Agreed!
John-AldrichTile-Tools From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 9:24 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: XBox mod hacker could face 10 years in prison !!! I largely agree with your assessment. I don't think that the modifications should be deemed criminal, but at the same time, I think that where there is interaction with other systems on a level that could negatively impact the experience for valid patrons of the equipment+service, that there should be some remedy available to the manufacturer. This is not simply a product modification. That's the problem when lawmakers do not understand the essence of the underlying problem and allow lobbyists to facilitate law generation for their own interests. -ASB Providing Competitive Advantage through Effective IT Leadership ------- http://Home.ASBzone.com/ASB/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/AndrewBaker ------- On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:04 AM, John Aldrich <jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com> wrote: No, it is not fair, but it should not be *illegal* for someone to compete online in an unfair manner. ISTR that when Diablo/Diablo II came out, Blizzard was able to detect when someone had gotten some "illegal" items and blocked that user or something. AFAIK, that never came to be a "legal" issue... sure the hacker could have sued Blizzard, but they probably would have been laughed out of court. I think that sort of thing should just be a warranty issue, not a legal issue! -----Original Message----- From: asbz...@gmail.com [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 6:11 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: XBox mod hacker could face 10 years in prison !!! Over the years, a lot of comparisons have been made between cars and computers. I don't necessarily agree with the criminal angle of modding electronic equipment, but one does have to admit that computers and computer-like devices facilitate and engage in a degree of interoperability that is not common in other modding scenarios. Is it fair to have someone mod a game system and then participate in an online multiplayer game with what no longer constitutes a level playing field? The challenges in this realm are different. -ASB Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Buff <kurt.b...@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:38:26 To: NT System Admin Issues<ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com> Subject: Re: XBox mod hacker could face 10 years in prison !!! Yup. Clear conflict with the intent of SCOTUS and the Carterfone decision and other decisions regarding 3rd party maintenance on cars, etc.. Something's going to give here in the next few years. On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 13:04, Steven M. Caesare<scaes...@caesare.com> wrote: > It's the leveraging DCMA circumvention as a root "crime" in this prosecution that's disturbing. > > -sc > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 2:53 PM >> To: NT System Admin Issues >> Subject: Re: XBox mod hacker could face 10 years in prison !!! >> >> I'm not exactly an Ayn-Rander, but... >> >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 08:14, Angus Scott-Fleming<angu...@geoapps.com> >> wrote: >> >> <snip a bunch, and the quote below was written by someone else...> >> >> > Now Apple is trying to control the platform, applications and network >> > simply to line their own pockets. While you Ayn Rand-ers are busy >> > slapping high-fives, let me remind the rest of you that competition >> > and open platforms are better for consumers on all levelfrom >> > pricing to performance. It is only in the short term that we benefit >> > from closed systems. >> >> I applaud Apple's attempt to keep their platform pure, same as with >> MSFT. There are good reasons for doing it. >> >> The issue at hand, however, is misguided IP law. There should be no >> penalty for selling modded equipment. If you bought it, it's yours, >> and you should be able to do with it as you will, including modifying >> it and selling it. If Apple/Microsoft refuses to support it >> thereafter, well, that's their call. >> >> Companies that try to enforce that will lose, eventually, though. >> >> Kurt >> >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ >> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>~ > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/%7E> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.54/2300 - Release Date: 08/13/09 06:11:00 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.54/2300 - Release Date: 08/13/09 06:11:00 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
<<image001.jpg>>
<<image002.jpg>>
