Question about Xbox Modchips

lain21us

lain21us

Banned
I'm thinking about getting a modchip. I'm playing KOTOR and the load times make me want to scream. I'd like to use my Xbox with Live, but I'm very absent minded, and if it were just a switch, I'm sure I'd forget to flip it. Is there any kind of modchip that is always off by default, so that I would have to consciously activate it to use it?
 
It is just a switch, but theres usually a light with it that turns on when the chip is on. So, just watch for the light, and be careful.

Theres a couple other things you can do, like have the chip use different connection settings than the Xbox would without it, but I'm not sure how well that works when you just boot with the game inserted.


It's illegal.
Click to expand...
Its not illegal. Copyright infringement is illegal and you can be sued for damages if they can prove you did it. But you are free to do whatever you want to your own property. If I want to saw my Xbox in half, I can do that. Its mine, I own it. You don't lease your Xbox.
 
Modifying your console (the insides) is illegal. It's illegal.
Click to expand...

Prove it. Find me the law that says I can't. Then find me an example of someone being arrested for it.

Pirating games is illegal.
 
[quote name='Scorch']Modifying your console (the insides) is illegal. It's illegal.[/quote]

No it isn't. That's just silly.
I bet you think it's illegal to rip the tags off your mattress after you've purchased it, right?
 
I didn't say you could get arrested for it. Sorta like cutting the tag on your mattress or something. I think it says something about being illegal if you cut it, but no one will get arrested for it.

But seriously, if you have a modchip, you have the power to back up games.. eventually, you'll just "try it out", just because it's there, and you'll be hooked.

Don't get a modchip.
 
[quote name='el bobo']What the hell does a mod chip do anyway?[/quote]

It modifies the way in which the hardware it is placed in was intented to function. More often than not, this is to gain some sort of illegal functionality, but there are many, many ways for hardware to be modded that is completely legal.
 
And by the way, cutting the tags off your mattresses IS legal.

The law only applies to the manufacturer and dealer selling them. They must be sold to you with them intact. You are free to cut your do-not-remove-under-penalty-of-law tags after you've purchased it.

But seriously, if you have a modchip, you have the power to back up games.. eventually, you'll just "try it out", just because it's there, and you'll be hooked.

Don't get a modchip.
Click to expand...
And drinking beer will lead me to a life of crime and drugs.
 
Modifying your Xbox is absolutely not illegal. This is a popular misconception among people who've never bothered to educate themselves on the topic. It is not even remotely illegal. As far as the mattress thing, the reason nobody gets arrested for it is that there's nothing illegal about cutting the tag on your mattress, and that's not what it says on the tag. It says that the tag is there by law. It's illegal for the manufacturer to remove or omit it because people need to know what material their matress is composed of, for allergies and such.
 
I guess dafoomie beat me to the matress thing. In any case, I don't need to be educated about the morality or legality of using a modchip. I posted the question for people who are familiar with modchip technologies, because I needed information about different models.
 
[quote name='lain21us']I guess dafoomie beat me to the matress thing. In any case, I don't need to be educated about the morality or legality of using a modchip. I posted the question for people who are familiar with modchip technologies, because I needed information about different models.[/quote]

All of this said, what you are planning to do with the modchip is illegal, as you have to bypass copyright protection to copy KOTOR to the harddrive. In doing this, you have violated the law.
 
[quote name='Scorch']I didn't say you could get arrested for it. Sorta like cutting the tag on your mattress or something. I think it says something about being illegal if you cut it, but no one will get arrested for it.[/quote]

Those aren't just supposed to be cut off while the mattress has the possibility of being sold, since they display advisory information. You're not supposed to take them off at the store or anything (or presumably if you plan to sell it during a yard sale at some point in the future), but those tags actually say they're not to be removed _except_ by owner. Once you've bought the mattress, you're free to take it off. :p
 
JSweeney, it is absolutely legal to make backups of software that you own. It's not a violation of copyright laws. Let me repeat myself, though. I DON'T NEED INFORMATION ON COPYRIGHT LAWS! I just want to know if there's a modchip like the one I described.
 
All of this said, what you are planning to do with the modchip is illegal, as you have to bypass copyright protection to copy KOTOR to the harddrive. In doing this, you have violated the law.
Click to expand...

Its questionable whether this is actually illegal or not, the DMCA technicly says that you can't bypass copy protection, with an exception for interoperability. But I don't think they'd rule against you considering you're only trying to play a game that you own. There isn't enough precedent in this area yet.

I would question if there is any copy protection at all, since Xbox discs are just dvd's written backwards. And this could fall under a broad interpretation of interoperability.
 
Its questionable whether this is actually illegal or not, the DMCA technicly says that you can't bypass copy protection, with an exception for interoperability. But I don't think they'd rule against you considering you're only trying to play a game that you own. There isn't enough precedent in this area yet.

I figure it would all be on a matter of scale and intent. I do agree with you, however, that one person doing it on a small scale with games they own is likely to fall under the eye of Microsoft's legal department.

I would question if there is any copy protection at all, since Xbox discs are just dvd's written backwards. And this could fall under a broad interpretation of interoperability

I wouldn't doubt that there are some null-sectors and other such tricks and tactics of copyright protection littered on some of the disks.
 
[quote name='lain21us']I just glossed over the entire DMCA, and I didn't see where it says that you can't "bypass copy protection" in the manner you are referring to. Here's a copy of it:

http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf

It's only 18 pages. Can you please tell me which page it's on, or which heading it's under?[/quote]

Try searching under "circumvention of technological measures"
 
Here's the text from the DMCA regarding this:

"Section 1201 divides technological measures into two categories: measures that prevent unauthorized access to a copyrighted work and measures that prevent unauthorized copying of a copyrighted work.
...............
As to the act of circumvention itself, the provision prohibits circumventing the first category of technological measures, but not the second.

This distinction was employed to assure that the public will have the continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological protection measure that prevents copying.
 
It seems pretty clear to me. The DMCA does not in any way prohibit circumvention of technological measures for the purpose of copying a copyrighted work for fair use. That is, the legal right to make backups of copyrighted materials that you own, for personal use.
 
This distinction was employed to assure that the public will have the continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological protection measure that prevents copying.
Click to expand...

Then it is legal and the DMCA doesn't apply.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']
This distinction was employed to assure that the public will have the continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological protection measure that prevents copying.
Click to expand...

Then it is legal and the DMCA doesn't apply.[/quote]

Exactly. So, back to my original question. I belive that the PS2 has a modchip where you hold down the reset button or something to turn it on. Does anyone know anything about this, and whether there is a similar chip for the Xbox?
 
[quote name='lain21us']Here's the text from the DMCA regarding this:

"Section 1201 divides technological measures into two categories: measures that prevent unauthorized access to a copyrighted work and measures that prevent unauthorized copying of a copyrighted work.
...............
As to the act of circumvention itself, the provision prohibits circumventing the first category of technological measures, but not the second.

This distinction was employed to assure that the public will have the continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological protection measure that prevents copying.[/quote]

The thing is, BOTH protections will exist on games, as there is a check in the boot-sector of most software products that checks the environment that a game is in before booting the software.

If your modchip creates copies that "self boot" they would be illegal. If they copy the data from the disk, but still requires the original disk to boot then they would be legal.
 
Look, quit wasting my time. The DMCA is pretty clear. The restrictions on the user have nothing to do with what the device he or she is using is capable of. The restriction is on the actual circumvention of copyright protection, and it is legal if you own the software. It is illegal if you are gaining unauthorized access to the software. To avoid confusion, the idea of authorized and unauthorized access was clarified, when it was written that these distinctions were written to protect the public's right to use the software without restriction, provided they follow fair use practices. The fact that Microsoft attempts to prohibit people from playing backups of software they own (fair use) does not make playing backups illegal. Microsoft does not have the legal right to prohibit such activity, and the DMCA allowed for devices like modchips, in order to protect the rights of consumers to use their software in any legal capacity. The DMCA was carefully worded to protect the right of people like me to copy software that I own for my own personal use. The type of modchip I have doesn't matter at all. The only thing that matters is what I do with it, which you would know if you would take a moment to read the DMCA.
 
This is a really stupid conversation, since modchips have never been ruled illegal. If they were made illegal by the DMCA, you can bet that a lot of people would have been charged with the crime of using a modchip. However, nobody has, and the reason is very simple. It's absolutely legal. It's not that Microsoft, one of the most legally active companies in the world, simply chooses not to prosecute. If they could, they absolutely would. Instead, all they can do is make you agree to certain conditions when you use their services (such as Xbox Live), in order to discourage people from such actions.
 
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/librarian_statement_01.html

The Register of Copyrights and her staff have conducted a careful and extensive evaluation of the entire record in the proceeding and determined that proponents of exemptions have demonstrated that the prohibition on circumventing access controls has had a substantial adverse effect on the ability of people to make noninfringing uses of four particular classes of copyrighted works. The Register has given me her analysis and recommendation, and today I have signed a document providing that persons making noninfringing uses of these four classes of works will not be subject to the prohibition against circumventing access controls during the next three years. The four classes of works are:

1. Compilations consisting of lists of Internet locations blocked by commercially marketed filtering software applications that are intended to prevent access to domains, websites or portions of websites, but not including lists of Internet locations blocked by software applications that operate exclusively to protect against damage to a computer or computer network or lists of Internet locations blocked by software applications that operate exclusively to prevent receipt of email.

2. Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are obsolete.

3. Computer programs and video games distributed in formats that have become obsolete and which require the original media or hardware as a condition of access.

4. Literary works distributed in ebook format when all existing ebook editions of the work (including digital text editions made available by authorized entities) contain access controls that prevent the enabling of the ebook's read-aloud function and that prevent the enabling of screen readers to render the text into a specialized format.

If they must make a statement that games and programs that are now obsolete that require the original media as a condition for access are not to be held to prohibition against access protections, that for current games that prohibition must obviously still exist.

Just because Fair Use allows you to make an archival copy, it doesn't grant you the right to use some other method (i.e. a modchip), to bypass access controls to play it. If the copy on the harddrive must have the original disk to boot, it would be legal, as it does not bypass access protections. If it boots on it's own, it is illegal, as it must bypass the access protections on the software to do so.
(With the already noted exception of game/programs with the original only requirements that are now on obsolete platforms.)
 
Look, quit wasting my time.

You are wasting your own time. You are not required to read nor post in this thread. You did not have to continue the discussion over these points.
Considering your original position, I would have thought you wouldn't. You did. You continued the thread on the path it has gone down. You are as liable for the course this thread has taken as anyone else.


The DMCA is pretty clear. The restrictions on the user have nothing to do with what the device he or she is using is capable of. The restriction is on the actual circumvention of copyright protection , and it is legal if you own the software.

Copy protection. Not access protection. Those are two entirely different technologies and seen as two entirely different controls. As such, they are legislated in that manner.

It is illegal if you are gaining unauthorized access to the software.
If you must bypass the access protections that the software has (most often a series of checks before it boots the software), that you are gaining unauthorized access to it. EVEN if you own the software product.


To avoid confusion, the idea of authorized and unauthorized access was clarified, when it was written that these distinctions were written to protect the public's right to use the software without restriction, provided they follow fair use practices.

Fair use does not give you the right to bypass access protections.


The fact that Microsoft attempts to prohibit people from playing backups of software they own (fair use) does not make playing backups illegal.

You can still make a backup.. so long as you don't have circumvent access protections to make them run. Here you go, right out of the DMCA:

This distinction was employed to assure that the public will have the
continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since
copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances,
section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing
a technological measure that prevents copying. By contrast, since the
fair use doctrine is not a defense to the act of gaining unauthorized
access to a work, the act of circumventing a technological measure in
order to gain access is prohibited.


Microsoft does not have the legal right to prohibit such activity, and the DMCA allowed for devices like modchips, in order to protect the rights of consumers to use their software in any legal capacity. The DMCA was carefully worded to protect the right of people like me to copy software that I own for my own personal use. The type of modchip I have doesn't matter at all. The only thing that matters is what I do with it, which you would know if you would take a moment to read the DMCA.

If your modchip allowed the user to bypass access protections, it would be in violation of the DMCA.


This is a really stupid conversation, since modchips have never been ruled illegal. If they were made illegal by the DMCA, you can bet that a lot of people would have been charged with the crime of using a modchip.

That's because modchips have other uses than piracy, such as hobbist programming and the like. Despite many people using them for ill, there are many positive and absolutely legal uses for the mod chip.



However, nobody has, and the reason is very simple. It's absolutely legal.

Again, much of it comes down to the use. Just because something CAN be used for illegal purposes doesn't automatically make it illegal. Of course, it can also then be said that just because a product is legal, it doesn't mean that all of it's uses are.

It's not that Microsoft, one of the most legally active companies in the world, simply chooses not to prosecute. If they could, they absolutely would. Instead, all they can do is make you agree to certain conditions when you use their services (such as Xbox Live), in order to discourage people from such actions.

http://news.com.com/2100-1040-945540.html
http://www.lik-sang.com/news.php?artc=2707
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002Oct/gam20021016016822.htm

You were saying?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top