Judge Recommends Banning Xbox Imports to the US

[ecoho]

mark my words this is gonna come down to who has more money and lets face it MS has more. I give this a year maybe two before motorola settles because the bad press will make them lose stock (and yes this would be considered bad press for them and for MS but hey MS always has bad press)

 

[MercurySteam]

And as per usual, outdated copyright laws are causing an unprecedented amount of bullshit and friction between huge companies.

 

[Buizel91]

glorious PC master race

Just...No.

Seriously i'm sick of seeing that. There is no "Master Race" You are Human. You are of the Human Race. You are simply a person from a group of people that play games on PC. Not a new fucking species.

OT: Won't happen. Just saying.

I have been reading some peoples comments, and it looks like a Patent is like Copyright, but for technology and doesn't last very long. (don't know what they are, don't care, just what i have read) However Microsoft didn't completely copy it, it just does the same thing? (what i read, don't burn me down) so...the problem is?

And i have been seeing on another thread, that it is Motorola who are in the wrong, and judging by the people who think Motorola is in the wrong, and the people who think MS are in the wrong, im inclined to agree. Because it's people like the one i quoted who are against MS (IE PC gamers, people who hate MS etc etc)

Again...Won't happen.

 

[RicoADF]

*Snip quotes to save space*

I have never said that is my position at all. My position is that this is not an action that protects any consumers, but in facts can harm the consumers of potentially both companies. My official position is that MS should pay them money for use of their product, and in turn Motorola should stop trying to mess with MS ability to produce and distribute their game system.

Also, while the judge has given his recommendation, what no one seems to realize is that a judge does not make laws. He is confined by the letter of the laws he passes judgement on. So, it is this judges opinion that the people who determine these things should carry out a certain action. He is not the deciding factor on this. The reason I said he and so many of his ilk are "retarded" is because judges often times confuse a moral issue for a legal one. In this case, the Judge has clearly looked at this case with blinders on and is looking at this in the narrowest possible way.

Also, for the record, I do not even own a 360. And if I did, this wouldn't affect me at all. But as a potential future purchaser of an Xbox360 (though it's not very likely), it benefits me to have this available to me. I of course want to see things taken care of properly though. I want Motorola to get what they need in this, which is of course some kind of monetary reparation. I also would hate to see MS inhibited from distributing their products because of this. And contrary to what people like to believe, this case has not been decided yet. A judge gave his recommendation is all.

One thing that drives me nuts about these forums is that people seem to think what they read here is definitive. I almost feel like this isn't even a worthwhile update since it resolves nothing. We know from previous articles that this judge already sides with Motorola.

/end rant

The idea would be to protect the IP Motorola owns, thats not meant to protect consumers, its meant to protect investers/inventors. As Nuke_em_05 says on page 1, IP is there to protect investors money so people will develop new things knowing they can make their investment back.

Fair enough if it's just a recommendation, however as I said if their found to be breaching the IP law then that recommendation should be followed through as I said, its standard proceedure to stop the sale of offending items until they companies can rectify the problem.

I didn't assume you had a 360 or were a fanboy, just replying to what you said and my opinion on the matter, doesn't bother me how this turns out.

If the judge already sides with Motorola, then there may be a reason for that (that MS did screw up).

 

[PlatinumRenegade]

I am personally a PS3 user, but I believe this is a stupid decision as that a good chunk of profit comes from Xbox 360 sales, Xbox Live memberships and such.

 

[PlatinumRenegade]

Oh, no
How will I live with this tragedy
Wait a minute- I'm one of the glorious PC master race, so it doesn't affect me
A good day to be playing PC

PC, Xbox, PS3, it's all the same. It's just what you prefer.

 

[badmunky64]

Common Obama!! Here's your chance to actually do something!!!

 

[Krion_Vark]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/55/Barack_Obama_Hope_poster.jpg/220px-Barack_Obama_Hope_poster.jpg
Oh the irony, a console that bricks moders being banned for not respecting Intellectual property.

It doesnt brick modders. It can brick them they do have the technology. But they currently just cut them off from Xbox Live.

Funny the captcha is cherry on top

 

[Risingblade]

So if my xbox red rings I'm royally fucked?


Captcha: beats me

You're no help!

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

I groan every time I hear "intellectual property" because it's usually followed up by some corporate asshattery and further evidence that copyright laws are just freaking broken.

I was just about to type something along those lines.

In fact, my response was going to be: How can they call it protection of "intellectual property" when there's almost no intellect in, or behind the creation of, said property?

 

[blackrave]

Just...No.

Seriously i'm sick of seeing that. There is no "Master Race" You are Human. You are of the Human Race. You are simply a person from a group of people that play games on PC. Not a new fucking species.

OT: Won't happen. Just saying.

I have been reading some peoples comments, and it looks like a Patent is like Copyright, but for technology and doesn't last very long. (don't know what they are, don't care, just what i have read) However Microsoft didn't completely copy it, it just does the same thing? (what i read, don't burn me down) so...the problem is?

And i have been seeing on another thread, that it is Motorola who are in the wrong, and judging by the people who think Motorola is in the wrong, and the people who think MS are in the wrong, im inclined to agree. Because it's people like the one i quoted who are against MS (IE PC gamers, people who hate MS etc etc)

Again...Won't happen.

Ok, time to get serious
Sorry, I forgot to put quotes around "glorious PC master race"
(it is from ZP first Witcher review- I found hilarious how Yahtzee described difference between PC and console gamers in both reviews of Witcher, so I usually quote him there)
I'm not against console gaming. I'm against developers who make shitty console ports on PC (controls, graphics, etc.)
As for Microsoft, my argument is against console exclusives
I understand not wanting to make games for PS3, but most gaming PCs run on Windows and last time I checked it had MS logo on it, so WTF?
Yes, timed exclusives are ok, but never releasing game on PC is loosing money

Regarding patents
As far as I remember patents had 10-15 years time limitation, after that anyone can use them.

PC, Xbox, PS3, it's all the same. It's just what you prefer.

You're mostly right
Consoles are just limited computers
But I don't like software and hardware limitations (and there is this whole argument of "owning" a console), so I prefer PC

 

[Necabo]

Ehmmm, did no-one read further and notice that not only the Xbox360 is affected but also Windows 7?! At least in Germany. Appearently due to the same codec infingements. Might not make a whole lot of difference with windows 8 coming out soon, But still..

 

[Signa]

Haha, that judge is retarded. They all are. IP is more important than consumer rights... WRONG! IP's exist to protect the consumer as much as they do the person who came up with an idea. I mean, lets face facts though, Microsoft is making that argument for them and not the consumer. If you are familiar with MS outside the realm of Xbox systems, you know this already. Enforcing this restriction would only increase the cost of the system. As others have said, better get ready for the new Xbox.

M$ infringed Motorola's patent, thus IP. So, the consumers, whose rights are to be "protected" by the IP - as per your logic - are Motorola's consumers, not Microsoft's ... Therefore, the judge's reasoning of Motorola's IP being more important than Microsoft's consumers is perfectly valid.

IP's protect consumers by not allowing cheap knockoffs to be sold to a consumer that bear the name of the original creation. Inhibiting the production of a device does not protect consumers at all in this case. Especially since, from a consumer perspective, MS is not laying claim to the creation of a device as much as they are simply using a device. It's one of those catch 22's of IP laws. In this case it's not in the consumers interest for the device to not be sold. It's probably one of the few times MS and consumer values are in perfect alignment. Furthermore, Motorola's consumers are not harmed by the use of the Xbox360. People are not choosing to pick either the Motorola or MS version of a product.

Really, the problems is that no one should be trying to inhibit sales or productions of a device. That will only serve to harm the consumer, create artificial shortages, and drive prices up. Everyone should just learn to be adults about this kind of thing. MS should admit their shortcomings and offer Motorola money for the use of their IP. Motorola in turn should not be trying to force MS to stop production and sales of Xbox360's.

What lunacy is this? Logic? In my IP laws? Get out of here! Any person on the internet knows that IP laws follow no logic!

 

[Strazdas]

Haha, that judge is retarded. They all are. IP is more important than consumer rights... WRONG! IP's exist to protect the consumer as much as they do the person who came up with an idea. I mean, lets face facts though, Microsoft is making that argument for them and not the consumer. If you are familiar with MS outside the realm of Xbox systems, you know this already. Enforcing this restriction would only increase the cost of the system. As others have said, better get ready for the new Xbox.

Hes not wrong. Protecting consumer from Xbox is more important than IP.

 

[LadyRhian]

M$

I think it's that I started using computers back in the late 70's, but every time I see this, I think "M String". As for the rest, the only console I ever owned was the Colecovision, Waaaaaaaaaaay back in the day. Ever since I got my first new computer in 1991, I have been one of the "Glorious PC Gaming Master Race". And I own a Macintosh (in fact, all my computers have been Macintoshes). So... Microshaft doesn't necessarily get any love from me.

 

[Mortuorum]

[Microsoft] infringed Motorola's patent, thus IP. So, the consumers, whose rights are to be "protected" by the IP - as per your logic - are Motorola's consumers, not Microsoft's ... Therefore, the judge's reasoning of Motorola's IP being more important than Microsoft's consumers is perfectly valid.

Except that Motorola's customers aren't affected one way or another by Microsoft's infringement. Their ability to use Motorola technology related to those patents is not in any way infringed. (And that's assuming Motorola even uses those patents and isn't being a patent troll.) The parties "harmed" are Motorola's officers and shareholders.

Haha, that judge is retarded. They all are. IP is more important than consumer rights... WRONG! IP's exist to protect the consumer as much as they do the person who came up with an idea.

Can you please provide a citation for that? That's the first I've ever heard that IP laws exist to protect anyone other than the content creator, their heirs or assigns. At least not in the US.

IP laws in the US are stupid.

Film at 11.

 

[Sylveria]

Haha, that judge is retarded. They all are. IP is more important than consumer rights... WRONG! IP's exist to protect the consumer as much as they do the person who came up with an idea. I mean, lets face facts though, Microsoft is making that argument for them and not the consumer. If you are familiar with MS outside the realm of Xbox systems, you know this already. Enforcing this restriction would only increase the cost of the system. As others have said, better get ready for the new Xbox.

M$ infringed Motorola's patent, thus IP. So, the consumers, whose rights are to be "protected" by the IP - as per your logic - are Motorola's consumers, not Microsoft's ... Therefore, the judge's reasoning of Motorola's IP being more important than Microsoft's consumers is perfectly valid.

IP's protect consumers by not allowing cheap knockoffs to be sold to a consumer that bear the name of the original creation. Inhibiting the production of a device does not protect consumers at all in this case. Especially since, from a consumer perspective, MS is not laying claim to the creation of a device as much as they are simply using a device. It's one of those catch 22's of IP laws. In this case it's not in the consumers interest for the device to not be sold. It's probably one of the few times MS and consumer values are in perfect alignment. Furthermore, Motorola's consumers are not harmed by the use of the Xbox360. People are not choosing to pick either the Motorola or MS version of a product.

Really, the problems is that no one should be trying to inhibit sales or productions of a device. That will only serve to harm the consumer, create artificial shortages, and drive prices up. Everyone should just learn to be adults about this kind of thing. MS should admit their shortcomings and offer Motorola money for the use of their IP. Motorola in turn should not be trying to force MS to stop production and sales of Xbox360's.

So you think that because the Xbox is popular and loved then MS should be allowed to break the law? I don't care how you spin it, the court has determined that they used the codec illegally and now their crying fowl for being caught out and punished for it. The IP laws are there for a reason, and while they can be anoying at times this is an example of why they are there, to stop a big company like MS from making money off someone elses work (Motorola). That boys and girls, is called stealing.

Gotta jump in here: I think what is being said is that stopping the sales of the console is unnecessary. There are better ways of setting this straight and making things right. Ways that wont hurt the consumer.

Cause the tech industry is known for their consumer friendly practices. Especially the game industry.

 

[Soxafloppin]

From a Sony fanboy: I hope this gets overturned because that is such bullshit.

 

[subtlefuge]

It's funny how Microsoft is against copyright infringement when it comes to games, but has been the #1 example of that in the computer tech industry since, well, there has been a "computer tech" industry.

It doesn't make Microsoft or "pirates" "right", it's just funny.

For those who think IP/copyright/patents etc are about the consumer: nope. In this case, it is about: Motorola spent money, who knows how much, to research and develop the tech behind these components. IP gives them the right to sell that tech exclusively so they can recover the cost of developing it; not just the cost of units of production. When Microsoft uses that tech, without having incurred the cost of developing it, and without licensing it from Motorola, they are cheating Motorola out of recovering the cost of developing that tech.

The idea behind it is to keep innovation going. What incentive would developers have to spend resources on developing new tech if they couldn't recover that cost? If someone could just use that tech as soon as it was developed without compensating the original developer, they couldn't recover that cost. Hence, IP law.

Actually Motorola Mobility purchased the patents from Apple, who purchased them from a small tech consortium for a small fee, then MM spent tons of money backing it in the format wars for video codec technology, so that one day they could control what they deem to be a "reasonable price" for anyone who's into any sort of professional video recording or distribution.

This isn't about innovation, it's a war that has been going on forever. It's actually really really bad for innovation and consumers. Just ask Sony. They've lost the format wars more than anyone else has ever participated (hilariously backing superior formats).