Homebrew Companies (Like Nintendo) Might have just been put up against a wall.

[Friendsxix]

Are you sure? I recall reading somewhere that the Wii had bricking code in one of it's updates specifically targeting users of The Homebrew Channel. It did get some non-homebrew users though...

Yes we are sure, the team who made the hack explained how.

Nintendo did deliberately brick Wiis, though it wasn't for usage of the Homebrew Channel. Rather, it was for having a region-changed Korean Wii. This manifested in the form of Error 003. Essentially, starting with version 4.2, the Wii would attempt to use the Korean Key to encrypt a specific series of bytes, and then compare the result to hard coded values. If the result matched the hard coded values, it meant that the Wii had the Korean Key, and thus had been tampered with -- making it throw Error 003. If the result did not match, the Wii continued on its merry way.

Source: http://wiibrew.org/wiki/Error_003

I'm guessing Nintendo did this because there were people region changing Korean Wiis (which were cheaper), and selling them for a profit in other countries.

 

[lefthandsword]

People don't read license agreements before agreeing to them, do they?

If you just hit "I agree" blindly and then complain about getting banned from X because you broke the terms stated in the agreement, you have nobody but yourself to blame

 

[a9lh-1user]

I've read all the statements and i've been shocked about them.
(I did the mistake and read the thread "How old are you" before i read this one....maybe 50% are be true about there age....very interesting)

There is only one thing that i want to write here:
Even if you didn't read the agreements you can be judged by them!
"Not to know what you did wrong (by absence of knowledge) doesnt mean you cant get punished"
Thats not only for this discussion about Nintendo it's also in the Law of (mostly) all countrys

 

[Foxi4]

Can you read?
I never said it was Nintendo fault, on the contrary. I never contested anything, on the contrary. It was just fucking rhetorical.
To follow your reasoning, if you steal something I can put you in jail without proving you actually did it.

Goods vs. services. Besides, they have proof, you just haven't contested the claim. As service providers they can terminate your service if they believe you've broken the terms.

 

[dubbz82]

From what I gather of this, it simply means that they simply can't pursue legal action against you for installing cfw on your system (this is still a victory regardless). As numerous others have stated, online service is an entirely different thing, and requires that you accept an entirely different set of terms and conditions. If you break these, they're still within their rights to kill your access. Keep in mind too, that even if this does hold up, it doesn't mean that you can go and list your CFW systems on ebay or so without fear of it being pulled down for violating THEIR terms of service (at least until if/when they modify their TOS), simply because something is legal to do doesn't mean that it's not breaking terms of service.

 

[ChiroToB]

Haven't read the case, but I worked in IP Law for years. The breakdown is pretty simple. When you purchase a physical product, you own the product. The physical product is yours to do with as you please, including modding, breaking, selling, etc.

What most people don't pay attention to is that included in the purchase of the physical product is also the lisence to use the software under the terms and conditions set forth by the manufacturer. For instance, Sony, MS and N all require you to have stock firmware and not use backed up/illegitimate games at all or online due to many reasons which are all outlined in the license agreement. When you break those rules, the manufacturer has the right to reclaim (revoke) posession of your lisence. This is how systems get banned. You no longer own a lisence to use THAT SPECIFIC CONSOLE (in gaming terms) online. That part of your purchase has been reclaimed.

We are lucky that prior to this case, however, companies didn't go so far as to intentionally brick your system so that you own the physical product but can no longer use it. This case seems to be reaching toward making it legal to use custom developed firmware, providing the firmware doesn't use ANY part of the original code for the operating system.

 

[duffmmann]

Goods vs. services. Besides, they have proof, you just haven't contested the claim. As service providers they can terminate your service if they believe you've broken the terms.

Exactly, and if you believe that they wrongfully banned you, then contest them. Bring Nintendo to court and prove them wrong. But he wont, because fact is he was rightfully banned and he knows it.

 

[Redferne]

Exactly, and if you believe that they wrongfully banned you, then contest them. Bring Nintendo to court and prove them wrong. But he wont, because fact is he was rightfully banned and he knows it.

/facepalm

 

[duffmmann]

/facepalm

Truth hurts

 

[dAVID_]

Koolboyman will be happy.

 

[WeedZ]

Exactly, and if you believe that they wrongfully banned you, then contest them. Bring Nintendo to court and prove them wrong. But he wont, because fact is he was rightfully banned and he knows it.

You can't take someone to court over denying services. They own their servers and can deny access to them by anyone for any reason.

This topic is pointless. Just because you 100% own your console doesn't mean you're entitled to their networks

 

[Pacheko17]

Wish Steam was like this.
Feels kind of uncomfortable to know that my 240+ games aren't REALLY mine.

 

[Foxi4]

Exactly, and if you believe that they wrongfully banned you, then contest them. Bring Nintendo to court and prove them wrong. But he wont, because fact is he was rightfully banned and he knows it.

It doesn't even require the court's intervention, they can just check system flags. If they made a mistake, they can reverse it.

 

[duffmmann]

You can't take someone to court over denying services. They own their servers and can deny access to them by anyone for any reason.

This topic is pointless. Just because you 100% own your console doesn't mean you're entitled to their networks

You can take anyone to court over anything. Doesn't mean you'll win of course. But yeah I completely agree with you, even if you own your system, you're not entitled to be on their networks at all especially because we all hit the I agree button to the ToS when we first use the device.

 

[Redferne]

Truth hurts

How?
Auto quote:

And just to be even clearer, I'm not contesting the ban. I perfectly knew what I was doing when I hacked my consoles (1 banned, 1 not... yet).

 

[duffmmann]

It doesn't even require the court's intervention, they can just check system flags. If they made a mistake, they can reverse it.

True, I just mean challenge them if you think you've been wrongfully banned, they'd be able to confirm the ban or if they made a mistake remove the ban.

 

[linuxares]

Yeah that law doesn't work in the EU so... they can show it up their rear end =)

 

[Foxi4]

True, I just mean challenge them if you think you've been wrongfully banned, they'd be able to confirm the ban or if they made a mistake remove the ban.

He's basically complaining because there's no specific message for what kind of software was in violation of the terms. Thing is, Nintendo is in no way obligated to catalogue homebrew or piracy tools - a generic message is enough.

 

[duffmmann]

How?

So you're aware you've been rightfully banned, but are demanding that Nintendo only ban you if they prove it to you first, even though they by no means have to because you agreed to the end user license? No thats not required at all, and the law will agree, I'm sorry man, but you're just wrong, again truth hurts, but its true.

 

[Redferne]

So you're aware you've been wrongfully banned, but are demanding that Nintendo only ban you if they prove it to you first, even though they by no means have to because you agreed to the end user license? I'm sorry man, but you're just wrong, again truth hurts, but its true.

So again, because apparently understanding simple English is way too hard for some people.

I never said I was wrongfully banned.
I never asked for the ban to be lifted.
I never asked for proof.

All I said was it WOULD be nice if the error code COULD correspond to something precise like "use of unauthorised software".
That way if you did use unauthorised software you STFU and deal with it and if you didn't it's easier to contest the ban.