Linked by davidiwharper on Fri 3rd Dec 2010 18:29 UTC
Legal "Federal authorities in the first-of-its-kind game-console-modding criminal trial abruptly dropped their prosecution Thursday, "based on fairness and justice." Following procedural rulings made by the presiding judge in the aftermath of his 30-minute tirade yesterday, it emerged that a key witness, an employee of the Entertainment Software Alliance, had provided a pirated game to the defendant during the course of his investigation. As this detail had been known to the government for almost a week but had been withheld from the defense, prosecutors had no choice but to move for a dismissal."
Thread beginning with comment 452103
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Hmmm
by WorknMan on Fri 3rd Dec 2010 19:15 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

Wonder how they knew the game was pirated and not a backup? If he made it known that it was pirated, he should've went to jail for no other reason than being an idiot.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Hmmm
by orestes on Fri 3rd Dec 2010 20:16 in reply to "Hmmm"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Backups don't exist for console games. Regardless of why you cracked the console and DRM on the games you've still broken the relevant laws

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Hmmm
by brynet on Fri 3rd Dec 2010 20:32 in reply to "RE: Hmmm"
brynet Member since:
2010-03-02

Just because they're written laws, doesn't make them right.

http://www.dumblaws.com/

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Hmmm
by WorknMan on Fri 3rd Dec 2010 21:36 in reply to "RE: Hmmm"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Backups don't exist for console games. Regardless of why you cracked the console and DRM on the games you've still broken the relevant laws.


Well, we're talking about two different laws here. One is violating the DMCA by modding a console. The other is piracy. If you take a game that you legally own and burn a copy of it, it is technically a copy and not a pirated game. Obviously, the prosecution considered the difference between a backup and pirated copy important enough for their case to make the distinction.

All I'm saying is that if I were using pirated games (and not backups) to test mods, I would certainly not advertise the fact that it was pirated. Sure, I might get in trouble for modding, but why make it worse for myself by introducing piracy into the mix?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Hmmm
by davidiwharper on Sat 4th Dec 2010 00:09 in reply to "Hmmm"
davidiwharper Member since:
2006-01-01

Wonder how they knew the game was pirated and not a backup?


The ESA investigator deliberately took a pirated game to the defendant's house, so that he could test whether the modding worked. In doing so, he broke the same law that the defendant was charged under (the DMCA).

Actually this is one of the reasons why the judge went all Rambo on the government the day before the dismissal. Both the ESA witness and another witness from Microsoft openly admitted to wilfully breaking the DMCA, yet here they were testifying against someone else for doing the same thing. (The Microsoft employee admitted to having modded Xboxes himself when he was at college.)

Reply Parent Score: 4