Law Firm Considers Class Action Suit Over Xbox Live Bans
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I was going to write a longer comment, but it looks like we have a general consensus here so I'll just say this: Q_Q!!
It's against the terms of Xbox Live. They signed up, they agreed, they got banned. They have the right to ban people at any time for violations.
It's like shooting someone in broad daylight then suing the police for arresting you on Christmas. Yeah the timing sucks but you still broke the law and deserve punishment.
It's like shooting someone in broad daylight then suing the police for arresting you on Christmas. Yeah the timing sucks but you still broke the law and deserve punishment.
Well, as I have pointed out I think that private citizens and companies have too much powerful to control the free speech rights, and access to information/computer networks of others. Sort of like how there are rights you can't sign away to a doctor, there are rights that you shouldn't be able to sign away as part of a EULA or whatever no matter what the fine print happens to say.
As things stand here however, this is exactly the kind of thing that I'd feel it reasonable to ban someone for *IF* they were cheating in games. The problem I have with this entire situation is that when I hear the term *mod* I tend to think of people modifying their motherboards to play games/versions of games not allowed in a given region. Say for example someone in Australia modding their hardware to play a game that might otherwise be locked for their region due. Something that I am 100% in support of incidently as I disagree with the entire idea of "region locking". While I understand some of the non-censorship related issues the bottom line is that it's being used for censorship. I'm of the opinion all consoles should be region free, period. I do not believe the 360 is region free.
As a result I'm staying kind of neutral, I'm guessing they didn't investigate anyone, and pretty much just nuked every modified console's access that they could recognize as modded without bothering to figure out what the mods did in each case.
Truthfully if the idea was to catch cheaters, I think they should have done more individual investigation, I mean honestly your paying for Gold to play online, I'd expect part of that fee to involve more involvement by actual people, making ham-fisted approaches to things unnessicary.
As things stand here however, this is exactly the kind of thing that I'd feel it reasonable to ban someone for *IF* they were cheating in games. The problem I have with this entire situation is that when I hear the term *mod* I tend to think of people modifying their motherboards to play games/versions of games not allowed in a given region. Say for example someone in Australia modding their hardware to play a game that might otherwise be locked for their region due. Something that I am 100% in support of incidently as I disagree with the entire idea of "region locking". While I understand some of the non-censorship related issues the bottom line is that it's being used for censorship. I'm of the opinion all consoles should be region free, period. I do not believe the 360 is region free.
As a result I'm staying kind of neutral, I'm guessing they didn't investigate anyone, and pretty much just nuked every modified console's access that they could recognize as modded without bothering to figure out what the mods did in each case.
Truthfully if the idea was to catch cheaters, I think they should have done more individual investigation, I mean honestly your paying for Gold to play online, I'd expect part of that fee to involve more involvement by actual people, making ham-fisted approaches to things unnessicary.
It wouldn't surprise me if they used a major game release to catch console modders. I remember when they had new modchip-detecting code and used Halo 2 as the carrier to find, report, and ban Xbox 1 consoles. (I watched that one very closely, because I had chipped my own console. It had a hardware disable switch, which I always had "off" playing games, and my console was never banned. The only reason I chipped it was to run XBMC, and that was well worth the time and effort.)
The way Live is more integrated into the 360 than the original Xbox, I don't think Microsoft would need to use a game's release in that way precisely -- they could download mod-detecting code pretty much any time they want (I think the "unauthorized storage device lockout" that slipped in with the WiFi adapter update is a prime example of that).
They might have used the fact that this mega-release was coaxing more people online as an opportunity to catch more bad guys. Trying to make it sound like a nefarious plot, though, makes it sound like a bad sitcom. "First, we'll wait until Activision creates a game that is so unbelievably awesome that the pirates will have to take their tainted consoles online to play it!"
As has already been noted, though, Microsoft does this every year about this time. When there's not a mega-blockbuster game release to blame it on, people just blame Microsoft for taking advantage of the upcoming Christmas shopping season itself.
The way Live is more integrated into the 360 than the original Xbox, I don't think Microsoft would need to use a game's release in that way precisely -- they could download mod-detecting code pretty much any time they want (I think the "unauthorized storage device lockout" that slipped in with the WiFi adapter update is a prime example of that).
They might have used the fact that this mega-release was coaxing more people online as an opportunity to catch more bad guys. Trying to make it sound like a nefarious plot, though, makes it sound like a bad sitcom. "First, we'll wait until Activision creates a game that is so unbelievably awesome that the pirates will have to take their tainted consoles online to play it!"
As has already been noted, though, Microsoft does this every year about this time. When there's not a mega-blockbuster game release to blame it on, people just blame Microsoft for taking advantage of the upcoming Christmas shopping season itself.
Does the whole "convenience" argument strike anyone else as a Conspiracy Theory?
There seems to additionally exist a viable reason for the timing outside of gouging people, and it's been common for all big releases. It also seems to assume the people who were banned would be the ones buying the titles en masse, which seems counterintuitive. Now, we all know things aren't that simple, but casting a sales decease as likely already seems to simplify things.
Not to mention, "I wouldn't have bought it if I knew I was going to get caught doing something illegal" just sounds silly.
There seems to additionally exist a viable reason for the timing outside of gouging people, and it's been common for all big releases. It also seems to assume the people who were banned would be the ones buying the titles en masse, which seems counterintuitive. Now, we all know things aren't that simple, but casting a sales decease as likely already seems to simplify things.
Not to mention, "I wouldn't have bought it if I knew I was going to get caught doing something illegal" just sounds silly.
I've never really understood what they mean by modded consoles. I've got a friend or two who gutted their consoles and incorporated them into their normal PC cases. Far as I know its the same hardware and software running it, they just have a switch that changes the video output from the computer to the Xbox.
Its pretty bad-ass actually I'd have them do it to mine if I didn't already have heating concerns about my PC.
Its pretty bad-ass actually I'd have them do it to mine if I didn't already have heating concerns about my PC.
The results of an unsuccessful class action lawsuit:
1) Microsoft loses money
2) lawyers (Microsoft's) get money
The results of a successful class action lawsuit:
1) Microsoft loses money
2) lawyers (both sides) get money
3) any left after lawyer fees gets split amongst the class, who may be lucky to get more than a couple of dollars
1) Microsoft loses money
2) lawyers (Microsoft's) get money
The results of a successful class action lawsuit:
1) Microsoft loses money
2) lawyers (both sides) get money
3) any left after lawyer fees gets split amongst the class, who may be lucky to get more than a couple of dollars
Modding a console is like shooting someone in broad daylight? Hyperbole much?TheTygerfire said:
I'm all for punishing cheaters, but I'm kind of surprised by the number of people rushing to Microsoft's defense. There are implications here beyond simply people pirating games, and I think mokes310's point about not refunding the remainder of their subscription fees is the salient one here.
Keep in mind that these people weren't banned for cheating or even pirating games - they were banned for modding their consoles. That can mean a lot of things, and while it may be against the terms of the EULA, it's not necessarily unethical. Therumancer is right - what if people were modding their consoles to be able to play games from other regions? Could we really begrudge Australian players for wanting to play the non-neutered version of Left 4 Dead 2?
Here's another example: Imagine if AT&T banned iPhone users from their networks for jailbreaking their phones (which violates AT&T/Apple's EULA), then continued to charge them $70 a month for service. People would be up in arms about it, and rightly so. But because Xbox Live subscriptions are purchased up front, banned players deserve to lose this money?
I'm as against frivolous lawsuits as anyone (see this guy), but this one strikes me as having some merit.
It's unlikely they can or will detect such a mod. Certain other mods like fan mods are common and popular and have no real impact on piracy. Worst case is that you've voided your warranty, but there doesn't seem to be any indication that case mods have been targeted. Not that I do it, mind. Mine's still factory sealed and will remain that way.KeyMaster45 said:
Okay, robbing a convenience store, that better for you?Jordan Deam said:
And why should they refund the subscription? They willfully and knowingly broke the user agreement. And if they didn't read it, tough shit, at the end of the day you still said "I Agree".
Oh, and you comparing $70/mo. and $50/yr. isn't a form of hyperbole, how?
He has a good point about the timing I guess, but it's still not a lawsuit Xbox users can expect to win. Unfortunately, user license agreements (despite being vastly unfair and being viewable only AFTER purchasing the product most of the time) are still accepted as a form of legal agreement.
I'm not supporting pirating a million 360 games, but I very much think somebody needs to champion consumer rights. I've been saying this for a while now, but piracy today seems to be the excuse a lot of companies are using to justify all kinds of horrible garbage, like spyware/malware being put in commercial products and extremely restrictive EULAs.
I'm not supporting pirating a million 360 games, but I very much think somebody needs to champion consumer rights. I've been saying this for a while now, but piracy today seems to be the excuse a lot of companies are using to justify all kinds of horrible garbage, like spyware/malware being put in commercial products and extremely restrictive EULAs.
Maybe they did, maybe they didn't, who knows; but frankly I don't see how that is even relevant. The modders broke the clearly defined rules. When Microsoft wants to bring down the banhammer is totally within their discretion. I think their timing was brilliant for driving the point home. I'm sorry, but I have to side with Microsoft on this one.Malygris said:
The amount of money doesn't matter. The question you should ask yourself is, after a company bans a user from its service for violating the terms of a EULA, is the company legally entitled to keep charging said user for a service that he/she can no longer access? I honestly don't know the answer, but I *hope* it's "hell no."TheTygerfire said: