PDA

View Full Version : Student faces three years in prison for modifying Xbox 360



Ares
30th November 2010, 04:57 PM
In the first case of its kind, a man from Southern California is set to go on trial Tuesday on criminal charges of circumventing digital rights management (DRM) by modifying Microsoft's Xbox 360 console.

Twenty-eight-year old Matthew Crippen faces two counts of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and could face a maximum of three years in prison if convicted.

The Cal State Fullerton liberal arts student is accused of installing chips on Xbox 360 consoles that allowed people to run pirated DVDs and other unofficial content.

In a potentially devastating decision, a federal judge ruled last week that Crippen could not claim "fair use" as a defense for modifying a gaming console.

Crippen's attorneys had hoped to claim that installing a mod chip in a gaming console was no different than "jailbreaking" an iPhone, since both devices share many of the same basic functions.

In July, the US Copyright Office announced that jailbreaking an iPhone, a process that allows non-Apple approved software to be added to the device, including pirated software, was not a DMCA violation.

"While a copyright owner might try to restrict the programs that can be run on a particular operating system, copyright law is not the vehicle for imposition of such restrictions," the office said. "The activity of an iPhone owner who modifies his or her iPhone’s firmware/operating system in order to make it interoperable with an application that Apple has not approved, but that the iPhone owner wishes to run on the iPhone, fits comfortably within the four corners of fair use."

But US District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez said "fair use" laws were irrelevant to the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA, under which Crippen is charged, because the Copyright Office's iPhone jailbreaking exemption didn't extend to gaming consoles.

"The DMCA only requires a showing that the technological measure was related to a valid copyright interest, not that any infringement actually occurred," Gutierrez said. "Moreover, although the government will have to establish that the technological measure that Mr. Crippen allegedly circumvented was used to control access to copyrighted work, the government need not show that the modified Xbox's were actually used for infringing purposes."

Crippen reportedly made a business out of modifying Xbox 360 consoles. Last year, he was indicted for circumventing "a technological measure that effectively controlled access to a copyrighted work" after modifying a console for an undercover security investigator and then an undercover federal agent.

He told Wired that the purpose of modifying the Xbox consoles was to allow people to use decrypted backup copies of their own gaming software, noting that "it's a given that any game will be scratched in that system."

Customers have complained that the Xbox 360 console scratches their discs, eventually making them unusable.

When Microsoft's Kinect gaming device was released, the company threatened legal action against those modifying its product, but later backed off and embraced "product tampering."

"Anytime there is engagement and excitement around our technology, we see that as a good thing," Craig Davidson, senior director for Xbox Live at Microsoft told the New York Times. "It's naive to think that any new technology that comes out won’t have a group that tinkers with it."

"It’s a trend that is undeniable, using public resources to improve on products, whether it be the Kinect or anything else," he added.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/student-prison-xbox-mod-chip/

SilverMagnet
30th November 2010, 05:17 PM
Counterfeiting and unauthorized duplication is only reserved for criminals like Ben Bernanke and JP Morgan. When the common citizen replicates, it then becomes a punishable offense.

BrewTech
30th November 2010, 06:23 PM
Anytime there is engagement and excitement around our technology, we see that as a good thing," Craig Davidson, senior director for Xbox Live at Microsoft told the New York Times. "It's naive to think that any new technology that comes out won’t have a group that tinkers with it."

"It’s a trend that is undeniable, using public resources to improve on products, whether it be the Kinect or anything else," he added.

Wait, so...Microsoft says they expect people to mess with their stuff, and think it's a good thing, but the government is prosecuting?

Another "crime" that requires no complaint of harm... just policy violation.

Hillbilly
30th November 2010, 06:28 PM
One more step for the Microsoft world take over. Come on when are people going to wake up and dump anything that says microsoft like a hot rock and use something else???

Joe King
30th November 2010, 06:36 PM
Anytime there is engagement and excitement around our technology, we see that as a good thing," Craig Davidson, senior director for Xbox Live at Microsoft told the New York Times. "It's naive to think that any new technology that comes out won’t have a group that tinkers with it."

"It’s a trend that is undeniable, using public resources to improve on products, whether it be the Kinect or anything else," he added.

Wait, so...Microsoft says they expect people to mess with their stuff, and think it's a good thing, but the government is prosecuting?

Another "crime" that requires no complaint of harm... just policy violation.
Yea, if anything is done in a case like this, it should have to start with M$ filing a complaint. Lacking that, the gov should be completely impotent in such a matter.

Although I would be very interested in knowing who the undercover security investigator was working for.

osoab
30th November 2010, 06:42 PM
Anytime there is engagement and excitement around our technology, we see that as a good thing," Craig Davidson, senior director for Xbox Live at Microsoft told the New York Times. "It's naive to think that any new technology that comes out won’t have a group that tinkers with it."

"It’s a trend that is undeniable, using public resources to improve on products, whether it be the Kinect or anything else," he added.

Wait, so...Microsoft says they expect people to mess with their stuff, and think it's a good thing, but the government is prosecuting?

Another "crime" that requires no complaint of harm... just policy violation.
Yea, if anything is done in a case like this, it should have to start with M$ filing a complaint. Lacking that, the gov should be completely impotent in such a matter.

Although I would be very interested in knowing who the undercover security investigator was working for.


What if M$ nudge .gov along the way without going public?

Now, I really think the dude screwed the pooch by doing the mods for everyone else. He made a business out of it.
The whole DCMA angle seems like a load of crap on both ends and a last ditch attempt by the attorney.

Hillbilly
30th November 2010, 07:03 PM
Think about this, it would be like Fender suing some Luthier for modifying Fender guitars to accept import counterfeit parts. That just does not happen with anyone but Microsoft.

Joe King
30th November 2010, 07:08 PM
Anytime there is engagement and excitement around our technology, we see that as a good thing," Craig Davidson, senior director for Xbox Live at Microsoft told the New York Times. "It's naive to think that any new technology that comes out won’t have a group that tinkers with it."

"It’s a trend that is undeniable, using public resources to improve on products, whether it be the Kinect or anything else," he added.

Wait, so...Microsoft says they expect people to mess with their stuff, and think it's a good thing, but the government is prosecuting?

Another "crime" that requires no complaint of harm... just policy violation.
Yea, if anything is done in a case like this, it should have to start with M$ filing a complaint. Lacking that, the gov should be completely impotent in such a matter.

Although I would be very interested in knowing who the undercover security investigator was working for.


What if M$ nudge .gov along the way without going public?

Now, I really think the dude screwed the pooch by doing the mods for everyone else. He made a business out of it.
The whole DCMA angle seems like a load of crap on both ends and a last ditch attempt by the attorney.
If that's the case, it should be the same as any other case.
i.e. there needs to be a complaint with their name on it asking the .gov to do something.

Same as if someone stole the tires off your car in the middle of the night. If you don't complain, how do they even know a "crime" has been committed?


As far as doing it for others, IMHO when I go to the store to aquire new goods I consider them mine to do what I want with.
Including paying you to alter it on my behalf.
Whether that "altering" is smashing it with a sledgehammer or putting new parts into it is completely between you and I.
If you alter it in a way other than what we had agreed upon, then I would be the one filing the complaint as I would be the wronged party.

undgrd
30th November 2010, 07:27 PM
By this logic aftermarket auto parts companies and 3rd party installers should all be getting lawyers. There are entire companies built around modifying the ECU of automobiles for better performance and efficiency.


At worst, the warranty for the XBox should be void.

osoab
30th November 2010, 07:51 PM
I have not read the DCMA law.

Now, when I said he screwed the pooch earlier, I was really prefacing this on a mod one of my old roommates did on a PS1 a while back. If I remember right, it was illegal to own the mod chip that was installed way back then. The argument then also had to deal with the fact that copying the games was illegal and the only reason to need the mod was to use a copied game.

I have no argument that defendant and his clients can do whatever they want to their own property. I really wasn't looking at that side of the argument earlier.

I really would like to know the whole side of the story. He is facing 3 years on 2 charges. What was the plea? Who did he piss off to get this to trial?

Joe King
30th November 2010, 08:08 PM
I have not read the DCMA law.

Now, when I said he screwed the pooch earlier, I was really prefacing this on a mod one of my old roommates did on a PS1 a while back. If I remember right, it was illegal to own the mod chip that was installed way back then. The argument then also had to deal with the fact that copying the games was illegal and the only reason to need the mod was to use a copied game.

I have no argument that defendant and his clients can do whatever they want to their own property. I really wasn't looking at that side of the argument earlier.

I really would like to know the whole side of the story. He is facing 3 years on 2 charges. What was the plea? Who did he piss off to get this to trial?

As far as the mod chip that allows the use of a copied disc, buying the disc and then copying it for your own use constitutes fair use under existing law.
If you are making copies of the disc and selling them, then that's a whole seperate issue.
IMHO, this is a case about a guy who installed an after market chip that allowed people to fully exercise their fair-use Rights.

Especially when the box in question here has a history of scratching discs so that if you play by their "rules" you always have to go back to them to buy a new one after so many uses.
That seems to be an obvious ripoff to me, and the boxes should be recalled as defective if they won't permit you to even play a copy of a game you already bought.


Aside from that, if there's anything illegal that people are doing with them after the fact, then that is a whole 'nother issue.

Joe King
3rd December 2010, 12:51 AM
Guess the Judge in the case isn't so bad after all.
At least he didn't look for a way to try fix their mistakes.



Federal authorities on Thursday dropped their prosecution of a southern California man charged with two felonies for modifying Xbox 360 consoles, following a severe berating by a judge and an admission they made procedural errors, (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/03/xbox_modder_prosecution_dropped/)


:D

Book
3rd December 2010, 09:10 AM
But US District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez said "fair use" laws were irrelevant to the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA, under which Crippen is charged, because the Copyright Office's iPhone jailbreaking exemption didn't extend to gaming consoles.

"The DMCA only requires a showing that the technological measure was related to a valid copyright interest, not that any infringement actually occurred," Gutierrez said. "Moreover, although the government will have to establish that the technological measure that Mr. Crippen allegedly circumvented was used to control access to copyrighted work, the government need not show that the modified Xbox's were actually used for infringing purposes."

The Rule Of Law

:D

TheNocturnalEgyptian
3rd December 2010, 05:15 PM
Open Source will set you free