[FUBAR-BDHR]

Can't believe no one has posted this yet:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/11/12/cnet.xbox.live.ban/index.html

Yea lets ban them from ever using the system so they will pirate all games and have no reason to buy any now.  How stupid is Microsoft?  Anyone see networks to replace live coming down the road.  They would already have a million customers. 

[SpardaSon21]

I noticed in that report the MS guy talked about people who are poor sports and ruin the games for others being banned as well.  I'm wondering how many Halo 3 players got hit with the banhammer.

[Pyro MX]

I don't have anything against preventing piracy. The problem is, it prevents people for doing whatever they want with the hardware they have bought. It's like buying a computer and not being able to install another OS on it or whatever.

When they say "Microsoft has banned as many as a million players from Xbox Live for altering their consoles in order to play pirated versions of games.", I'm pretty sure they have no way of knowing if the individual altered his/her console in order to play pirated games or just to run alternate software.

It also appears that modification is prohibited by the TOU : "All consumers should know that piracy is illegal and modifying their Xbox 360 console violates the Xbox Live terms of use, will void their warranty and result in a ban from Xbox Live."

If people want to use MS's service, they have to respect it, whether they like it or not. Now I don't say that this TOU is a good thing, but people shouldn't have expected any other behavior from Microsoft. They have every right to do so as it is explicitly written. Now is it a good idea of doing so? Not my department, I don't know the numbers. But I doubt it.

Of course there's a problem of game piracy here, but people do not modify console necessarily to play pirated games. They can do it to run unofficial or alternative software on the computer. Because let's face it, a Xbox is basically a computer stuck in a beautiful casing. And a very restrictive TOU. If you want to do whatever you want with a machine, well the only choice you have is to buy yourself a "real" computer and stay away from gaming consoles. But from the looks of thing, we won't have the rights to do whatever we want on any hardware if this trend continues...

[FUBAR-BDHR]

Reading some of the comments it seems they just didn't ban people using pirated software but anyone with a modded system.  So if your breaks down and you fix it yourself you got banned.  Also there are reports of people getting kicked for playing purchased copies of COD MW2 because the stores sold them before the release date not because they are pirated. 

Glad I will never own a console. 

[Pyro MX]

I think that the TOU covers any form of modification, as it doesn't mention anything like "modded-for-playing-pirated-games Xbox" (and I wonder if it's possible to discern both anyway). But it sure breaks the warranty. They cannot cover the mistakes of people who are doing the modifications wrong, especially if it concerns hardware.

[FUBAR-BDHR]

What are you supposed to do when they are out of warranty?  I've never looked at an x-box but I have fixed 2 or 3 PS2 systems.  Sony wanted over 80 dollars for a CD drive.  I was able to buy the part and fix it for about 20.  In one case I took 2 broken systems and made one working system.  Cost 1 broken system. 

I don't think MS should have the right to ban you from working on your own paid for equipment.  Wonder how that TOU would hold up in a court. 

[NGTM-1R]

I don't think MS should have the right to ban you from working on your own paid for equipment.  Wonder how that TOU would hold up in a court. 

License agreements are in general not legally binding, but the odds are pretty good they'd win this one. Live is their service, they have a right to distribute it in whatever manner they deem fit.

[Pyro MX]

I don't think MS should have the right to ban you from working on your own paid for equipment.  Wonder how that TOU would hold up in a court.

Neither do I, honestly. If I pay 400$ for a piece of hardware, I better have the rights to do whatever I want with it. But when it comes to services, MS pretty much have the right to do whatever they want and keep whoever they want online. How would it hold up in court? "Users have every right to modify their consoles. They are just no longer entitled yo use our services and warranties."

[blackhole]

As most people have noted, there's nothing stopping Microsoft from doing this, nor is there anything inherently wrong with it. It's just a suicidal business decision. It's kind of like how Volition could have sued every single person who pirated FS2 when it wasn't available on the market. Sure, you can do it, its just incredibly f*cking stupid.

[Mongoose]

As most people have noted, there's nothing stopping Microsoft from doing this, nor is there anything inherently wrong with it. It's just a suicidal business decision. It's kind of like how Volition could have sued every single person who pirated FS2 when it wasn't available on the market. Sure, you can do it, its just incredibly f*cking stupid.

I don't see what's so suicidal about it.  It's written loud and clear in the TOU that MS reserves the right to boot people from Live who have modded their consoles.  These people did, and voila.  Like Pyro MX said, you're perfectly free to do any modding to the system you want...but MS doesn't have some moral obligation to allow your modded console onto their offered service, particularly when said modding allows you to rip them off.  It's the consequence you accept.  I can't say I have any sympathy for anyone who got booted over this.

And honestly, I don't see how limits on modding should dissuade anyone from owning a console.  What, were you planning to attack the thing with a soldering iron?

[Pyro MX]

Well, the only platform is a selling point of the console. Except if you're on the Wii, maybe.

[blackhole]

It's written loud and clear in the TOU that MS reserves the right to boot people from Live who have modded their consoles.  These people did, and voila.  Like Pyro MX said, you're perfectly free to do any modding to the system you want...but MS doesn't have some moral obligation to allow your modded console onto their offered service, particularly when said modding allows you to rip them off.  It's the consequence you accept.  I can't say I have any sympathy for anyone who got booted over this.

I didn't say anything about morals, did I? Its a suicidal business decision. I don't care who should have done what - Microsoft just declared war on one million of its customers. This is not going to end well.

EDIT: And in case anyone thinks I'm vastly exaggerating what Microsoft is trying to do, again, I'm not saying that Microsoft was TRYING to declare war on one million of its users... but the users have different ideas.

[General Battuta]

I dunno. I think it'll probably end well for Microsoft - i.e. their sales won't be seriously impacted.

I think they're probably doing the best possible thing for the users of the service. Modding is a force for good, but it can also be a force for tremendous, tremendous irritation.

[FUBAR-BDHR]

Remember there are already companies out there that hate microsoft.  I could see a move by Google or Mozilla or Sun to put up a network just to pull users over away from MSN or IE, or Office.

[General Battuta]

Huh? But how does that relate to Xbox Live usage? Non-modded consoles are by definition locked to a single network.

Unless I'm missing something obvious here,

[Topgun]

As most people have noted, there's nothing stopping Microsoft from doing this, nor is there anything inherently wrong with it. It's just a suicidal business decision. It's kind of like how Volition could have sued every single person who pirated FS2 when it wasn't available on the market. Sure, you can do it, its just incredibly f*cking stupid.

+1

[General Battuta]

But why? Much as I like creativity and open hardware, what do they actually lose?

[redsniper]

All those folks they banned?

[Thaeris]

I must state that support and friendliness goes a long way for a company... even if the user is in the wrong.

I think of Graphic Simulations, who made the F/A-18 Hornet simulator for the Mac. Worst support EVAR! I tried many times to get help with a few problems for programs which were very much legally obtained, but despite multiple emails, I never got a word. I still liked the company for its products, but I was also very much disenfranchised with the organization. And, I'm not the only one.

This is not comparable to the Microsoft incident: I did absolutely nothing wrong. Even still, Microsoft doing this to their user base will have repurcussions for them, even if it ultimately doesn't do too much harm to the company.

Still, I'm not sure what the best route of action for dealing with this kind of thing is...

[karajorma]

Huh? But how does that relate to Xbox Live usage? Non-modded consoles are by definition locked to a single network.

And they just banned everyone with a modded console. So if someone were to come along with a network that they could work on they'd have a userbase of over 1 million users.

More importantly, with other networks available you'd get other people chipping their machines just to use them. And when MS responds in their typical manner by trying to introduce some bull**** to prevent modded machines working with Google Live or whatever that's when they get hit by an antitrust suit.

What happens now depends on how easy it is for someone else to come up with a new network. It might not be easy but ironically the people with the technical know-how to do it are going to be a disproportionately large number in the group MS have just kicked. Cause the hardwear hackers and tech geeks are exactly the people who first chipped their machines.


The important thing is that MS may have just opened a very large chink in their armour surrounding XBOX/Live integration. Previously if you had one, you had to have the other. MS may have just short-sightedly ended that.