Xbox modders unite in class action suit


Recommended Posts

If you want a modified 360 then don't go on LIVE. Simple as that.

When you sign on live that tos toc you agree to is a legal binding contract between you and MS.

Don't agree to it and they cannot touch you =)

This is true.

Why would you take your car to get fixed at a dealership when its not under warranty? That's like asking for them to just rape your wallet.

It was a hypothetical. And sometimes you need to take it to a dealership cause they are the only ones who have a certain part.

I understand fully that having a modded console breaks their EULA, and being banned from Live is the price you pay. However there are alot of other things that enter into the picture, the law suit is mainly based around the timing, and I think it completely wrong of MS to wait for a sales boost and then start banning. But aside from the timing issue that many people have, the main issue that I see wrong with consoles being banned, and to my knowledge they don't really make this publicly known is that once live banned, your console can do nothing but play games, no more streaming from the pc, no more WMC and i think that is completely wrong. If they want to take away a subscription service as punishment, it's understandable but to take away some pretty huge functions of your system, i think is totally wrong.

It was a hypothetical. And sometimes you need to take it to a dealership cause they are the only ones who have a certain part.

such as? I have a 1973 jeep wagoneer. I have no problems finding parts. even a break booster and they didnt make them for my jeep originally. but I need them for power breaks

How does modifying something YOU bought and own violate anything? It's like buying a car and putting rims or a new engine in it. Does that mean that the dealer you bought it from will not fix it the next time you take it in for repair cause you modified it?

yea but the only road that takes you to the arcade belongs to ms and your car isnt considered street-legal in that area. back to stock rims/engine you go else, buy another car.

If you had a console banned because you were silly enough to play a modded console online then you *really* can't complain.

It doesn't matter how self righteous you want to be, it ends with a console ban.

I don't think the TOS has any legal validity, you pay for an XBL subscription and are only offered the TOS after paying. MS will most likely end up having to refund subscription costs for those banned.

It's the EULA that won't hold in court - a contract that is put in place after the money has been exchanged does not have any legal validity.

MS is free to deny service based on the EULA but they will have to pay back whatever was paid for that denied service.

No I bet the EULA and TOS both apply to silver which means it active before you pay for live. If they want money back for the consoles then theyll never win that.

If they want to take away a subscription service as punishment, it's understandable but to take away some pretty huge functions of your system, i think is totally wrong.

Part of that online subscription system includes the ability to install games to your drive, and play videos with downloaded codecs. There is nothing wrong with them taking away the ability to install games to the drive seeing as xbox live is used to verify the disc.

Anyone and everyone even LOOKING into a lawsuit over this needs a big smack in the head. You modded, you got banned, your fault. Not MS, not the dog down the street. YOU elected to modify your console. You KNEW there was a risk you'd get BANNED. Tough ****, you lose. I for one stand by the fact MS banned all the consoles, and i'm one of the toasted members.

Call em', get a refund it works, i did, don't start up a silly frivolous lawsuit with no bearings and waste everyone's time.

How does modifying something YOU bought and own violate anything? It's like buying a car and putting rims or a new engine in it. Does that mean that the dealer you bought it from will not fix it the next time you take it in for repair cause you modified it? Or does it make it illegal to use cause you modified it?

Because the console ISNT yours to do with as you please, you are only granted a licence to use the console under the terms and conditions Microsoft set on it which can be revoked at any time, hence the bannings, you can still use the console just not on Microsofts service.

Because the console ISNT yours to do with as you please,

not from what i recall. you can do whatever the **** you like to your console, but when you take it online to play games - you're breaching their xbox live terms of service or whatever,

According to AbingtonIP, Microsoft has also misapplied the ban, locking out users who had modified their Xboxes for reasons other than piracy.

This is false, flashing the DVD drive doesn't allow to run any kind of homebrew while using wave 4, it only serves piracy.

They don't really stand a chance.

not from what i recall. you can do whatever the **** you like to your console, but when you take it online to play games - you're breaching their xbox live terms of service or whatever,

I cant say for certain but most if not all consoles have clauses in the terms and conditions that forbid you to modify the hardware or bypass the copy protection as you dont own the rights to the hardware designs. Thats why the big three can sue and shut down modchip fitters and console flashers.

I understand that PIRACY is illegal, but as far as I know, modding is still a "grey area". I've always subscribed to the "I paid for it, I'll do whatever I want with it." AKA, if I wanted to smash it with a sledge hammer, it's my right. If I want to open it up and "mod" it as well, that's also my right. The problem is what the end user chooses to do with such a mod. There are many reasons nowadays, especially with the current generation of consoles, and the power they have, to hardmod or softmod them. Homebrew, running games directly off an external harddrive (I do that on my Wii), etc.

And while I know a person who bought TWO 360's, One to mod, and one to play on XBL, not every can afford that, and not everyone mods for illegal reasons.

It's not a grey area, it's a violation of the EULA, DMCA and several other statutes and laws. So while you can stay offline and mod til your hearts content, don't cry when you go online and get popped. Frankly I find it to be.... great. I'm more than willing to bet 99.8% of "modders" are game pirates and they drive prices up for people who pay for their games, so I'm quite happy they get to suffer a little for their actions.

If there was any actual homebrew on the 360 (don't link me to that crap that started a month or two back), then people could try and play the homebrew > piracy card.

As it stands, only reason you'd go through the bother of voiding your 1 year standard warranty/3 year RROD warranty and tear open your 360 is to play pirated games. With a flashed drive you really can't do anything else.

Some people make the argument that they do it to play backups of games they legally own, but on the whole I find that excuse to be baloney. Fact is the EULA for Live is made explicitly clear, and if you break it you get banned. No sympathy at all for the modders here.

I guess you can say for example if apple ban people from the apple store that jailbroke there phone.

would that be wrong for them to do that even if you payed for your hardware.

just as people who have an Xbox 360 and PAY for Live should you be able to do what you want to your console.

I guess you can say for example if apple ban people from the apple store that jailbroke there phone.

would that be wrong for them to do that even if you payed for your hardware.

just as people who have an Xbox 360 and PAY for Live should you be able to do what you want to your console.

Jailbreaking the iphone doesn't tamper with the hardware, it's not as simple when it comes to software exploits.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Free Software Foundation Europe pushes EU to force Google to allow AI uninstalls on Android by Paul Hill Credit: Pexels Users should be able to fully uninstall AI-based features from Android devices and be able to access interoperability functions, free from Google’s verification requirements, the European Commission has heard as part of an Android interoperability consultation under the Digital Markets Act. These measures were proposed by the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) last week when it submitted its documentation. The FSFE noted that Google had started silently installing AI models without telling users. It noted that the EU’s DMA requires companies like Google to allow users to uninstall pre-loaded software from their devices, but in the case of the AI models Google is installing, they reinstall if you delete them, contravening the DMA. To get Google back under control, the FSFE has told the European Commission that there needs to be improvements within the Android Open Source Project (AOSP). First, it said that users should be able to fully remove pre-loaded AI components from their devices, with companies being prohibited from silently reinstalling or reactivating them. Second, access to Android interoperability features should not be contingent on registration, authorization, or contractual relationships with Google. This pertains to Google’s attempt to force developers to register with Google, even to publish apps to alternative app stores like F-Droid. Discussing its submission, Lucas Lasota, FSFE Legal Programme Manager, said: Google is planning to roll out its Android Developer Certification in September 2026. This will force every Android app developer to register with Google before their software can be installed on certified Android devices, but it should affect those who have removed Google Apps from their device. The program is controversial because it entails the signing of contracts and payment of account fees to Google, as well as the handing over of the identities of developers. It said: The FSFE said that if the Commission’s draft measures remain unchanged, then Google will be allowed to make developers verify their identity. The FSFE believes that asking developers to register is contrary to the text and spirit of the law. In summary, the FSFE has told the Commission that no developer should need a Google account, a Play Store presence, or any agreement with Google to access Android’s interoperability features.
    • You could disable this "functionality/feature/whatever" with 2 registry keys, ages ago.
    • My Photos app is version 2026.11050.1001.0 and it remembers the window size and position. My Snipping Tool is version 11.2602.49.0 and it can capture the taskbar.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      519
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      185
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      87
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!