Man Convicted For Hacking Xbox 343
PipianJ writes "Remember the ruling in Britain which outlawed mod chips last year? BBC News is reporting that a man has been convicted of modding an Xbox and sentenced to 140 hours of community service, a fine of 750 pounds (about $1300), and the confiscation of his PCs and Xboxes." From the article: "The man had been selling modified Xbox consoles which he fitted with a big hard drive containing 80 games. 'This case sets a major precedent which marks a milestone in the fight against piracy,' said games industry spokesman Michael Rawlinson." Update: 07/04 22:12 GMT by Z : Updated to more accurately discuss the story.
Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Kinda relevant, but somehow missed from the main slashdot post:
There are legitimate reasons to chip consoles, e.g. to run your own OS on them. I wonder how the case would have gone had the guy just been selling modded console sans illegal software. Anyone want to turn themselves in and find out?
--
DNS Checking Tool [pingability.com]
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
I read the story on the Beeb earlier and thought just that - it really sounds like a case of piracy (cough, sorry, copyright infringement) which has by virtue of Press Release has been trumped up into entirely about modding a console.
Selling consoles with loads of copied games on them is just plain dim-witted and the guy deserved to get caught - but conveniently for the sake of scare-tactics, there had to be that mod-chip as well...
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, in this instance, piracy is the correct term.
Piracy refers to large-scale copyright infringement for monetary gain.
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:3, Interesting)
Except now they're using AK-47s.
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:4, Interesting)
An accusation of piracy used to be a very big deal. There was usually hanging involved. Your quote from Thomas Babington Macaulay even backs this up. He doesn't call the booksellers 'pirates'. He calls them 'piratical'. The difference being that he is accusing them of having something in common with real pirates, not being real pirates.
Using the term to refer to copyright infringement is roughly as accurate as using the term 'Child Molester' or 'Fluffy Rabbit'.
Unfortunately, it seems the powers-that-be have successfully inserted the term into the language as a means to refer to the infringers of copyright as a sort of pre-emptive argumentum ad hominem [wikipedia.org] .
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:3, Informative)
This is from the introduction to The True-born Englishman [blackmask.com] by Daniel Defoe, published in 1701.
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
"It sends a clear message to anyone tempted to become involved in chipping consoles that this is a criminal offence and will be dealt with accordingly "
I don't understand why that statement is so focused on the chipping part, when the guy was doing a great deal more than that (i.e. selling pirated games). The only reason I can think of is that ELSPA are spinning this as a way to deter a larger amount of people from the lesser 'crime' of chipping.
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:2, Interesting)
That's how these think. They try to create impressions. "Downloading is illegal" where in most cases it is not (uploading is), "modding is punished severly" when we don't have a solid basis for that statement yet.
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:2, Informative)
I don't often support the moderation system, but in this case the parent poster must be modded down so is post is invisible, as he is giving misinformation which could lead to people committing criminal acts when they think they are legal. Why he was modded up I do not know, the moderator must be a pirate.
Jurisdiction (Score:5, Informative)
In Canada downloading *absolutely is* legal. There have been rulings on this point from the high courts, and the CPCC is steamed about it. The comment from the minister in charge of these things was something like "It is very disappointing to discover that this is the case in Canadian law. We'll have to fix that."
They haven't fixed it yet, and Canada is hardly the most IP liberal country in the world. I believe France had similar rulings lately, largely because they have a similar copyright levy system.
Even in the US, though, downloading is *not* a criminal offense. You cannot go to jail for downloading. You can only go to jail for distribution. It's illegal, and you'd have to pay damages to the RIAA, but you will not have a criminal record. The FBI and local police will not and cannot investigate downloading. There will be no wiretaps to find out if you're downloading.
It simply isn't that kind of offense, which is why the RIAA has its own evidence gathering goons.
Even if it were a criminal offense, it would be a stupid thing to try to prosecute. The burden of proof in criminal court is "beyond reasonable doubt." Hard for downloads, only really worth trying for distribution. In civil court it's "the preponderance of evidence", which is easy.
Re:Jurisdiction (Score:2)
So you're trying to say that a 100GB library of MP3s - with no original media even having been purchased - is not a copyright violation ?
You'll have to pardon my scepticism.
Re:Jurisdiction (Score:3, Informative)
Assuming you're in Canada, the first part is true but the second part is not. There's no requirement that the media have a levy paid on it. The section that deals with the levy and the section that deals with copying are seperate.
So yes, you can copy your CDs (or your friends' CDs) to your hard drive even though there's no levy paid on hard drives.
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember that if you repeat a big lie loud and often enough, people eventually start to believe it.
In the future, sources will quote press releases such as this one while arguing that modding should be/is illegal. Similar to the process we have now whereby American copyright terms are increased to match European terms, and then Europe
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:3, Insightful)
And everyone whose XBox I've modded haven't either (unless they know someone other than me to burn them which they don't). They play their own games that they bought/rented, but that's it.
Nice assumption though.
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:5, Funny)
he should definitely get the death penalty for this.
</sarcasm>
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:2)
Who knows, maybe the games were simply demos out of PC game magazines. For a while, even the breakfast cereal makers were giving away PC games with each box (Prince of Persia etc...).
Having a console system with 80 pre-insta
Re:Er, this is actually about boring old piracy (Score:3, Interesting)
It looks like the court did not actually think the games were worth much anyway. Certainly nothing like retail price. Note that the £750 isn't a fine it's his court costs. 38 hard disks containing 80 games equates to 3,040 games. He has 140 hours of community service, thus a game equates to under 3 minutes worth of of work. 140 hours @ £4.20/hour equates to £588. Dividing this by 3,04
Re:Your anti-DRM mission today: Lesbian Strapon po (Score:2, Funny)
it doesn't (Score:2, Insightful)
Blame the media and lazy submitters (Score:2)
Man convicted for chipping Xbox Xbox console
(image)
(NOTE: extra-tiny caption. almost invisible)"The Xbox was fitted with a 200GB hard drive packed with games"
A 22-year-old man has become the first person in the UK to be convicted for modifying a video games console."
Re:Blame the media and lazy submitters (Score:5, Funny)
Man convicted for chipping Xbox Xbox console
(image)
(NOTE: extra-tiny caption. almost invisible)"The Xbox was fitted with a 200GB hard drive packed with games"
A 22-year-old man has become the first person in the UK to be convicted for modifying a video games console."
It's like seeing this on slashdot front page:
headline "Man convicted for running a distro of linux"
in the story: "-CD through the skull of a apple fan boi."
Re:Blame the media and lazy submitters (Score:2)
Re:it doesn't (Score:2, Redundant)
You are preaching to the choir.
I love this snippet from the
#1: He was selling his modded Xboxs, instead of modding it for personal use,
#2: but what precedent does this set for casual homebrew gamers and importers?
Probably no more than the logic between #s 1 & 2 above. "He was selling" but "what does this mean for casual people".
I think he needed to think a bit before he submitted his story. I think a lot of people who submit poorly written copy to accompany stories are: 1)
I'm glad he didn't get jail time! (Score:2)
I was *very* amazed (and pleased!) that he didn't get jail time. Maybe if this had happened in the USA he could have ended up sitting in prison for a few years. Sounds like he got off a little easy, but maybe in this case the punishment finally fit the crime a little better.
Re:I'm glad he didn't get jail time! (Score:2)
The big "conviction" story in the UK today is that of a 15 year-old (now 16) who raped his teacher [bbc.co.uk].
Today he was sentenced to "life imprisonment" - but in the UK, that now means about 4 years. He'll be free before he's 21.
Re:So, uh (Score:2)
Why not?
it's illegal
Why?
What precedent does it set? (Score:5, Funny)
Uh, aren't you leaving something out? (Score:5, Informative)
"The man had been selling modified Xbox consoles which he fitted with a big hard drive containing 80 games."
So.. um.. not just mod chips, then.
Precedent or no, this guy no more deserves our sympathy or support than some guy selling bootlegged CDs on a street corner.
Re:Uh, aren't you leaving something out? (Score:2)
I've noticed a few misleading technology articles in the past week or so on the BBC. It's rather disappointing too, since the BBC's news reporting is generally excellent. For instance, there's the article [bbc.co.uk] about how people think that downloading things is different to theft - no note of the fact that it isn't, actually being copyright infringement. Another example is the article [bbc.co.uk] about th
In my admittedly limited experience (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't follow the BBC closely and I don't really know much about their normal news coverage. But it seems that on this one set of subjects they seem incapable of or unwilling to write a balanced article.
Somehow I don't think it's just a coincidence that the BBC is, itself, a large traditional commercial copyright holder.
Re:Uh, aren't you leaving something out? (Score:3, Insightful)
From my experience in NYC, most street vendors selling pirated music, movies, bags, t-shirts, whatever, have been very hard working immigrants..
They would sell fruit (as the Jews, Italians, and Irish of old did), they would sell rags, they would sell pottery, paint, poems, dishes or used magazines, except for one thing: bootleg music and movies and games make more money, have a bigger demand. S
Re:Uh, aren't you leaving something out? (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Are the 80 games copyrighted? And did the man need and not have permission from the copyright holders? The implication is "yes" and "yes", meaning he violated copyright. But the article doesn't make this point clear. Perhaps he was buying legit copies and merely repackaging and reselling them, which may but should not require any special permission from copyright holders.
2. What exactly was he convicted of? And what is he guilty of? The article says he was convicted of
Don't worry (Score:3, Insightful)
Right, so he deserved it ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Right, so he deserved it ... (Score:2)
But seri
Re:Right, so he deserved it ... (Score:2)
I'm not sure whether that's likely or whether it's more reasonable to assume that it was in fact illegally-copied games, but as they say - in dubio pro reo.
DIY probably won't be enforced, sellers are toast (Score:3, Informative)
Do it yourselfers who only modify boxes for themselves probably won't be bothered.
Those who do it for friends for free or just the cost of parts may but only if someone rats them out.
Those who are doing a high-volume business OR who are making any kind of profit are toast.
In a nutshell, the industry will play wack-a-mole and go after the higher-profile targets first.
If he wasn't selling them... (Score:4, Interesting)
(BTW: For those who havn't done it, modding an xbox is so easy that virtually anyone can do it. It actually takes longer to take the thing apart than it does to install the modchip and a bigger HD).
N.
Re:If he wasn't selling them... (Score:2)
Don't Mod Xboxes (Score:4, Funny)
Rewrite the summary (Score:4, Insightful)
Question for Slashdotters (Score:2)
In that way, isn't Slashdot doing a disservice to the OMOH by blurring the line between it and the negative Mainstream Meaning of Hack (MMOH)?
I mean, it is an effect of a legislation that expels from legality many playful activities associated with the OMOH, but the deliberate breaking of laws is certainly MMOH, isn't?
How does
It never ceases to amaze me..... (Score:4, Insightful)
Next time excercise some editorial control and highlight the fact the man was selling Pirated Xbox software and that this was all part of a greater nonissue. You pirate software and sell it(Whether in Hard Drive or Disc Format) you are going to get the hammer. Guy got off amazingly light in the face of what he was doing.
Do you actually know what he was convicted for? (Score:3, Informative)
Without the court docket all we have to go on is the article. The article says he was actually convicted for chipping, not copyright violation. Possibly he plea-bargained down to that (or the UK equivalent)... but regardless, IF he was convicted for chipping then this case can be used to help make the next case against someone doing
Re:Do you actually know what he was convicted for? (Score:3, Informative)
FYI: there is no equivalent in the UK. The closest we have is a system where the judge is supposed to take into account during sentencing the fact that the perpetrator admitted his crime, and reduce the sentence appropriately.
The Crown Prosecution Service is always supposed to prosecute every crime as far as they believe they can prove it.
It's worth noting that chipping (i.e. contributory copyright infringement) isn't a criminal offence but
Re:It never ceases to amaze me..... (Score:2)
Piece by piece, and little by little, consumers rights are being stripped away.
Re:It never ceases to amaze me..... (Score:2)
perhaps the poster didn't bother to read the article, but BBC themselves in my opinion is the one who is spreading F.U.D. if they are at all.
Just RTFA people!!! it's about CHIPPING (Score:3, Informative)
And remember... (Score:4, Insightful)
The point.... (Score:4, Insightful)
HOW LONG BEFORE I NEED TO HAVE A FEDERALLY APPROVED "SOLDERING IRON" OR "OSCILLOSCOPE" LICENSE?!
Now this guy got nailed for piracy but the quote about "chipping consoles is an illegal act" towards the end makes me uneasy. Real uneasy. It's only a matter of time before people get nailed like this under the US DMCA.
They aren't using this guy as a posterboy for generic anti-piracy, they are using him as an example for mod-chipping.
Re:The point.... (Score:2)
You'll be fine unless sodering irons or oscilloscopes threaten corporate or governmental interests.
Thank you lameness filter, I really appreciate that when quoting somebody else I get smacked and can't post what I'm trying to say. I'm full aware that all caps is similar to yelling. The original poster was yelling.
Calm down. (Score:2)
Re:The point.... (Score:2)
Definitely a thought-provoking piece, and you really have to wonder just how visionary RMS really was when he wrote it. I hope that he wasn't, for obvious reasons, but it's rather scary to see that the things he writes about are already here, even though applied on a different level (hardware instead of software).
Re:The point.... (Score:2)
I don't know about you, but I've never had to sign a contract to buy any game console.
Re:The point.... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's fundamentally flawed, defeat
Re:The point.... (Score:3, Interesting)
If you want to modify something - anything - the first things you should do is find out (a) is it safe ? (oops maybe I shouldn't have knocked down that load bearing wall) and (b) is it legal? (No sir you CAN't wire your garde
Re:The point.... (Score:2)
If I buy a box with a CD therein and then click agree, that doesn't make an agreement by a long shot. To have a legally binding agreement of any kind, the parties to the agreement have to be unambiguously identified and must be of legal age to enter into an agreement. Just clicking a mouse on a computer does neither. Nobody can prove who clicked the mouse, and if the person who might ostensibly have clicked it was of legal age. Kids routinely install software in computers a
How can chipping be illegal? (Score:3, Interesting)
I would hope that if I bought the hardware I'd be entitled to do whatever I liked to it, provided I didn't actually break the law by putting pirated games on it.
I fail to see how taking a soldering iron to your X-Box can be interpreted as an illegal act.
Re:How can chipping be illegal? (Score:2)
Because it is. The law is not about justice or morals or ethics, it's ultimately about what interest group can bribe the government to imprison or shoot their opponents.
TWW
Re:How can chipping be illegal? (Score:5, Informative)
Did you miss this link [slashdot.org] in the submission? The fact that mod chips disable a copy protection mechanism makes them illegal, according to the court, whether or not they're actually used to play illegally copied games. The court makes case law. It's now up to UK legislators to change the situation.
I would hope that if I bought the hardware I'd be entitled to do whatever I liked to it, provided I didn't actually break the law by putting pirated games on it.
I would hope so too, but unfortunately, the DMCA and the EUCD were passed into law. Now, manufacturers can legally prevent you from doing what you want with the equipment you buy from them, by forcing you to disable access controls (thus breaking the law) in order to do it.
Ugh! (Score:2)
80 games (Score:5, Funny)
That's like giving out 80 bags of hash with every bong you sell....the cops probly care more about the amount of hash you're giving out than they are the fact that you're selling bongs.
Re:80 games (Score:2)
Excuse me, that's "infringe" on the hash.
Re:80 games (Score:3, Informative)
Cloning Marijuana Made Simple. [marijuanapassion.com]
Re:80 games (Score:3, Interesting)
But then again, theres also a law on the books that says it illegal to tie my horse on the south side of a street on a sunday.
eh...
Re:80 games (Score:3, Interesting)
Weed is still illegal, but bongs are just water pipes and they aren't necessarily used for illegal activity. Just like BitTorrent, if you think about it.
Like software, I guess (Score:3, Insightful)
Its an interesting conundrum which is only showing up in the computer age. If I bought a car tire, turned tied it to a tree and used it as a swing, I could do so. If I resold it as a swing, the manufacturers wouldn't care. It would still be an increase in their sales.
What gives with computer hardware/software anyways? Why does it have to be so different? I think the only problem here (which I agree to) is that some mods can be used to play games which were copied without first buying them. I think to make this go away: 1) cheaper replacements for broken discs past warranty should be allowed (some companies charge $20 or $30! - the cost of the game), 2) allow for some way to mod it without circumventing the copy protection on the games while still allowing functionality.
For example, with #2, if you want to mod your X-BOX as a weather station, to stream media in your house, to make the next Terminator robot, you should be allowed to - and even resell the design. In this way, you're using the hardware as you want to, MS makes the hardware sale (their prob if they sell at a loss) and you don't get to copy games.
But, software IS different. (Score:2)
But the thing about software. I do agree that some companies are trying to push the envelope when it comes to ownership versus a licence to "use" the software. But there's a reson for it.
Sure, you can buy that tire and use it as a rope swing, but you can't copy the tire and equip
Re:Like software, I guess (Score:2)
What if they sold the car tires at a loss assuming that you'll buy lots of gas (or something; tires are a weak metaphor) and the car companies get a cut of the gas price?
The only reason a full computer is being sold at less than $150 is that
I'm sorry... (Score:4, Insightful)
I personally think (mod me up/down/whatever) that this kind of ruling is stupid. I do not like this one bit, this seems to screw over everyone who wishes to make sure their system works with any software they buy that's "designed" for such a system. (This also makes me wonder, why develop PAL and NTSC? I mean, if you're going to make the system, (from now on replace system with XBox) and distribute it worldwide, should this XBox not have the same hardware, same BIOS, etc? Why the hell would I need to buy the same XBox, TWICE, from different countries just so I can play a game from a differnt land?
Just to clear it up, I don't own an XBox (The whole statement above is a theoretical/POV one) and this is one of the reasons I'll *NEVER* buy a console, and instead wait for emulation.
Depends. (Score:4, Interesting)
It really doesn't matter, if my understanding of the legal system is even vaguely close to accurate, as to whether the person was "guilty" of software piracy, if he was in fact prosecuted under a different law entirely. What matters is what the judge ruled on, how and why.
For example, if the judge said something along the lines of "the piracy was the offence, and the xbox mods were an aggravating factor", then I don't think there's anything to be too concerned about.
On the other hand, if it was the reverse of that, that the mods were the offence, and the piracy was an aggravating factor, then there could be some implications, as that would imply that the piracy was merely a detail that made things worse, in the eyes of the law.
Without clearer information on exactly what was said, and without some input from a legal expert who can give some interpretation, it's very hard to see what exactly this case means. However, if the latter idea (ie: mods are bad) is correct, then what we're seeing is probably the "worse possible case". In other words, someone who was caught selling modded boxes only would not be likely to get anything worse.
Of course, the whole thing might be thrown out on appeal. The appeals process would go to the appeals court, then eventually to the House of Lords, and (if necessary) to the European Court of Human Rights. The House of Lords has a lot of grudge matches going with the House of Commons at the moment, so don't expect them to be sympathetic to the Government. The EU is in an even worse mood, so if it gets to them, almost anything could happen - and probably will.
This is not like America, where the Government can throw around impeachment threats, whenever the Supreme Court rules against them. The Law Lords cannot be impeached by the sitting Government and have pretty much free reign to decide how they like. They are supposed to rule by the law, but when they get seriously narked by Government attitudes, they're just as likely to rule in retaliation.
Most likely, it won't go to appeal, as the fine isn't super-huge and community service is unlikely to involve the rooftop of Stangeways, or the insides of Dartmoor's equally notorious prison. Depending on how many boxes were sold, he might easily cover the costs of the computers and the fines from his "income".
Just for fun (Score:5, Informative)
PipianJ writes "Remember the ruling in Britain which outlawed mod chips last year? BBC News is reporting that a man has been convicted of modding an Xbox and sentenced to 140 hours of community service, a fine of 750 pounds (about $1300), and the confiscation of his PCs and Xboxes From the article: "The man had been selling his modded Xboxs, instead of modding it for personal use, but what modified Xbox consoles which he fitted with a big hard drive containing 80 games. 'This case sets a major precedent does this set for casual homebrew gamers and importers?" which marks a milestone in the fight against piracy,' said games industry spokesman Michael Rawlinson."Update: 07/04 22:12 GMT by Z: Updated to more accurately discuss the story.
Oh, well if your BOLDING it... burn the modders! (Score:2)
What 80 games were on the drives? Doom 3, Halo, and the like or some home brewed pong, brick, and minesweeper? See how that changes the issue. Notice how irrelevant the process of modding is in that context? So modding is illegal, but that's ok because the law was used to slap a bad guy? No. Modding should be legal. Period. It's my hardware, it's my right. Should this guy recei
Pleas mark Zonk -1 Stupid (Score:5, Informative)
This is about copyright theft, not modding. The title is uninformative and flame bait. Zonk should have known better than to release this story with that title.
Watch this post get modded into oblivion. I don't care, my karma is bullet proof, bitch.
--
BMO
Re:Pleas mark Zonk -1 Stupid (Score:2)
This is like the guy going to McDonalds and ordering a filet mignon. Do you really look at Slashdot and think, "Fancy restaurant!"
getting a plate of Rhesus Pieces
It must be quite the fancy restaurant to serve monkey parts. Perhaps the rainforest cafe?
-Adam
Re:Pleas mark Zonk -1 Stupid (Score:2)
It's like ordering filet mignon at a fancy restaurant from a pretentious waiter and getting a plate of Rhesus Pieces.
Hmmmmmm. Rheeesus Pieces!
Re:Pleas mark Zonk -1 Stupid (Score:2)
"Mmmmm... I can't wait to eat that monkey!"
Re:Pleas mark Zonk -1 Stupid (Score:2)
IMHO, anyone who thinks this is a .... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:IMHO, anyone who thinks this is a .... (Score:2)
Booooo....
Balanced? (Score:3, Insightful)
This brings me to another point: If the whole purpose of a copy-protection device is to stop you copying something, then why do you need a law to prohibit tampering with the device?? If its such an amazing piece of engineering why does it need legal protection? It seems like 'they' are getting the best of both worlds - they can have their copy-protection devices AND the law behind them when only ONE is actually necessary. Perhaps consoles should be sold under a contract making it clear that you don't actually own the console and you may not modify it. For fucks sake someone just choose one of these options, you cant have your cake and eat it too.
Fair use (Score:3, Informative)
Why Is Slashdot Slanting things so poorly (Score:2)
Why wasn't the fact that the accused was allegedly selling the modded X-Boxen with pirated software presented in the post ? Just what is it that goes into selecting a submitted story to post ?
The root name server story is another example if you wan't a mother lode skim the archives of the politics section.
This story isn't about modding, it's not about hacking, It's not about fair use, It is abo
The Crime was modding (Score:4, Informative)
Re:The Crime was modding (Score:2)
Man Convicted? (Score:2)
Conviction should be for pirating games (Score:4, Insightful)
The man had been selling modified Xbox consoles which he fitted with a big hard drive containing 80 games.
So, the bigger crime is that he sold modded X-Boxes, rather than the fact that he loaded it with 80, most definitely pirated, games??? What's the world coming to... That would be like if someone was arrested for having a hydroponics setup, rather than for the large marijuana crop that individual was growing.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well... (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/21/ps2_mod_c
Re:Eh.. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Other Hacks Illegal too? (Score:2, Informative)
Re: It changes absolutely nothing (Score:2)
In this case, you aren't allowed to do it for personal use either. UK courts have found mod chips illegal in general - read the submission.
If you try to make a profit off of it, you're hurting the bottom line of some company and you are going to get slammed for it. How simple is that?
I call BS. Consider these three situations:
1. I buy an Xbox for myself and mod it.
2. My friend buys an Xbox and pays me to
Re: It changes absolutely nothing (Score:2)
The fact remains that the game company's bottom line (which was what the post I replied to was talking about) would be affected just as much whether he sold those illegally copied games, or gave them away for free, or whether they never existed at all. All that matters, as far as their profits are concerned, is the number of people who buy legal
Re: It changes absolutely nothing (Score:2)
Re:Illegal? (Score:2)
Re:Illegal? (Score:2)
Sure, all you'd have to do is take apart an XBox, take apart an XBox 360, throw away the innards of the XBox, stuff the innards of the XBox 360 into the empty XBox case somehow, and throw away the empty XBox 360 case. Voilà!