UK Courts Rule Nintendo DS R4 Cards Illegal 254
CheShACat writes "A UK high court ruled today that R4 cards for the Nintendo DS are illegal, finding two vendors guilty of selling 'game copiers.' The ruling by Justice Floyd is quoted as saying, 'The economic effect on Nintendo of the trade in these devices is substantial as each accused device can store and play copies of many Nintendo DS games [...] The mere fact that the device can be used for a non-infringing purpose is not a defence.' No word in the article as to what law in particular they were found to have broken, nor of the penalty the vendors are facing, but this looks like bad news for all kinds of hardware mod, on any platform, that would enable homebrew users to bypass vendor locks."
Nintendo won a related lawsuit in the Netherlands recently, in addition to the one in Australia earlier this year.
Apply logic to other things... (Score:4, Insightful)
My baseball bat is a murder weapon. The fact that I can use it to play baseball is not a defense.
Guns for hunting/murder.
Recording devices for reminders/spying.
Tacos for eating/poison delivery.
Re: (Score:2)
Or just apply it to a DVD-ROM, USB drive etc.
Re:Apply logic to other things... (Score:5, Funny)
Just because my Logitech 5-button optical mouse (black) can be used as a controller for the cursor on my personal computer does not mean it cannot also be used to crush the ants that have invaded my bedroom because of all the Cheetos crumbs I dropped during last night's marathon session of Starcraft 2: Liberty (the RELOADED release*).
Thus, it must be regulated as an insecticide.
[*please note this post is for entertainment purposes only and should not be misconstrued as a description of reality, since I'd never play a pirated game since that would be wrong (SEED, YOU BASTARDS!)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you signed those letters as "Anonymous Coward" too? How you gonna collect the re-ward?
Alternative solution (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's almost as if there was more than one reason to own an R4 card and you've selectively used a single illegitimate case as a strawman to dismiss all the legitimate uses, which would be humourous given the thread you are replying to if it wasn't so sad because you are serious.
Re:Apply logic to other things... (Score:5, Informative)
The DSi Flash Carts contain an actual poriton of a copyrighted rom that contains an exploit.
How legit is that?
Re: (Score:2)
Likewise I am guilty of:
hacking because I own a computer,
blowing up the world trade center because I own a box cutter,
being a threat to national security because I am intelligent enough to see how utterly insane that ruling is,
etc.
Re:Apply logic to other things... (Score:4, Funny)
Leave their sex life out of this...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
only one way to be sure- scan a note and see. :D
Re:Apply logic to other things... (Score:5, Informative)
Well, modern copy machines won't scan modern money, or anything with the EURion constellation [wikipedia.org], but I haven't heard of one that would stop working afterwards. That pattern of circles can come in handy if you want to make a convention badge or some such that can't be photocopied.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the US it's perfectly legal to copy currency at 50% or 200% magnification (as long as you don't try to pass it as real money). You see examples of this in print ads from time to time, and in books about currency.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There is a blackbox bit of software bundled with most (all?) proprietary scanning software that stops you scanning money, so what your copier-guy friend is saying is probably true. I found out about the software years ago when I first got a scanner, because to me it is obvious to try and casually copy money to see just how convincing (or not) it comes out.
I knew it would be crap quality - a 300dpi HP inkjet (a 595C, IIRC) on normal copier paper will never look good. It's just that the DRM jumped up and said
sounds like a easy dos attack! (Score:2)
sounds like a easy dos attack! I hope it's a easy reset.
Re: (Score:2)
as long as we're applying logic:
there are scientists who know how to make nuclear bombs!
Fred Phelps for president!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Heck, I'd say I -should- have a right to own things which are only really usable for illegal activities. If I want to use a crackpipe as a paperweight but never use it to smoke crack (and I, in fact would not use it to smoke crack), then I should be able to.
("should", not "do right now.")
Re:Apply logic to other things... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, an R4 isn't as bad as either of these, but, where does it end?
Where does common sense tell you it should end? Mine tells me it should end where waiting until I commit a crime with the thing would leave a lot of people in danger. A crack pipe and a piracy device, you can prosecute me after I use it illegally, the fact that it's harder to do that than try to prevent me from doing that doesn't matter. When talking about the ability to kill hundreds of people, that's another story.
Seeing as how I quite obviously wasn't proposing a sweeping new legal change, I was expressing an opinion flashdrives, I didn't think I needed to spell out specific exceptions.
Re: (Score:2)
Common sense is actually quite neither common nor sensible.
http://www.stonekettle.com/2010/01/myth-of-common-sense.html [stonekettle.com]
I love my iTouch DS, but, let's be honest, it's used largely to pirate games. So, who's honestly surprised Nintendo didn't try to get it banned?
Re: (Score:2)
But largely, they -don't-.
The vast minority doesn't make what the vast majority does right.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Logic? That's only a device to circumvent a judge's arbitrary ruling, and thus prohibited by law.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, we can apply that logic to many things.
Cocaine is a local anesthetic, so it should be stored in doctor's offices and clinics.
Heroin is an analgesic and pain killer, so it's fine if you want to keep a couple bricks at home.
This is a fun game.
How about meth as an example. It is legitimately used to treat ADHD and obesity. If you have a prescription for the commercial brand of meth, then it's legal for you to own it. If you don't have a legitimate use for it, even though other people might, it's not
Re: (Score:2)
My baseball bat is a murder weapon. The fact that I can use it to play baseball is not a defense.
Guns for hunting/murder.
Recording devices for reminders/spying.
Tacos for eating/poison delivery.
I'm going to go ahead and play devil's advocate here.
The baseball bat is designed for something other than murder and is frequently used for something other than murder.
The R4 is not designed for homebrew and is very infrequently used for homebrew.*
Just because an argument can be taken the nth degree to prove your own point doesn't mean that it should.
*This is my anecdotal experience. I have seen R4 chips very often and I have never seen them being used for homebrew.
Re:Apply logic to other things... (Score:5, Informative)
The judge goes into a nuanced consideration of the law as it stands, the snippet that’s being quoted is a taken out of context and ignores that huge modifier at the end there. The section in question states:
The judge then goes on to establish the multi-stepped test required for a finding
Hardly the kind of extremist reasoning thats being suggested.
Re: (Score:2)
If something is illegal because it is generally used for illegal purposes, I have no problem with governments disallowing it. These game copying cards are most likely used to illegally copy games. Some people might buy the cards to legally backup their games, but most people are buying them to illegally copy the games.
*reader of this comment pulls out the "You need proof that it is used for illegal purposes!" card*
Well, show me the proof that it is generally used for legal purposes. If a government allows g
Re:Apply logic to other things... (Score:5, Funny)
meat is murder!
fish is rape!
bread is assault!
veggies are petty theft!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you're doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Only to PETA. Otherwise it's "sweet delicious murder" thank you very much.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you tasted KFC lately?
I think that's punishment enough.
Re:Apply logic to other things... (Score:5, Insightful)
Given how much graffiti I see around here, I'd imagine that a sizable percentage of spray paint is used to commit vandalism. Yet I can still buy spray paint. Most cigarette papers in many places are used for pot, but those are still sold legally. Radar detectors are primarily used to evade prosecution for infractions, yet are legal in most of the U.S. And 100% of all VCRs and DVRs are used for copyright violations, which although exempted from prosecution by judicial rulings in the Betamax case, are still technically violations of the law, just (barely) protected violations. And so on. That argument doesn't hold water.
At least in the U.S., it has nothing to do with the percentage of people who use something for illegal activity and everything to do with a giant pro-copyright lobbying effort by major corporations that also happen to heavily fund the political campaigns of both major parties. I'd imagine that either the same is true in the U.K. or it's caused by the U.S. throwing its weight around. It's also probably safe to say that Nintendo shopped around for the right legislative district to file a suit in so that they would get the most bang for their buck.
It's not the first time Nintendo has been abusively anti-consumer rights, either. Remember Galoob v. Nintendo? They have a long history of abusing copyright to suit their ends. This is just another example.
Precedent set (Score:3, Insightful)
>>>'The economic effect on Nintendo of the trade in these devices is substantial as each accused device can store and play copies of many Nintendo DS games [...] The mere fact that the device can be used for a non-infringing purpose is not a defence.'
>>>
And then a few weeks later, other UK judges outlawed the use of VHS tapes, DVD-Rs, and MP3 recorders, for the same reason that these blanks can be used to copy movies and songs.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is just the dumbest idea in the world, it justifies piracy.
"Well I payed a tax for piracy so it's ok."
Re: (Score:2)
Which is just the dumbest idea in the world, it justifies piracy. "Well I payed a tax for piracy so it's ok."
That sounds verbatim of what a friend who lives in Canada said to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Read the decision (Score:3, Informative)
Jailbreaking (Score:5, Interesting)
One big feature of jailbreaking iPhones is that you can install apps on your iPhone in a similar manner that you could install NDS games on an R4. Does this also mean that jailbreaking an iPhone is illegal there, too? It should be noted that a major feature of the R4s, and similar devices, was that you can run homebrew on your NDS, which I have. There's some decent homebrew (not that great of a selection, but still some good stuff) available, such as the (excellent) roguelike game POWDER [zincland.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, this ruling doesn't outlaw "jailbreaking" (or whatever that scene calls it) the DS, you just can't buy the hardware that enables it. If you found some software-only method of achieving this, that wouldn't be covered by this ruling.
If cracking the iPhone needed a special SIM card, instead of just running some code to crack it, this ruling would make such a product illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't see why that distinction would matter. Of course, laws never adhere to logic or reason.
DVD-ROM (Score:3, Insightful)
So I guess this makes all optical drives illegal too then.
Well, they haven't, but they may as well do it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why not ban hard drives too? And since many people fill their hard drives with copyright infringing material downloaded using Bittorrent we'd best ban that. Bittorrent depends on the Internet. The Internet has does serve some legitimate purpose but this hardly mitigates the fact that it is enables piracy. Ban that too. I have a TV capture card in my PC. Piracy!!! Of course TV capture would be nothing without TV broadcast, a piracy enabling technology if ever I saw one. VCR. Blank cassette tapes. Pen and pap
It's a bit unfortunate... (Score:3, Insightful)
...that rampant piracy has diminished the useful and legitimate purposes of these devices to such a degree that they must be criminalized. I grew up in an era where "homebrew" was the only type of gaming there was. One could say that it actually created the game industry.
But the game industry has grown up now into serious business, and while landing a couple of pasted-together white blocks onto a platform of larger white blocks used to be great fun, I don't think anybody wants to give up Mario 25 and Zelda 21 just yet.
Is that the price to be paid in a world where these devices are permitted to exist? A better question, perhaps, is do you want to take that chance?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's a bit unfortunate... (Score:5, Insightful)
These are just architectural necessities of any anti-piracy system that isn't going to be a penny-ante joke. Whatever you think about piracy, they are quite arguably too high a price to pay.
Re: (Score:2)
The abolition of intellectual property(and related things like DRM anti-circumvention laws) would make piracy impossible by definition, while sharply reducing the power and scope and suppressive capabilities of the combination of law and technology.
I don't get the sense that this scheme has many defenders, certainly none w
Maybe they could settle these cases faster (Score:5, Insightful)
Whoever has the most money wins the case.
That way, we could save taxpayer money and the verdicts would invariably come out the same way as they would have through trial.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not very fair.
It should be like Top Trumps, where "most money" is just one of the stats.
Only the R4? (Score:2)
Not just R4. Read the article. (Score:2)
What about the tons of other flash card carts for the DS? Why single out only the R4?
The article mentions every SLOT-1 card I could think of: "As well as the R4 DS, the ruling covers the following: M3 DS, DS One Supercard, DSTT, DS Linker, Acekard, CycloDS Evolution, N5, and EZ."
To be fair (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:To be fair (Score:5, Insightful)
Will that be your response when this UK court also bans any software which uses BitTorrent?
After all, the fact that it has non-infringing uses is irrelevant, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless, they're the ONLY way to play homebrew on the DS. Nintendo would have a case if they allowed unsigned code.
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless, they're the ONLY way to play homebrew on the DS.
Nintendo's flippant response might be as follows: "Of course you can run unsigned code on a DS: just duct-tape a PDA to it." In other words, switch to an Archos 5 or a Pandora [openpandora.org].
An anecdote of one (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It doesn't matter if 90% other people use bit-torrent to download ROMs, the latest crappy films or porn.
It doesn't matter if 90% other people use r4 cards for ROMs.
If I am doing no such thing you have no right to stop me going about my legal business just because you're too impotent to deal with those other guys without fucking around with what I have every right to do.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but a fair amount of them use it to get WoW patches.
Re: (Score:2)
Be honest, 99% is for piracy... (Score:3, Insightful)
I actually have an R4RS that I bought a couple years back for homebrew development/hacking (but, in the end, the wifi wasn't good enough), but to be perfectly honest, the market for these really is 99%+ for piracy.
Its not that they don't care about noninfringing usage, the court just realized that the noninfringing usage is almost irrelevantly small.
Thanks, Nintendo! (Score:5, Interesting)
I had a CycloDS for my DS, but your DSi's firmware blocked it from working. This page reminded me to look, and sure enough, I can now buy a nice Acekard 2i [gbatemp.net] for like $15 [shoptemp.com] and/or a Supercrad DStwo [gbatemp.net] for about $35 [shoptemp.com] that does things your console should do natively (such as GBA and SNES emulation), both of which use the same 16 GB Micro SDHC card that my CycloDS uses, all of which will work with my nice Nintendo DSiXL.
Of course, since I own physical copies of all the games I put on my flash cart, it's all ethically sound, if not legally unassailable. Fortunately for me, I am much more concerned with living ethically, if not legally, especially when in regards to stupid, anti-consumer laws like the ones that would outlaw this sort of thing. Although Nintendo might be screwed even in that case, because "Jailbreaking" a mobile device [cnet.com] is now legal in the US. Since my DS is a mobile device, and the Acekard / DStwo are methods of "jailbreaking," -- i.e., running unapproved software -- well, seems to me the much loved DMCA that Nintendo would no doubt use to shut these things down in the US... wouldn't actually shut them down.
So thank you, Nintendo. Thank you for reminding me to look for a DSi compatible flash cart, and reminding me I need to do my part to support small development studios like the Supercard and Acekard teams.
The ruling is you cannot bypass copy protection (Score:3, Informative)
Those of you silly enough to argue that living is infringement failed to read further into the article that says that bypassing a copy protection device is illegal. Even if the bypassing device has legitimate uses.
Sound familiar? It's like the DMCA, though the DMCA was updated earlier this week with a ruling that said that no longer applied for fair use (which still blocks space shifting, but allows the formerly illegal mashups from DVDs and Blu-Rays, short clips etc.).
So jailbreaking is still illegal in the UK, you cannot pick DRM locks, and you cannot bypass copy protections that may be present for whatever reason.
Funny, really ... (Score:5, Insightful)
The mere fact that the device can be used for a non-infringing purpose is not a defence.
US Supreme Court in Sony vs. Universal [wikipedia.org]:
On the question of whether Sony could be described as "contributing" to copyright infringement, the Court stated:
[There must be] a balance between a copyright holder's legitimate demand for effective - not merely symbolic - protection of the statutory monopoly, and the rights of others freely to engage in substantially unrelated areas of commerce. Accordingly, the sale of copying equipment, like the sale of other articles of commerce, does not constitute contributory infringement if the product is widely used for legitimate, unobjectionable purposes. Indeed, it need merely be capable of substantial noninfringing uses....
It's interesting that the two courts took diametrically opposed positions on this subject. Of course, Congress pretty well neutered that decision with a succession of purchased laws culminating in the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, but that was one case where the Supremes ultimately got it right.
And then, after all the hate and discontent they raised over the advent of the VCR, the movie industry went on to rake in billions selling VHS movies on writeable media played back on the previously-vilified Video Cassette Recorder. Money they would never have seen had the hardware companies not been free to develop and market something new. That was not a surprising attitude, though: the content cartels have always been about maintaining the status quo, and can't quite seem to wrap their heads around the fact that change can make money. But that would require them to actually think, and maybe do a little innovating of their own. But history has demonstrated conclusively that they don't know how to do that.
Anyone remember Jack Valenti's impassioned monologue about how the VCR would "destroy the industry"? Yeah. He was spot on with that one, wasn't he. This is also the guy who said, "I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone." Right on, Jack. Point is, these are people who don't have anything on their minds but control, control and more control. It's not even about the money, it's about control. They've controlled matters so well, in fact, that I won't purchase a game console. I don't like who I'd have to thank for it, and I don't like their business models, and I don't like the fact that the machine isn't really mine. You want to lease the box to me, that would be different. But they don't: they want me to pay cold hard cash for the illusion of ownership (ha, kind of like buying a house, when you think about it.)
Fact is, the content industries are mostly led by short-sighted fools. At some point, their stockholders are going to have to rise up and slay them, because they're throwing money away by not going with the flow, by not learning from history and their own mistakes, by being greedy to the point of sociopathy.
Are you serious? (Score:2)
The mere fact that the device can be used for a non-infringing purpose is not a defence.
Some real world counter examples:
Ok. Who is the victim ? (Score:2)
I understand that in many countries it is now illegal to distribute a device that circumvents a copy-protection mechanism, but where are the alleged victims here ? The article and the case seem to revolve around Nintendo, but they're just supplying the platform aren't they ?? They don't own the copyrights that are being infringed as, surely, they belong to the games manufacturers - who appear to be absent...
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing Nintendo "represents" these very same game manufacturers because Nintendo licenses the right to produce software for the platform. Thus, as a result, Nintendo controls who can write software for this platform, and makes money from the manufacturers as a result - thus the manufacturers are "lucky" to get anything at all, since Nintendo makes the rules (sound familiar? hint: app store).
It's important to note that Nintendo does produce games of their own as well.
Re:What about homebrew? (Score:5, Informative)
The mere fact that the device can be used for a non-infringing purpose is not a defence
Right in the summary. They know, they just don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What about homebrew? (Score:5, Interesting)
because you can use something else as a doorstop. Can you use anything else to run homebrew?
Anyway, Auntie says that HMRC have siezed 165,000 of these things, that's a sizeable market. Hopefully pissing off that many ordinary consumers of Nintendo products (don't forget, all those people will have bought DSs) will hopefully hit them where it hurts.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you use anything else to run homebrew?
Yes. You can use a Windows Mobile 6 PDA, or an Android device (as long as it isn't sold by AT&T), or a Pandora, just not a DS.
Re: (Score:2)
Are any of the binary compatible with the DS?
No. But as ESR wrote in "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way" [catb.org]:
What do you need binary compatibility with the DS for? Is it just that you want to be able to run homebrew apps and commercial DS games without carrying two devices?
Re: (Score:2)
Basically every device can BE VIRTUOUS or it's exact opposite, so that you can potentially use it legitimately in itself isn't a real defense.
Laws aren't smart or flexible enough to deal with virtue. For example, I just heard on the radio last night some dude who was arrested for "child endangerment." The reason: he saw a fight between 2 kids and broke it up. Was arrested and charged with that. His background: student body president while in HS, went to chico and graduated, went to be president of some school association and broke up a fight between his 2 students.
He asked: "Why is it that I am charged with child endangerment w
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be interested in a link to that story. Sounds interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What about homebrew? (Score:5, Insightful)
Dunno why you're devil's advocating to me, since I was just pointing out that his statement was already covered, but, eh, why not give you my take (using illegal and infringing interchangeably, since I'm talking generically)...
I think a device should be judged based on a couple factors:
1. Possible uses.
2. Predominate uses.
3. Harm to people from allowing illegal uses.
4. Harm to people from removing device from circulation completely.
Yes, this actually requires people to think, and not have cut and dried answers, but I think it's a fair way to evaluate something.
If a device has 5,000 uses, good for it (1), but then everyone always just uses the two illegal uses (2), then you can judge the device as "bad," and get rid of it. If, however, it has two uses, and it's split 50/50 between illegal and legal uses, then you need to use tests 3 and 4. Say, your bomb doorstop. People would be killed if you, or someone you know, decided to set it off. That's a fairly massive amount of harm, and so your legal use doesn't outweigh the need to keep something like that safely locked away. Then you have test 4. Say a small group of people started using pacemakers to high-jack planes. Removing pacemakers from the market entirely just is not feasible. It would be incumbent upon airlines to secure planes against that interference.
Of course, these are extreme examples, and where lines are drawn will be different with different products. Thus, arguing non-infringing use as a defence would be arguing that your personal gain, and the gain of others using it in your fashion, is greater than the loss suffered by allowing the illegal use to continue. In this case, it was decided that more people are using R4 cards in an illegal/infringing manner than are using it for legitimate uses, and the removal of the legitimate uses isn't doing any material harm to homebrewers beyond not being able to do homebrew, which Nintendo doesn't allow on their consoles any way, thus placing Nintendo in the same camp as Apple with jailbreaking, et al.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Please note that I only know the specifics of US law, your kilometerage may vary in the territory of the Queen.
why would a non-infringing use be a defense? If we allow that any tool with a legal use should therefore be legal...
Nobody has specifically made R4 cards (or writable DVDs and CDs, or VHS and Betamax tapes) illegal. When home recordings first became possible, movie makers were worried that VCRs would destroy their market, and sued based on the idea that VCR manufacturers were making equipment
Re: Stupid Courts (Score:5, Interesting)
It gets better.
Now that the UK has banned guns, they are starting to go after knives.
They don't seem to be content with fighting knives, they want to go after kitchen knives too.
Re: Stupid Courts (Score:5, Insightful)
As I understand it, there's a movement to ban any knife with a point, to reduce stabbings. Because banning tool #1 meant that people intent on violence switched to tool #2, banning tool #2 is sure to work this time! (What's that definition of insanty again?)
It's at least hard to make a gun in your garage. But adding a point to a knife? Only the law will be pointless.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A knife with a rounded end can still be used in the kitchen, or so the argument goes. Also, pizza knives (though only Xena can cut a pizza while it's being tossed in the air).
Re: (Score:2)
> A knife with a rounded end can still be used in the kitchen, or so the argument goes.
This sounds like the guy from New York that wanted to ban salt.
The point on the edge of a chef's knife is a pivot point. Rounding it off would kill much of the usefulness of the knife.
Of course after they successfully go after the jabby sharp point, they will follow up with the rest of the blade.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but now when you find someone with a pointed knife, you can book them before they stab someone.
Not saying I agree, but that's the logic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Every day when I drive to and from work I'm surrounded by people who can kill or severely injure with the weapons they are holding. Some of them are clearly crazy! Somehow I'm not dead yet.
Perhaps you missed the point (so to speak) that England did the experiment. Banning guns did not reduce the danger of being assaulted by a thug with a weapon, it merely made it impossible for the weak to defend themselves when it happens. This isn't a theoretical discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
Next they'll come after pointed sticks.
Re: (Score:2)
Next they'll come after pointed sticks.
Are you insane?! How can you possibly think that they would go after pointed sticks next?! Do you even know how much fresh fruit the UK imports?!!
To play the devil's advocate (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously dude! It's like, how many AR15's are ACTUALLY used to kill people? Why can't I just have a fully automatic assault rifle??????????????????
Re: (Score:2)
Very few, the AR15 is the civilian version, and the USA you sure can get a full auto assault rifle. You will need to pay a tax and get an FFL.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd have a point if 99% of people used knives to murder and 1% used them to cook.
UM, you do know that he is not making some sarcastic comparison to the ruling in the article, but a comment on actual UK law enforcement.?
Re: (Score:2)
You'd have a point if 99% of people used R4s to infringe copyright and 1% used them lawfully.
Fact is, nothing remotely close to 99% of DS customers use R4s to infringe copyright (let alone 99% of people). And the correlation between infringement and displaced sales is unknown. And the cost of outlawing distribution of tools that can be used for infringement is not seriously considered.
Demonstrating that GP was incorrect is a fine thing, but your correction would have more reach if you were careful to avoid
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have some data to back this up, or just some sort of gut feeling? When you say something like "fact is" I would actually expect you to have some facts to share, and I'm tempted to throw your own comment about corrections having more reach back in your face if that's not the case.
99% is probably high; it sounds hyperbolic to me. But 85-90% wouldn't shock me in the least. It's semantic at that point whether it is "
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
A High Court is not the highest court in the UK, that would be the Supreme Court, I believe, although I'm not a lawyer.
And I'm not sure what you mean by "It's not really making piracy *more illegal* is it?". Things can't really be more or less illegal, just more or less severely punished, but I don't think this ruling is about piracy as such, only things that could be used _for_ piracy.
Re: (Score:2)
Up until last year the house of lords was the highest you could go.
(only just found out that that had changed.)
Re: (Score:2)
the name and location have changed. The actual judges are the same. Basically, it was an enormously expensive re-branding exercise.
Re: (Score:2)
"What about leaving that shiny things on the shelf and use your time for something more constructive?"
But want Shiny on MY terms! Can't vote with my wallet or won't HAVE shiny! Shiny = constructive. Mmmm....corporate cawk, so tasty.
Did I miss anything? :)
Re: (Score:2)
This doesn't seem like flamebait. he actually has a point, however badly worded. hackers should start thinking about an open standard.
If there's a specific reason for this not to be a valid idea, let us know, but don't just call him flamebait.
Re: (Score:2)
Growing up, I loved music - still do. I am old enough to remember 8 tracks, but never bought one. Scratching on a record player, that even had a cassette player that RECORDED! Eventually, when I came of age to work and spend foolishly all of my money on music, I still have a case logic case full of 'original' CDs. Yes, that's over 200 Compact Audio Discs that cost over $20. The most expensive was my Grover Washing Jr. Mister Magic album that
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That seems doubtful. If this truly is the easiest way to carry multiple games around without having to carry around physical copies of each one, then it seems likely that legitimate use is not only significant, but is probably in the majority.
And this, folks is one of the big reasons why iPhone and iPod Touch are tearing so badly into Nintendo's portable gaming sales [ipodnn.com]. T