Oh boy, that'll show them! Not like they can just toss it all away to the nearest dumpster! Hell, I understand that it's supposed to be symbolic or something but they couldn't mail I dunno, real bricks?
Anti-DRM Group Sends Nintendo 200 Bricks
- Thread starter allistairp
- Start date
I guess that's true, but in that case, what you said before is a big issue here.Petromir said:Only if own things. In the license rental agree ment model, legally you can do far less as it's not yours, you mearly have a semi perminant loan of it for a flat rate.CrystalShadow said:OK, fair enough, but I guess we're getting into a tricky area here, because up until internet connected devices showed up, it was difficult for anyone selling things to even check what you were doing with them.Petromir said:n ot saying this is how they should sell consoles, but paying for smething,, that can be taken back from you if you breach the rules is as old as selling.CrystalShadow said:Who would have thought so many people blindly accept that a device you paid for is owned by the person that sold it to you?V8 Ninja said:
THe problem is not that things are, but that its not always made clear this is the case which isnt acceptiable.
If you can't check what is being done, being technically allowed to take something back is a moot point.
Lol. Who would have thought Nintendo can decide to stop you from doing things which are in fact perfectly legal?Echo136 said:Who would have thought Nintendo would have realized that the product you are purchasing from them just MIGHT be used for illegal purposes.CrystalShadow said:Who would have thought so many people blindly accept that a device you paid for is owned by the person that sold it to you?V8 Ninja said:
(Reverse engineering. Modification of hardware & software, have traditionally been legal as long as you aren't doing them for the sole purpose of doing something illegal with the result.
Homebrew software is legal, despite what companies claim. Pirated games are not. But with technical changes to the device involved being almost identical...)
I recall places like RadioRentals which hired products out to consumers. There it's obvious you don't own something.
But, game consoles are sold in a way that bears most resemblance to what people consider permanent ownership.
To then turn around and say it's actually a licence rental is, if nothing else, a rather deceptive business practice.
The sales method suggests ownership. What the business seems to want is a licence agreement.
Films and games have the same problem. The method of selling the product to a consumer doesn't resembles something quite different from what the company selling it is actually trying to do.
And that is fundamentally misleading, I think.
Seriously guys, this. The fact that it's not illegal for them to give those kinds of terms in the US, unlike in Europe doesn't make it right to have these kinds of terms in places that don't ban it. Instead, it should be taken as a sign that US consumer protection laws are lax and maybe they should give everyone the same, reasonable terms.allistairp said:
(Say, for that matter, if I take my US 3DS to Europe, does that mean my EULA suddenly got less restrictive and I can do those things that are not banned there? What about the reverse?)
That does bother me quite a bit, but honestly, why are people using a 3DS for media. Theres cameras and phones for that.sunburst313 said:
That indeed sounds awesome, but you cant just take peoples word for it that they are just going to emulate older games and nothing else. For one, they are trying to profit off of older games with their store, and for another that would be a horrible business risk. You allow modding, and all of a sudden someone releases 10 easy steps to mod your gameboy to allow illegal gaming and the whole thing falls apart. People get mad when Xbox doesnt allow modding, but people just dont realize that they are in business to keep their games secure. It mindfucks me why more people arent supporting this. Yes I realize it means the ToS are horribly against you, but its either that or no game developer will ever want to make a game, because they all run the risk of getting stolen all the time and making no profit.CrystalShadow said:
Admittedly, I should have phrased my first sentence better. But when 98% of the people who "Modify" a game console do it for pirating, I don't feel too bad for NOT rephrasing it. Fact is that almost everybody who modifies their game consoles do it for piracy. I understand why Nintendo is doing what it's doing with the 3DS. And so far it appears that most gamers aren't too pissy about it except for this anti-DRM group, which are probably a bunch of pirates themselves.CrystalShadow said:Who would have thought so many people blindly accept that a device you paid for is owned by the person that sold it to you?V8 Ninja said:
HankMan said:
OT: While I can understand the automatic updates and permanently bricking the console in case of pirates cracking it, I don't think that will stop them in the end. Also the whole "owning rights to video or pictures captured with the device" thing is a point against the 3DS. If I was going to use the camera on it before, I'm not now as I have better cameras at my disposal that I own the rights to.
[sub]You know, between this and the battery life problem I'm really cooled off of the idea of buying one now. Might as well save up for a Pandora. They don't treat their customers like they're guilty until proven innocent.[/sub]
It's sad the newer generations willingly accept the loss of control over their products they used to have. There is no WAY A digital camera company would get away with claiming they own content taken by consumers, but for video games the kiddies who don't know any better defend them and others just shrug their shoulders and accept it.
"Only pirates care about broad, demanding EULAs that wouldn't hold up in court" is the same argument you hear from the government: "If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't mind domestic spying"
American customers get screwed when it comes to games when other nations won't allow it. The good news is that EULAs hardly ever make it past a judge if a case goes to court.
"Only pirates care about broad, demanding EULAs that wouldn't hold up in court" is the same argument you hear from the government: "If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't mind domestic spying"
American customers get screwed when it comes to games when other nations won't allow it. The good news is that EULAs hardly ever make it past a judge if a case goes to court.
I believe there are around half a billion topics about this, but let's do this anyways.
This is NOT how you stop pirates. I don't remember who it was, but some company wrote an article about why this the exact opposite direction from where you want to be going. You can't beat the pirates, so what should we do? Find a way to have them join us. We humans are still animals-if pinned down, we will only struggle harder. I believe there was even a line in the Piracy episode of Extra Credits, something like this;
"Oh, and Sony? You DON'T. FUCK. WITH THE PEOPLE. WHO INSTALL LINUX. ON THEIR PLAYSTATIONS."
This is NOT how you stop pirates. I don't remember who it was, but some company wrote an article about why this the exact opposite direction from where you want to be going. You can't beat the pirates, so what should we do? Find a way to have them join us. We humans are still animals-if pinned down, we will only struggle harder. I believe there was even a line in the Piracy episode of Extra Credits, something like this;
"Oh, and Sony? You DON'T. FUCK. WITH THE PEOPLE. WHO INSTALL LINUX. ON THEIR PLAYSTATIONS."
True. But as I said, the PC has all those risks, and while it might be said the PC gaming industry is a bit of a mess, it still exists. Despite all the piracy risks.Echo136 said:
Unfortunately, I don't know if we can ever overcome the combination of greed and paranoia that leads to the problems on both sides.
(Greed is evident in the makers of games, since the primary motivation is money, but also in those that resort to piracy, since it's getting something without having to pay for it.
Paranoia is evident in a lot of the anti-piracy measures, since many are more effective at being a nuisance to people that have paid than in being a deterrent to piracy.)
Still, maybe I just find the whole notion of Intellectual Property so messy that I can't see a workable solution within a capitalist framework.
Really? Because in fact thats exactly how I feel. Ive owned a few current systems and none of those EULAs have ever prevented me from enjoying my games or made me feel like Im losing all my civil liberties. Its a friggin game system. You play the games. Give it a rest, seriously. The moment I see an eyeball blinking at me from my PS3 Big Brother style Ill gladly change my opinion but until then Im going to go play some Demon's Souls.Nurb said:
Then I hope you didn't plan on taking any pictures or videos your would want to hold the rights to. Nintendo owns those to. If your not stupid, it's really easy to see why is a really big deal.Echo136 said:
YOU might get enjoyment from playing a game, others like those linux guys get enjoyment out of modding everything they own to run linux on it. Control is giving people the right to do whatever they want with it... why? Because someone might suddenly FEEL like it. That's the point, and you're too accepting.Echo136 said:
I'll paste something I edited in after you started replying to underline my point:
There is no WAY A digital camera company would get away with claiming they own content taken by consumers, but for video games the kiddies who don't know any better defend them and others just shrug their shoulders and accept it. They demand too much power and no judge in his right mind would let them have it in court. If someone paid for a DS, then it's theirs and what they do with it isn't based on your personal tastes.
That's not necessarily true.RootBrewski said:
They may be trying to get around Region Locks that prevent them from playing games (which, admittedly, they may or may not have legally purchased) that haven't been released in their country. They also may be trying to run Homebrew Games, which may be illegal but still don't constitute piracy.
The PSP was definitely not a failure. The PSP Go was, but definitely not the original.Echo136 said:
That said, this is the main reason I'm not buying a 3DS. This is also going to be my deciding factor going into getting the NGP. I'm so sick of companies telling me what I can do with what I purchase. Extensive DRM on hardware is a gross violation of consumer rights.
I couldn't give a shit less if they think this will stop pirating, because it won't. They'll find a way like they always do. What it will do is prevent people from legally modifying the system, and placing homebrew and other applications on a device that has the potential to do so.
Video game consoles are one of the only hardware I see being sold with an extremely controlling automatic ToS. Software has it all the time, but not hardware. That's like selling me a damn radio and telling me I can only listen to bloody AM.
Being open source is key to having a happy audience. Why do you think everyone loves their Android phones so much? It's an open platform with endless amounts of customization. Take a lesson from Google, Nintendo. Don't be evil.
As I said in another post, that part bothers me a lot, if you are over the age of 15 and you have a gameboy you probably already have a phone, it just makes more sense that you would use your phone for media instead.shameduser said:
For my response to the pictures and media part, look just above you.Nurb said:YOU might get enjoyment from playing a game, others like those linux guys get enjoyment out of modding everything they own to run linux on it. Control is giving people the right to do whatever they want with it... why? Because someone might suddenly FEEL like it. That's the point, and you're too accepting.
I'll paste something I edited in after you started replying to underline my point:
There is no WAY A digital camera company would get away with claiming they own content taken by consumers, but for video games the kiddies who don't know any better defend them and others just shrug their shoulders and accept it. They demand too much power and no judge in his right mind would let them have it in court. If someone paid for a DS, then it's theirs and what they do with it isn't based on your personal tastes.
As for the piracy part, Ive said half a dozen times already in this thread, you'd have to be naive to not believe that the majority of people modding their systems would do so to pirate games. The main reason the PSP failed was because it was so easy to pirate games on it.
I think it's easy to misunderstand this "Anti-DRM" "Free Software Foundation" as a bunch of pirates and kids that want everything for free and refuse to pay for games. (don't worry, I know about the FSF and the good work they do). But the article doesn't really portray the FSF as more than just that. It's a shame though :\sunburst313 said: