Prosecutors Drop Charges in Xbox 360 Modding Trial

[The_root_of_all_evil]

From what I understand, the prosecution's abrupt abandonment based on "fairness and justice" had nothing to do with any change of heart regarding the DMCA provisions, but because the case was shoddily built on questionable legal grounds.

Then that alone is a triumph for the justice system. Do some bloody homework first and keep within the same rules you set for us, fecking Government.

 

[Loonerinoes]

While it's certainly good to hear the individual's going free...it's still pretty amazing.

God forbid they lost this case hook line and sinker. God forbid that its recorded loss would set a precedent that might actually push towards saner copyright laws...

...ugh...I'm happy for the result...but goddamit, I can see their fucking gears turning in their heads as they chose to drop this case. "Screw it, better let this one go rather than risk losing it and potentially losing our business of suing people over this kinda crap in the future." You can't make stuff like this up...honestly...

 

[Killerbunny001]

The trial could have raised this question :

Why is it ok for the Airforce to mod PS3 to make a super computer and not ok when a citizen mods a X360 for what ever purpose?

 

[Wintermoot]

good thing he,s free! but its still stupid they don,t want to change the DMCA

 

[Wintermoot]

Gamers need to wake up and stop supporting such nonsense before they find themselves needing to ask permission to even turn on the hardware (sort of like always online software).

Expect the game business model to change soon.

Most game companies are/will move towards an online only model (especially as cloud computing becomes more common).

This move is being forced upon the game/software development industry by piracy rates.

LOL, you really believe that? Piracy is just the scapegoat. The industry wants to gain absolute control and they will use whatever scapegoat they can. Used game sales are another one.

Piracy has always been around and yet the industry grew this big. Now, all of a sudden, we are to believe that piracy is killing the industry. LOL, believe that if you want.

but the main difference is that priacy is more common now in the past allot of systems used cartridges wich where harder to copy now that we complatly switched to CD,s DVD,s and bluray,s it has become much easier to pirate, still punishing people for modifieng hardware THEY own is pretty stupid

 

[antipunt]

I suppose this is a -massive- eye-opener for him.

Hey kid, you're not getting 10 years in prison anymore

O_O

He's going to start making raps songs like 'Jesus-walks'

 

[ChaoticLegion]

They had a TRIAL ATTORNEY on the jury?

Is this regular practice in the states?

As far as I understand it, that kind of practice is considered a conflict of interest in the UK to have members of the legal establishment sit in as part of a deciding jury, I could be wrong.. and if I am, please correct me.. it just sounds pretty bad.

(I'm interested in a REAL answer to this.. so, no supposition please, if you don't actually 'know', then any answer you give isn't going to help.)

In the UK it is possible for a Solicitor / Barrister (lawyers) to recieve jury summons. In fact the only persons disqualified from jury service in the UK are people suffering certain medical conditions as listed in the Juries Act 1974 or those who have been criminally sentenced subject to the criteria listed in the Juries Act 1974.

I'm currently in my second year of studying for my LLB Law degree in the UK so I hope this suffices you for a "real" answer.

 

[ChaoticLegion]

"Presumably, Rosario's statement was an attempt to convince jurors that Crippen knew that what he was doing was against the law - a key question in order to establish guilt."

That's a defense now? Gee, I didn't know murder was against the law, officer.quote]

That's not what he is trying to say at all. In order to establish criminal liability, it is necessary to prove bothn the Actus Reus (the physical element) and Mens Rea (the mental element) of the crime. It is still not certain whether what he was doing was indeed illegal (hence the case) however a guilty mind would have been very detremental to his case.

 

[ChaoticLegion]

To do that would legitimize the EULA. Plus, if gamers had to read all that legalese (which holds no legal power) before they bought a game, sales would drop alot so I think that even publishers don't REALLY want to push that issue.

Fuck the publishers.

I actually like EULAs... they enable me to return PC games regardless of what a store's policy on returns is. I just say I disagreed with the EULA and considering it wasn't made available for me to read before purchase, I am within my legal rights to demand reimbursement, store policy be fucked.

I only ever demand to read EULAs prepurchase to fuck with irritating sales staff.

Suprised you don't get arrested. If I went into a local store and demanded that they take a game back when their policy prohibits it and I made a scene, I'd imagine I'd get a free ride in a police car.

In other words, you can't FORCE a refund. With that in mind, the EULA is worthless.

Thank god for living in the UK, I don't have to be scared of the police when it comes to enforcing my legal contractual rights against companies. I've done this many times, and each and every time you can guarantee the company will back down as soon as I start stating my legal rights from statute law.

 

[JDKJ]

Suprised you don't get arrested. If I went into a local store and demanded that they take a game back when their policy prohibits it and I made a scene, I'd imagine I'd get a free ride in a police car.

In other words, you can't FORCE a refund. With that in mind, the EULA is worthless.

Under local law I can force a refund, we have pretty good consumer rights law and contract law here. So either way they want to play it I have them snookered. I don't use that particular ploy often though as forcing the issue usually results in me getting my money back AND a life ban from the store (or chain) in question. Also, I don't make a scene. Calm and confident is always better than childish dramatics, as is knowing a polite and non-threatening way of telling someone that if they don't comply you'll proceed to shove lawyers up their arse until they give in or burst.

A game's EULA's worth changes from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

I can't see why it would change from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Most EULAs contain a choice of law provision (i.e., the EULA specifies a particular jurisdiction's law under which the EULA must be interpreted) and a choice of forum provision (i.e., the EULA specifies a particular jurisdiction in which any disputes arising from the EULA must be brought). Iowa or Idaho, it doesn't make a difference in how the EULA reads.

 

[JDKJ]

They had a TRIAL ATTORNEY on the jury?

Is this regular practice in the states?

As far as I understand it, that kind of practice is considered a conflict of interest in the UK to have members of the legal establishment sit in as part of a deciding jury, I could be wrong.. and if I am, please correct me.. it just sounds pretty bad.

(I'm interested in a REAL answer to this.. so, no supposition please, if you don't actually 'know', then any answer you give isn't going to help.)

Anyway.. I certainly give kudos to the Judge for being so upstanding about this, it wasn't something I expected from the US judicial system when corporate entities are involved.

As long as there was no particular conflict of interest regarding any of the parties involved, there's no reason why he couldn't be there. Going into law doesn't suddenly exempt oneself from jury duty.

Both prosecutors and defense attorneys need to agree on jurors, so if either side thought there would have been a conflict he wouldn't have been allowed.

Thanks for the answer... but WOW, that's a bit of an eye opener. The legal system is even worse that I thought

Er, I don't see how this is a bad thing. The entire point of a jury is that it's an unbiased group of citizens of all walks of life. Choosing law as your profession shouldn't disqualify you at all.

Again, both the prosecution and defense must agree on the twelve jurors. If either group thinks there is a conflict of interest, they can dismiss any juror the feel like.

Unfortunately, as a practical matter, most lawyers will never end up doing jury duty. Firstly, your average lawyer will try their best to get out of jury duty because they'll see it as a waste of time better spent trying to amass billable hours and will usually claim a reason sufficient to render themselves undesirable (e.g., having made a predetermination as to guilt or innocence). Secondly, your average trial attorney's not interested in seating a lawyer because a lawyer may actually know something about the law and trial attorneys love to exploit the ignorance of a juror.

It's jacked up, but juries rarely reflect a cross-section of the larger community. The majority of jurors are retirees, the unemployed, recently naturalized U.S. citizen still fresh on the notion of "civic duty," etc., etc. Jury pools also naturally tend to exclude the young and politically apathetic who likely do not register to vote. Jury pools are usually culled from voter registration lists.

 

[LightspeedJack]

Ten years for flashing some Xboxs? What a farce, I'm glad the guy is home free.

 

[Korten12]

The trial could have raised this question :

Why is it ok for the Airforce to mod PS3 to make a super computer and not ok when a citizen mods a X360 for what ever purpose?

Citizen =/= AirForce, Airforce has not only asked (at least I assume) but they aren't using them to download games illegaly, they're using them for AirForce activites and they needed the horse power.

 

[John Funk]

The trial could have raised this question :

Why is it ok for the Airforce to mod PS3 to make a super computer and not ok when a citizen mods a X360 for what ever purpose?

In this case, I believe the difference is software modification vs hardware modifications. Being able to install a Linux OS on the PS3 was one of the original features of the console.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

I can't see why it would change from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Most EULAs contain a choice of law provision (i.e., the EULA specifies a particular jurisdiction's law under which the EULA must be interpreted) and a choice of forum provision (i.e., the EULA specifies a particular jurisdiction in which any disputes arising from the EULA must be brought). Iowa or Idaho, it doesn't make a difference in how the EULA reads.

The variation from jurisdiction to jurisdiction is based on whether the relevent local laws even recognise EULAs as they are executed in games as legally binding contracts. I mean, really, what would a South Australian state court care about the provisions in a EULA if they didn't even consider the EULA in question to be a real legal document? They wouldn't.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Thank god for living in the UK, I don't have to be scared of the police when it comes to enforcing my legal contractual rights against companies.

I figure if companies don't want to have their contractual obligations nailed to them then they shouldn't try and use contracts to beat customers over the head in the first place.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Why is it ok for the Airforce to mod PS3 to make a super computer and not ok when a citizen mods a X360 for what ever purpose?

In this case, I believe the difference is software modification vs hardware modifications. Being able to install a Linux OS on the PS3 was one of the original features of the console.

I think you'll find the USAF mods don't go anywhere near the DMCA's provisions on circumventing copy protection... as for any EULA/ToS/AUP issues they probably got permission from Sony. Hell, they probably ordered the whole batch directly from Sony and said "Yeah, with this whole Other OS thing you've got going we're gonna use em to build a super computer. No problems with that, is there?"

 

[JDKJ]

I can't see why it would change from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Most EULAs contain a choice of law provision (i.e., the EULA specifies a particular jurisdiction's law under which the EULA must be interpreted) and a choice of forum provision (i.e., the EULA specifies a particular jurisdiction in which any disputes arising from the EULA must be brought). Iowa or Idaho, it doesn't make a difference in how the EULA reads.

The variation from jurisdiction to jurisdiction is based on whether the relevent local laws even recognise EULAs as they are executed in games as legally binding contracts. I mean, really, what would a South Australian state court care about the provisions in a EULA if they didn't even consider the EULA in question to be a real legal document? They wouldn't.

When you click through the EULA with its choice of law and forum of State XZY provisions, you have effectively agreed to those provisions and, as a matter of law, are thereafter precluded from asserting in Bumfuck, Egypt or anywhere else other than State XYZ that the law of Bumfuck, Egypt or anywhere else other than State XYZ wouldn't recognize a EULA as a binding agreement. Don't you see where, in agreeing that the laws and forums of State XYZ govern the EULA and any resulting disputes, you can't thereafter raise a claim in anywhere other than State XYZ or cite to the laws of anywhere other than those of State XYZ. That's what your agreement states.

If you try to stand up in South Australia's forums and claim "whatever," the other party will counter-claim that you don't have any legal right to make a claim of "whatever" in a South Australian forum because South Australia isn't the agreed upon forum for disputes. It's State XYZ.

That's why EULAs have choice of law and forum provisions in the first place. To ensure that you can't raise a claim anywhere that might give you the slightest home field advantage. They ensure the exact opposition by picking the other guy's field and his rules of the game in advance. Which means that if you wanna dispute the EULA's terms, you'll have to do so on the other guy's home field and under his rules (which are usually pre-picked to ensure that it's as easy as possible for them to kick your ass all over that field).