Mod Chips Declared Legal In U.K.

[Andy Chalk]

Mod Chips Declared Legal In U.K.

A U.K. appeals court has ruled that the use of mod chips in videogame consoles does not constitute copyright infringement, legalizing their sale and use.

Neil Stanley Higgs, aka Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers' Association [http://www.mrmodchips.co.uk/catalog/] said the verdict represented "a milestone in the fight against piracy."

On June 11, however, an appeals court ruled in Higgs' favor, quashing all 26 charges against him. TeamXecuter.com [http://www.team-xecuter.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47710] says Higgs appealed the decision based on the argument that copyright infringement takes place when a user copies an original game disk, not as the result of the use of a mod chip. The appeals court agreed, and not only overturned the verdict against him but also awarded him full legal costs. Following the decision, the ELSPA's Rawlinson was not available for comment.

The one-year sentence [http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/06/13/appeal_court_weighs_in_on_modchips/] in September, including 90 days in prison and the rest spent on work furlough, in addition to five years probation and a $100,000 fine for selling them.


Permalink

 

[fix-the-spade]

So does that make homebrew illegal in the US?
Or is homebrew software and cartridges not counted as modding?

 

[UpInSmoke]

Some of you UK folks should set up shop... lots of money to be made.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Ka-Ching!

Damn you Americans are harsh though. Jeffrey Archer didn't get that much!

 

[Arbre]

I think this is a mistake. You should be allowed to do what you want on your console, but selling components which break part of the hardware anti-piracy defenses shouldn't be allowed.
It would be hypocrisy to say that this stuff is for homebrew only.
Oh yes, those 3700 chips (!!) are for developpers only, I swear.

It's sad.

 

[CarlosYenrac]

I imported a copy of Chrono Cross for PS1 because it was never released here in Australia, and I'll be damned if I'm going to risk scratching the disc while playing it- I created a backup, and now play it on an enulator on my PC, as a non-chipped PS1 will not play NTSC games.

Chipping your console is not copyright infringement- playing a copy of a game you don't own on said console IS.

 

[fix-the-spade]

I think this is a mistake. You should be allowed to do what you want on your console, but selling components which break part of the hardware anti-piracy defenses shouldn't be allowed.
It would be hypocrisy to say that this stuff is for homebrew only.
Oh yes, those 3700 chips (!!) are for developpers only, I swear.

It's sad.

Granted, they probably aren't all going to bedroom programmers, but some of them are. It's doubly hypocratic to say you should be allowed to do what you want, except not that.

 

[L.B. Jeffries]

The race is on now. How long does it take to pass a law in the UK? That's how long you've got to buy one of these things.

 

[Arbre]

Granted, they probably aren't all going to bedroom programmers...

You mean they likely mostly go to people who want to mod their console to run illegal copies.

It's doubly hypocratic to say you should be allowed to do what you want, except not that.

Well, that's right, it's a difficult stance to find there, but it's equally absurd to argue that these chips are mainly meant for garage devs. Let's not try to foul people here.
I didn't say you shouldn't be allowed to install those chips, because we're halfway between what do we allow a consumer to do, and what we don't. The trend these days is to remove rights from the consumers and tend towards a system where what you buy is just an unit copy which you basically have very limited rights on. Things were different before, but before, there was no internet, no such a level of piracy where any schmuck can get an illegal copy of anything rather easily.
What I said, precisely, is that selling those things should be illegal, because their use and existencial reason is just to break protections on a machine, and these protections are there for a good reason, and are followed by a legion of copyrighted systems.

If you want to acquire and run illegal copies of your games, fine, it's up to you, but never those activities should become legal.

 

[oshin]

I know its a typical internet attitude, but he made 2 million squid off modchips, and he still used his parents house as a store (he probably lived there). As for the modchips, I suppose your could consider them a bit like handguns, your not gonna use them for hunting deer, theres a malicious purpose behind them. Then again you can legally buy handguns in many country's, and in others you`d get jail time for possessing one, its a funny old world.

 

[nightfish]

The race is on now. How long does it take to pass a law in the UK? That's how long you've got to buy one of these things.

it has to go through two houses of parliament.

first its passed in the House of Commons, then it has to go to the House of Lords. They can reject it but only 3 times.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

The race is on now. How long does it take to pass a law in the UK? That's how long you've got to buy one of these things.

it has to go through two houses of parliament.

first its passed in the House of Commons, then it has to go to the House of Lords. They can reject it but only 3 times.

So basically about 4 years.

 

[fix-the-spade]

The race is on now. How long does it take to pass a law in the UK? That's how long you've got to buy one of these things.

it has to go through two houses of parliament.

first its passed in the House of Commons, then it has to go to the House of Lords. They can reject it but only 3 times.

So basically about 4 years.

Or they can take what's known as the "tuition fees approach". Where, even though the House of Lords AND the Queen herself have rejected the motion multiple times, the Prime Minister can simply force it through claiming special need (or words to that effect). A throw back to the Second world war that wasn't quite removed afterwards.

Much like the pub licensing laws from WW1...

 

[SilentHunter7]

I think this is a mistake. You should be allowed to do what you want on your console, but selling components which break part of the hardware anti-piracy defenses shouldn't be allowed.
It would be hypocrisy to say that this stuff is for homebrew only.
Oh yes, those 3700 chips (!!) are for developpers only, I swear.

It's sad.

Yeah, but he's not the one pirating. That's like arresting a gun manufacturer for murder, or an ISP for Identity Theft. You cant arrest someone for someone else using his product for something illegal.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I thought the whole reason the consoles had disc locks to start with was just so they could charge more for games in some regions than in others. For instance a new 360 game is £40 in England and £25 in Japan. Neither side is completely ethical here.

 

[Arbre]

I think this is a mistake. You should be allowed to do what you want on your console, but selling components which break part of the hardware anti-piracy defenses shouldn't be allowed.
It would be hypocrisy to say that this stuff is for homebrew only.
Oh yes, those 3700 chips (!!) are for developpers only, I swear.

It's sad.

Yeah, but he's not the one pirating. That's like arresting a gun manufacturer for murder, or an ISP for Identity Theft. You cant arrest someone for someone else using his product for something illegal.

There are just so many things you can do with those chips like... err... breaking the legal defenses of a console. Or... breaking the legal d...

I'd be surprised if even 10% of the people who would have bought these chips would have garage developpers, and I'd be even more surprised if none of them would have not used these chips to play illegal copies.
Pure bull.

Bah. Whats next? Banning DVD writers because people could use them to pirate dvds?

Oh, with the slight difference that DVD writers are certainly not solely used to burn illegal game copies.

 

[Arbre]

I can't really see that region coding is a good reason to put protection in a game.
You make a fully functional game, then have people break it so that it can only play on machines bought in one part of the world.

This would not be problematic if it was not for the fact that a lot of developers introduce huge delays on their products, or never publish them in some regions. Europe and Australia has been treated like this for a decade, so there is no wonder that chips that break the region code are popular. That these chips also break copyright protection is unfortunate, but as long as area's outside of Japan and the U.S. are treated this way it will remain a problem.

Regional locking is a minor issue as a whole, safe to those who live in countries with ignorant people passing laws on things they seem to know shit about (Austrialia).
Besides, like it or not, but no one forces you to buy games, and this comes from an European, you know, the other country for cash cows.
But aside from ridiculously high prices, Europe does get a very wide range of products, and just ordering a game from a neighbour country can solve an issue about a banned game, like it happened in Germany for example. It's easily done.

Yes, regional locking isn't really community friendly, but in the end, it's their business.
Where it gets really stupid it's when you're forbidden to buy a foreign console, like a Japanese PS3.

As I said, I think it's minor stuff. I don't think regional locking is a major motivator behind the sales of those chips.
I've seen a good load of chipped Wiis handed to people, notably models coming from China, yet the games played on them were easily available in Europe or anywhere else.
It was just to get the game for free.

 

[Synangel]

Its more of Banning the internet because it allows people to download... everything.

ohshi, i should not give them ideas, i can see them doing that (well, restricting it at least)