bought? Microsoft doesnt own it, i do. For example: you buy a car and changes engine in it, now your not allowed to drive on the motorway anymore... Does it sound correct?
a)And Microsoft owns the X-Box live service, and they get to decide who can be on it.
b)It depends what you do to the engine. I don't know what country you live in, but most Western nations have pretty strict laws about what's "street legal". In America, these can very from state to state... California, for example, has very strict emission standards. So it is absolutely possible that you can make your car legal to own -- but not to drive -- by modifying the engine. (There are also a lot of things it's legal to drive on private property, but not on public roads.)
Argument by analogy is always risky, but you chose some particularly poor analogies.
I can't see this lawsuit going anywhere. Online services are private forums, and the right of the owners of private spaces to decide who can/can't use them is pretty nigh absolute (at least in America, I don't know other nation's laws well enough to comment), with the exception of discrimination based on ethnicity, gender, or religion. (And sometimes sexual orientation.) The only hook to hang a lawsuit on is breach of contract, but given how EULAs work, Microsoft has the right to change the contract any time and you can just suck it down, and, in any event, the people in breach here are the modders, not MS.
Originally posted by Pryetta Are you kidding? It is against the terms of XBOX Live when you have this modded xbox, the name is not yours, it is their's you use their service and should do it right. Those with modded Xbox 360s SHOULD be banned, how dare you think you are special and get things that others do not have in your region. Enough is enough, play fair or don't play at all. You mod your Xbox, your PS3, PSP, Wii...you SHOULD be banned, you are paying for a service that is being provided by someone else, it is not your service, you are just paying to use it.
My modded Mustang GT would leave your Toyota Tercel back at church club sucking dirt.
Originally posted by Lizard_SF Originally posted by Kuro1n
Why shouldnt it be allowed to modify something you bought? Microsoft doesnt own it, i do. For example: you buy a car and changes engine in it, now your not allowed to drive on the motorway anymore... Does it sound correct?
a)And Microsoft owns the X-Box live service, and they get to decide who can be on it. b)It depends what you do to the engine. I don't know what country you live in, but most Western nations have pretty strict laws about what's "street legal". In America, these can very from state to state... California, for example, has very strict emission standards. So it is absolutely possible that you can make your car legal to own -- but not to drive -- by modifying the engine. (There are also a lot of things it's legal to drive on private property, but not on public roads.)
Gotta say your own analogy is off-base. California may have street legal laws sure but that's California, not the manufacturer of the car. Ford doesn't care what I do with my Mustang as long as I don't expect them to warranty any of my mods.
I see no difference between thieves, shop lifters and people who pirate games. Shame on all of you who are trying to justify the piracy. if you are that broke and cheap, you shouldn't be even playing games in first place. Maybe get a better job so that you can afford things you want in life legally instead of stealing.
If you are broke don't play video games, just like you don't jack a car because you can't afford one.
I see no difference between thieves, shop lifters and people who pirate games. Shame on all of you who are trying to justify the piracy. if you are that broke and cheap, you shouldn't be even playing games in first place. Maybe get a better job so that you can afford things you want in life legally instead of stealing. If you are broke don't play video games, just like you don't jack a car because you can't afford one.
I agree. I didnt realize how much dishonesty there was in the hobby until seeing some of the things posted here. Exploits, hacking, gold buying, game theft and on and on seem to be condoned in this hobby. In no way do I think the majority of gamers are cheats but if what i see here is a sampling of such, it is more widespread than I would have thought.
A recent report shown that Microsoft had banned a closed amount of players from Xbox Live because those gamers had their Xbox modded for piracy play. As such, a law firm by the name of Abington IP, which they are specialized in helping consumers in class action cases are looking into seeing if they can get a case for the banned players of Xbox Live. Abington IP even set up a form on their site for banned players to try to get in on this case and get a potential refund for the remaining time on their Xbox Live subscription. Abington IP explained on their site why they have a case on Microsoft: As has been reported widely in the media, tens of thousands of Xbox owners have had their modified Xbox consoles banned from Microsoft’s online gaming service Xbox Live. Although modification of Xbox consoles is against the terms of use for Xbox/Xbox Live, Microsoft “conveniently” timed the Xbox console ban to occur just after the release of the new Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 game and less than two months after the release of the very popular Halo 3: ODST game. This “convenient” timing may have resulted in more Xbox Live subscription revenues for Microsoft than it would have generated had these Xbox console bans taken place at some time before the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and Halo 3: ODST. Additionally, sales of both Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (published by Activision) and Halo 3: ODST (published by Microsoft Game Studios) would likely have been greatly diminished had the Xbox console ban occurred prior to the release of these games. Well they might come up with a better strategy when or if they go to court with Microsoft. If you are one of the many (or little) banned Xbox Live gamers, then you might as well sign the form and see if you can get a partial refund.
What a rubbishly analytical excuse to procede with a plaintiff.
Because people who mod consoles buy games.....yeah....
Says the clueless... i got a modded console and i very VERY few pirated games (the ones i have aren't available in my region).
Tbh i have two xbox 360s, one for playing the games i cant get in my country and one for playing the real games online and such...
Why shouldnt it be allowed to modify something you bought? Microsoft doesnt own it, i do.
For example: you buy a car and changes engine in it, now your not allowed to drive on the motorway anymore... Does it sound correct?
I agree. It is not Micro$ofts bussiness what you do with the equipment you bought unless it is illegal to modify your Xbox, which I strongly doubt it is.
It is illegal, as it is also illegal to make private servers of MMOs....it falls under the copyright acts.
People have so many excuses... Mostly the fact that it's harmless hardware that "They own".... While, microsoft cannot take your hardware away no matter how much you mod it, because "IT IS YOURS", They can prevent you from using their online services, which the TOS directly effects.
The TOS is the TOS no matter how you cut it. Microsoft has every right to ban them. I half to laugh a little at the wordage on the plaintiffs litigation though. Completely silly, yet pretty sound, if not extremely "beating around the bush"
Based on the justification given in the OP, I don't think they have a leg to stand on. HOWEVER, look at it this way: MS bans a whole mess of consoles. They provide absolutely NO option for contesting a ban, the only option one has is to buy a new console. Now, if all the banned consoles deserve to be banned, then its all good. 2 problems with that however: 1. You have to be willing to accept that Microsoft ran an operation with a 100% success rate. 2. IF you're willing to believe that MS is capable of running an operation with a 100% success rate, and that every single person banned deserved it, then it wouldn't have cost MS anything to offer a token option for protesting the ban, since no one would have been able to take advantage of it. Given all that, its clear to me, that regardless of their justifiable right to ban, the fact that the ONLY solution is to buy another console makes me think MS was using the ban-hammer to generate revenue, and if anyone innocent wants to take them to court over that, they'd probably have a case. The people who modded don't have a chance in hell.
Yea, and even if it is the case that microsoft banned people at a certain period to make revenue. Microsofts litigation will be to reinforce the fact that they strictly adhere to the TOS.
There is nothing illegal about banning people for doing something against a TOS. If microsoft wired a revenue strategy along side the bannings, then all the better for them. The plaintiff would have a decent case if microsoft never warned against modifications in the TOS, then banned people with modding as an injust excuse to gain revenue.
The fact that it is against the TOS give microsoft a incredibly large favor of this case. The job of the case is to decide the fact of issue. No doubt, microsoft has the overwhelming swing and justification to reinforce what they did, irregardless of whether they where milking the fat cow, because that fat cow had a justification to be milked. Microsoft just happened to choose the right time and place to add insult to injury.
In the end, the Xbox360's TOS serves as a "Cover our ass" for any action they take against perpetrators who may end up unhappy with the results of what they did. The gamers are unhappy they got banned for doing something against the TOS, and they are forming a plaintiff. Microsoft is sure happy to know that these poor saps are just wasting their money on lawyers that say they will fight the case for them.
The exact same lawyers know that this is a dead end case, and that they will not win with those fancy analytical allegations. But they are happy to fight a losing battle knowing that they are payed by the minute. This shows off a firm that does not care about it's reputation for winning cases, and only cares about making a quick buck from people who don't know how bad of a money hole they are sinking into.
Why shouldnt it be allowed to modify something you bought? Microsoft doesnt own it, i do. For example: you buy a car and changes engine in it, now your not allowed to drive on the motorway anymore... Does it sound correct?
You can modify your XBox all day. You simply cannot use it on Microsoft's game service.
Your analogy is all hosed: Sure, you can change the engine (buy a new XBox) but you can't hook up nitro (modify) and remain street legal. "Terms of use" violation.
I'm no Microsoft supporter, but I have to side with them on this one. TOS seems pretty straightforward- You cannot use their online service with a modified box. The issue goes beyond simple game piracy. MS has little or no control over how that box interacts with their system and that is arguably dangerous to their customers and business.
Mod your box all day - You can't use their service. Any questions?
Timing of the bans? Might have something there if it can be shown MS identified the offending boxes before the sales and deliberately delayed action. Need to show malice and that's a tough one.
But basically this whole scheme is a cash grab for the lawyers. Class actions seldom produce any real returns for the plaintiffs and are primarily intended to give companies pause before pulling shenanigans. If things get too hot, MS will toss a few hundred kay chicken feed to the jackels and be done with it. Any settlement will be absorbed by legal fees and the rest of you won't see a dime. Or maybe you will see a dime.
Well, the TOS does say you can be banned for just about anything.
The only thing is, there is basically NO WAY to prove MS waited until after these huge games hit to make more money from people buying them, and than (if they so chose to do so), even more money from those who wish to rebuy to play again.
While that is pretty unethical to the max, ethics takes a very far back seat to money now a days, so meh.
Comments
Its not special treatment. Your not paying for the service your paying for the hardware. Once you own the hardware its yours do do with as you please. And as far as your next post. This is why copyright laws need to be reformed until they are I forward you to revolutiontt
On a side note, the game companies cant control us, they have no right to. If they keep shoving crap out their doors and hoping people will pay money for it, they are gravely mistaken. Ill continue to pirate my black heart out until games start being released that are worth the money spent.
You modded software not hardware, that software was part of the hardware granted and prevented you from playing suspect copies of games the resulting mod xbox is the same physically as it was before at least in terms of function the difference is the firmware and or software on it so yes you hacked a bit of code in one way or another to allow you to play stolen IP. The fact that you bothered to steal the IP proves that it is worth something. The most likely reason you stole the IP is that it was easier and or substantially cheaper to steal than it was to buy that or you just want to think your cool. Hence the ideology behind most anti-piracy options the goal is not to make something impossible to get at but rather to make it cheaper and or easier in general to get it the right way; its a game not the national defense center after all.
Any one who steals be it a candy bar, a car or some ones intellectual property should be treated as a theft and should be punished according to the crime.
As to MS actions well I personally don't agree with much of anything MS does their timing I am sure was in their favor and at the cost of any one but them but it is their IP and they have to right to snatch it out from under you; you do not own the IP you own the plastic, silicon and copper that it runs on yes but not the code, not the game and not the service you are simply paying or other wise being permitted to use it for a time.
As to your comment of thinking its okay to pirate because you don't agree with the cost, by this thinking it should be okay to jack a car because I think its worth less than the dealer is asking, why not just shoplift the game after all they are asking to much for it so its okay to steal it.
If you don't think its worth the cost then don't play it, use, etc.
You meantion stealing, and thievery. What if someone got banned who had only modded their xbox, but did not pirate any games right after shelling $150 for COD4 and XBL subscriptions?
When you break the rules you forfeit your already spent money.
It's not like Microsoft raided these people's houses and took back the modded 360s. They banned them from a service after they blatantly broke the rules involved with using that service.
Don't break the rules then cry that you got caught and punished, anytime you break any rule you do so at a risk. So tired of people not taking responsibility for their own ridiculous and stupid actions.
The question is whether MS knew these people had broken the rules, but delayed the enforcement of said rules to ensure they still got money off these people due to COD4s release.
The argument isn't about whether these people deserve their bans.
I say it doesn't really matter why they chose the date they did, perhaps moraly its wrong most every thing MS does is moraly suspect in one way or another its MS after all but morals and laws are not the same thing for that matter one persons morals and another persons morals are not the same thing.
What makes the "crime" you're commenting on in your first paragraph fundamentally different to the "crime" refered to in the second paragraph? You take a very relaxed view in Microsoft taking money off people who did not get the services they paid for.
Would it be right for a police officer to steal money off a criminal after he robbed a bank?
IF (big IF) MS did fleece consumers they're no better than the pirates they're fighting. I
hope they get just punishment if that's the case.
MUNDO!!
What makes the "crime" you're commenting on in your first paragraph fundamentally different to the "crime" refered to in the second paragraph? You take a very relaxed view in Microsoft taking money off people who did not get the services they paid for.
Would it be right for a police officer to steal money off a criminal after he robbed a bank?
IF (big IF) MS did fleece consumers they're no better than the pirates they're fighting. I
hope they get just punishment if that's the case.
Well, the second part is not actually a crime, though it is morally reprehensible.
As basic as it gets, it's about responsibility. By modding the Xbox, people knew that it was against the terms of service and that MS could ban the console from Xbox live. They took the risk and probably didn't sweat it because it didn't seem to be enforced that often. Now that it was enforced, people are crying about the timing and the timing is quite suspect. The cop demanding money from the bank robber isn't a good analogy. A better analogy would be the bank taking money from the bank robber for robbing the bank, since Microsoft owns the IP and the service that the people paid for.
While I'm hardly going to defend MS and think that what they did was wrong, I do not necessarily believe that the people who modded the Xbox should be refunded. What they did was wrong and they got punished for it. As far as what MS did, I am of the opinion that they get fined rather than refund money, so that the modders don't get 'rewarded' for modding their xbox.
You might be right about this, but you might not be. MS could well have known that people were breaking the terms of service, but not have enforced bannings so as to not harm the sales of COD4 and associated XBL subscriptions.
That's the claim anyway.
MUNDO!!
Morally, that actually sounds pretty fair to me. Legally, who knows?
MUNDO!!
What makes the "crime" you're commenting on in your first paragraph fundamentally different to the "crime" refered to in the second paragraph? You take a very relaxed view in Microsoft taking money off people who did not get the services they paid for.
Would it be right for a police officer to steal money off a criminal after he robbed a bank?
IF (big IF) MS did fleece consumers they're no better than the pirates they're fighting. I
hope they get just punishment if that's the case.
Well, the second part is not actually a crime, though it is morally reprehensible.
As basic as it gets, it's about responsibility. By modding the Xbox, people knew that it was against the terms of service and that MS could ban the console from Xbox live. They took the risk and probably didn't sweat it because it didn't seem to be enforced that often. Now that it was enforced, people are crying about the timing and the timing is quite suspect. The cop demanding money from the bank robber isn't a good analogy. A better analogy would be the bank taking money from the bank robber for robbing the bank, since Microsoft owns the IP and the service that the people paid for.
While I'm hardly going to defend MS and think that what they did was wrong, I do not necessarily believe that the people who modded the Xbox should be refunded. What they did was wrong and they got punished for it. As far as what MS did, I am of the opinion that they get fined rather than refund money, so that the modders don't get 'rewarded' for modding their xbox.
I hate to keep sounding like I am on MS side here but yes they have the right to ban you at any point (early or late) i fyou break the TOS without refunding you the diffrence that is part of the TOS that was aggreed to and a risk that both parties agree to take hince the TOS in the first place to describe the terms of the service such as to mitigate both parties risk i.e. MS cant just ban you for no good reason after you pay and you cant break the TOS then sue them for the diffrence which is what they are trying to do.
Now I have not read this particular TOS but like most of you I have read more than my fair share of TOS and thats how it usualy goes all MMOs are this way as well, you pay for your month you get band on day 1 you get no refund you brok the TOS you forfeted the service that you paid for. Lets take a look at you bank rober thogh I know you alredy adjusted this is just for fun; your a crack dealer cops bust you and take your stash and 100k in cash . . . you think they gona give that back? unlike your bank rober where the rober is taking the property of the bank and the cops must return it to the bank the crack heads property is forfet as it was illigaly aquiered and is the property of the goverment in the first place so ya they gona keep not that cop as an indavidual but yes the establishment will keep that 100k.
MS did not still the diffrence in cost of the remaining term of there subscription, they forfeted it by breaking the TOS as is defined in the TOS I would be willing to bet. Simple fact of the matter is they where in the wrong, not saying MS isnt a jack ass or didn't time it for max profit on there side but ya they are pirats they stole, they broke the TOS and they got ban, lucky if they dont get suied for damages by the game developers as well or are they? they should imo hell music and move (and book im sure) industry sues people for it why not game industry; they stole a very valuable asset they diserver harsher than what they will get I'm sure since all im aware that they got was a ban.
Regardless of how this trial turns out or who is guilty of what, this is just going to fuel the next step of console modding. People are already working on a hack to get around the ban and I'm willing to bet that in the future we will see a pirate Os replacement that can bypass the need for Windows Live entirely.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
True it wont stop piracy,
The only way to stop piracy is to make it more cost affective to get your games the right way, lower the cost of the game where possible, remove region resrictions if possible, incress the finacial impact of piracy through fines or jail time beyond lawsuits between private parties. Unfortunetly what they are more likely goign to do is further resrict the system over all as we have been seeing with DRM here resently this hurts every one pirate and valid gamer in terms of anoyance and since it does not make it any mroe costly to pirate or cheaper to do it right it wont help any thing if anything it will make piracy worce if its a pain in the ass to play the game you own and its only a matter of annoyance to pirate the same game then why wouldn't they pirate aside for moral reasons which they have alredy proven they lack.
A very underhanded tactic.
I'm not so sure why everyone is so concerned about whether modding is justifiable ban or not... The case isn't about that, but about MS being selective about when they ban to maximize profits. It's one thing to have a set of rules, but it's another thing to only enforce those rules when it's convenient.
a)And Microsoft owns the X-Box live service, and they get to decide who can be on it.
b)It depends what you do to the engine. I don't know what country you live in, but most Western nations have pretty strict laws about what's "street legal". In America, these can very from state to state... California, for example, has very strict emission standards. So it is absolutely possible that you can make your car legal to own -- but not to drive -- by modifying the engine. (There are also a lot of things it's legal to drive on private property, but not on public roads.)
Argument by analogy is always risky, but you chose some particularly poor analogies.
I can't see this lawsuit going anywhere. Online services are private forums, and the right of the owners of private spaces to decide who can/can't use them is pretty nigh absolute (at least in America, I don't know other nation's laws well enough to comment), with the exception of discrimination based on ethnicity, gender, or religion. (And sometimes sexual orientation.) The only hook to hang a lawsuit on is breach of contract, but given how EULAs work, Microsoft has the right to change the contract any time and you can just suck it down, and, in any event, the people in breach here are the modders, not MS.
My modded Mustang GT would leave your Toyota Tercel back at church club sucking dirt.
Gotta say your own analogy is off-base. California may have street legal laws sure but that's California, not the manufacturer of the car. Ford doesn't care what I do with my Mustang as long as I don't expect them to warranty any of my mods.
And that's how it should be.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
delete
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
I see no difference between thieves, shop lifters and people who pirate games. Shame on all of you who are trying to justify the piracy. if you are that broke and cheap, you shouldn't be even playing games in first place. Maybe get a better job so that you can afford things you want in life legally instead of stealing.
If you are broke don't play video games, just like you don't jack a car because you can't afford one.
I agree. I didnt realize how much dishonesty there was in the hobby until seeing some of the things posted here. Exploits, hacking, gold buying, game theft and on and on seem to be condoned in this hobby. In no way do I think the majority of gamers are cheats but if what i see here is a sampling of such, it is more widespread than I would have thought.
What a rubbishly analytical excuse to procede with a plaintiff.
Says the clueless... i got a modded console and i very VERY few pirated games (the ones i have aren't available in my region).
Tbh i have two xbox 360s, one for playing the games i cant get in my country and one for playing the real games online and such...
Why shouldnt it be allowed to modify something you bought? Microsoft doesnt own it, i do.
For example: you buy a car and changes engine in it, now your not allowed to drive on the motorway anymore... Does it sound correct?
I agree. It is not Micro$ofts bussiness what you do with the equipment you bought unless it is illegal to modify your Xbox, which I strongly doubt it is.
It is illegal, as it is also illegal to make private servers of MMOs....it falls under the copyright acts.
People have so many excuses... Mostly the fact that it's harmless hardware that "They own".... While, microsoft cannot take your hardware away no matter how much you mod it, because "IT IS YOURS", They can prevent you from using their online services, which the TOS directly effects.
The TOS is the TOS no matter how you cut it. Microsoft has every right to ban them. I half to laugh a little at the wordage on the plaintiffs litigation though. Completely silly, yet pretty sound, if not extremely "beating around the bush"
Yea, and even if it is the case that microsoft banned people at a certain period to make revenue. Microsofts litigation will be to reinforce the fact that they strictly adhere to the TOS.
There is nothing illegal about banning people for doing something against a TOS. If microsoft wired a revenue strategy along side the bannings, then all the better for them. The plaintiff would have a decent case if microsoft never warned against modifications in the TOS, then banned people with modding as an injust excuse to gain revenue.
The fact that it is against the TOS give microsoft a incredibly large favor of this case. The job of the case is to decide the fact of issue. No doubt, microsoft has the overwhelming swing and justification to reinforce what they did, irregardless of whether they where milking the fat cow, because that fat cow had a justification to be milked. Microsoft just happened to choose the right time and place to add insult to injury.
In the end, the Xbox360's TOS serves as a "Cover our ass" for any action they take against perpetrators who may end up unhappy with the results of what they did. The gamers are unhappy they got banned for doing something against the TOS, and they are forming a plaintiff. Microsoft is sure happy to know that these poor saps are just wasting their money on lawyers that say they will fight the case for them.
The exact same lawyers know that this is a dead end case, and that they will not win with those fancy analytical allegations. But they are happy to fight a losing battle knowing that they are payed by the minute. This shows off a firm that does not care about it's reputation for winning cases, and only cares about making a quick buck from people who don't know how bad of a money hole they are sinking into.
You can modify your XBox all day. You simply cannot use it on Microsoft's game service.
Your analogy is all hosed: Sure, you can change the engine (buy a new XBox) but you can't hook up nitro (modify) and remain street legal. "Terms of use" violation.
I'm no Microsoft supporter, but I have to side with them on this one. TOS seems pretty straightforward- You cannot use their online service with a modified box. The issue goes beyond simple game piracy. MS has little or no control over how that box interacts with their system and that is arguably dangerous to their customers and business.
Mod your box all day - You can't use their service. Any questions?
Timing of the bans? Might have something there if it can be shown MS identified the offending boxes before the sales and deliberately delayed action. Need to show malice and that's a tough one.
But basically this whole scheme is a cash grab for the lawyers. Class actions seldom produce any real returns for the plaintiffs and are primarily intended to give companies pause before pulling shenanigans. If things get too hot, MS will toss a few hundred kay chicken feed to the jackels and be done with it. Any settlement will be absorbed by legal fees and the rest of you won't see a dime. Or maybe you will see a dime.
Well, the TOS does say you can be banned for just about anything.
The only thing is, there is basically NO WAY to prove MS waited until after these huge games hit to make more money from people buying them, and than (if they so chose to do so), even more money from those who wish to rebuy to play again.
While that is pretty unethical to the max, ethics takes a very far back seat to money now a days, so meh.