bahumat42 said:
stinkychops said:
bahumat42 said:
stinkychops said:
bahumat42 said:
jumjalalabash said:
mindlesspuppet said:
This shouldn't even be a case, he bought the hardware, he's allowed to do what he wants with it. So are the people he enabled to do the same. There are plenty of legit reasons someone would want to mod a 360.
And he doesn't have any. He is doing it to let people pirate games.
not only that he has made money off of breaking their system, thats all kinds of wrong. Now ten years is a bit harsh but it will scare off modders a bit.
A bit hard?
Have you ever jay-walked? What kind of sentence do you think you deserve for that?
He didn't directly hurt anyone. He was supported by consumers. This is a copyright law case. How can anyone really be such a lapdog as to put this man's entire life going down the drain over a few lost dollars to a huge corporation as 'a bit harsh'.
i jay walk all the time we don't get arrested for that here
but yes its totally fine to prosecute him for being a thieving bastard. He is allowing people to bypass the purchase of videogames losing money for the production teams. And getting paid for it. Let him rot i say.
He didn't steal anything. He allowed people to gain the ability to run software from other 'production teams' who stole from Microsoft. There are legitimate applications of modding. What do you think should be the arbitrary sentencing of a murderer?
yeah the people can run legitimate software if they ask microsoft, hense the army using some of the hardware. And gratz for picking up on my misuse of the word thieving, note you dont question the bastard part. He is allowing people to run software they haven't purchased, so the intellectual property gets no money off of it. Please don't turn this into a piracy is ok thing. Because piracy isn't ok. It's why games companies close simple as.
That's pathetic.
First of all: I didn't say anything about the 'bastard' part because I have never met the man. It is an unfounded and childish personal attack.
Second: What I said was not condoning piracy, it was condoning modding. If you have no grasp of the difference then stop spouting ignorance and do a search. Its only a few clicks and several keys away.
Your argument is founded on the slippery slope idea. Basically, he gives people the ability to do many things, if they so choose it can be exploited for illegal purposes. So you say he should be punished. Using your same logic car manufacturers should be gone because they allow vehicular murder. Gun manufacturers should be executed because they allow people to be wrongly shot.
Its not 'simple as'. There's a huge debate going on about Piracy on the internet because its NOT simple as. You saying it doesn't make it so.