Microsoft Shuts Down Lik Sang 814
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft has taken legal action, shutting down popular import gaming site Lik Sang for distributing X-box mod chips. Lik Sang is a popular import gaming site based out of Hong Kong. The full article (MSNBC) can be found here." Several people have pointed to the same story on news.com.
Abuse of power? (Score:3, Insightful)
It just goes to show you how abusive MS is, as if you needed any more evidence.
Remember the Xbox upgrade article. (Score:3, Insightful)
Many people yelled that it was just an upgrande and M$ was not telling me what to do with **MY** hardware. Well bite me, I knew M$ would prove me right.
I dont own an X-box, I dont own a mod chip, but M$ continues with the attitude that you will use this the way we want you to use this, you will not dieveate at all from our buisness plan or we will label you a pirate and sue your sorry butt..
Ha Ha (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I don't care what you guys say (Score:2, Insightful)
Not MS... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Score one for Tha Man (Score:3, Insightful)
I think Microsoft's recent increase in agression is a sign that they think so too.
I leave it up to you whether that is a good thing or not.
Legal action? Or monetary action? (Score:3, Insightful)
Hmmm... Did MS use real legal action to shut them down, even when they were outside the US? Or is there some "monetary action" going on here...
Re:As a general rule (Score:3, Insightful)
How could anyone not expect this to happen? (Score:1, Insightful)
This is not a shot at the end user (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How could anyone not expect this to happen? (Score:2, Insightful)
Its not my fault they sell the things at a loss. Why should I be forced to be their perfect consumer?
Re:This is not a shot at the end user (Score:3, Insightful)
What right does MS have in preventing people from selling after-market mods
Re:Lik Sang = Hong Kong. Hong Kong = China. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:2, Insightful)
Tom
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:3, Insightful)
How is anyone "forcing" Microsoft to do anything?
Re:Score one for Tha Man (Score:3, Insightful)
Value adds are the features inherant to the system as designed. It just so happens that the xbox is a very "value added" system inherantly.
DVD, 5.1 Dolby Digital, Hard Disk, 4 Controllers, Ethernet, Fast Video, 64 megs of ram, HDTV support and many other XBOX features give it VALUE over other competing products and make it wanted and valued by many.
The devaluation is at the software and game level. Is Developer X going to spend 5 million making a game that can be pirated with ease because someone can goto lik-sang.com and get a modchip? NOooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Microsoft is protecting the value of the millions of units sold. Microsoft is protecting the rights of the licensees, distributors, developers and contributors of the xbox.
What is the value of hacking a system to use it for purposes of which it isn't intended or designed for and why can't microsoft legally fight to protect its intended and protected interests?
Even though i modded my dreamcast and could play pirated games, i didn't consider this a value add. For one, i couldn't read the japanese games and often times it wasn't worth the effort and for pirated games they were ripped, chunked, slow and missing features.
After my experimentation with "mod chips" it just wasn't worth it, and personally i see the value in the xbox of being a superb platform to begin with so i'm anxiously waiting to buy the excellent games that will come out.
As for liksang, i'm sure they were doing other things to get shutdown and i'm sure Sony, Sega and Nintendo have always wished they had to balls or $$$$ to do it themselves....
it was the "value add" of the modchips and ripped DC games that ended the life of that console. (and the ps2.. but sega cited the loss of software sales because of rampant piracy and loss of developers because of rampant piracy to be a big factor)
mod chip not only useful for playing pirated games (Score:5, Insightful)
The article insinuates that the justification for sutting down this distributor is contributory infringement, based on the false premise that the device it distributes is unlawful. This is bullsh*t. If the mod chip's only use were the facilitation of software piracy, they might have a legal case; however, as of today (and the article acknowledges this) the mod chip makes running Linux on the Xbox possible, and running Linux is a significant non-infringing use of the mod chip, so the mod chip cannot be deemed illegal on the grounds that it can be used to run pirated games. I will never own an Xbox, much less bother to mod one, but Microsoft's attitude is really ticking me off. Check this out, Bill: you can't tell people what to do with "your" console once you've sold it to them.
So what exactly is the legal issue? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm curious as to what the exact legal basis for this action is.
As use of a product to break a law is to be more of a Federal interest than a corporate unless profits are involved. Which and whose profits are threatened by the mods?
More importantly, how will this carry over to modifying any other consumer hardware? Will it be illegal someday to use after-market parts on your car? (One co-worker of mine who specializes in performance tuning tells me that messing with chipsets in most sports cars invalidates all warrenties.)
An objection to mods on the basis that it allows illegal activity is like objecting to a rifle because it allows illegal activity. Heck, a garbage disposal can be used to hide evidence of misdoing. Why not make them illegal as well?
I think there's a problem when enforcement of laws is used to prevent potential crimes and shut down the producer of potential problem goods. Yea, so a lot of mod chips will be used for piracy: go after the pirates. Others will produce interesting experiments like Linux on xbox. Yes, the manufacturer has to be aware of how the product will be used, but Phillip Morris and Winston-Salem blatently *advertise* product that cause even more expensive long-term health problems.
But that's okay, so long as it doesn't infringe on profits of other conglomerate interests such as m$ or the RIAA.
Re:Follow the money (Score:3, Insightful)
And screw sony too. Anyone that own's one of their DVD players knows about the infamous C:13 error that you get after about a year of usage. Thousands of consumers have this problem and Sony's only answer is to fix it for a mere 179 bucks.
If you're having the problem, you can try to fix it here [ben-morris.net]
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm starting to think that few people commenting on Slashdot have any idea how economics works.
Playstation 2 drops price, GameCube drops price, suddenly XBOX is the expensive guy on the block. MS was forced to drop price to keep up. It's called competition.
I can't wait to hear the next illogical argument. "well MS didn't have to drop their price. They just did it because they want to piss people off!"
Re:This is not a shot at the end user (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm curious why you think MS has a right to stop a legitimate business from trying to turn a profit.
Mod chips are, protests to the contrary, legal. The only ground MS might have to contest them on would be through the DMCA, as a chip could be used to run a pirated copy of a game. However, the DMCA also makes allowances for circumvention with "significant non-infringing uses", which a mod chip certainly has (seeing as how many people here want to run Linux on it). Of course, the law only supports consumers as far as they're willing to pay their lawyers.
MS didn't license the Xbox to anyone, as anyone who owns one will tell you. People bought it outright, they can do whatever they want to it. People can sell hardware, software, instructions, whatever they want to help people modify their box.
Some people have taken the opinion that MS is only attacking those things which might threaten their profitability (such as giving people the ability to write/distribute their own, unsigned games). Okay, then why don't they go after aftermarket controller manufacturers, since they obviously compete with MS controllers?
This whole thing really irks me, and I'm not sure what bothers me more -- them getting away with it, or people believeing that MS has some kind of right to protect their flawed business model. Okay, maybe MS isn't making much money on hardware (as we all seem to believe). And we then assume they make that money back in development fees. So? I don't recall signing a piece of paper, when I bought my Xbox, that said I'd support Microsoft's business plan. Their plan is their own business. Lik Sang's business plan is, similarly, their business, and no one else's. They saw a need, and filled it. Sure, it's possible that mod chips might cut into a small fraction of game sales. Again, that's not my problem.
If chipping cuts into a significant fraction of sales, and people stop making games, and the platform dies, then, well, that is my problem, and I'll be disappointed. O h, well, too bad, maybe next time. I'll still have gotten my $300 worth of fun out of the box. But, again, that's how the market works.
This is capitalism at its best.
I find it ironic that it's China that has the strongest support of capitalism, and the US that has the strongest implicit government support of illegal monopolies.
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:4, Insightful)
The PS2 lost money initially and so did the Gamecube. Granted, the XBox is losing money a littler longer then the other two, but it's still very typical for the industry.
But none of this really matters. The fundamental point is that money for console systems has always been made off the royalties off the games, not the hardware. Sony is just as aggressive against piracy devices as MS is.
Re:Score one for Tha Man (Score:3, Insightful)
To use it for purposes of which it isn't intended, obviously. Why ask the question when you have the answer in your question?
Because once they sell you the product, they have no legal rights to it anymore. BTW, what's a "protected" interest? That means nothing to me. I'm currently using an old Western Digital hard drive as a doorstop -- does that mean WD has the right to come and force me legally to not use their product in this unintended way?
Re:Score one for Tha Man (Score:5, Insightful)
Selling Xbox mod chips is *exactly* like having a set of lockpicking equipment. Locks are meant to keep people out of areas they don't belong in; same goes for the 'security hardware' on the Xbox. You don't see the 5-0 arresting those guys that come and get your keys out of your locked car, do you?
Microsoft basically is using it's influence to crush out of existence what they don't like. Gee, who'd have thought they'd do that.
Re:Score one for Tha Man (Score:5, Insightful)
For one, i couldn't read the japanese games and often times it wasn't worth the effort
Well, guess what, I can't read Japanese either, but I have enjoyed many games from that country on my modded PS2 such as Sexy Parodius, Twinbee Deluxe Pack, Salamander Deluxe Pack, Gradius Gaiden. I also just happened to purchase Ikaruga for my Dreamcast. These are all shooters - and there is no language barrier for pure twitch action like that.
Konami's games have always been popular here, but we didn't get any of those. So I adapted my system so that it would do what I wanted it to do. I see no harm in that, and there is not a thing about it that breaks any law aside from (possibly) the DMCA additions to US Copyright Law.
You know why people have to import? Because the console manufacturers maintain a tight reign on what is published on their console. They are able to do so because it is nigh impossible to create working distributable software without their permission, and even if you could, you could possibly be in violation of patents or sued under the DMCA (for bypassing methods of protection).
What it boils down to is that certain companies are not allowed to translate their games onto U.S. systems, even if they are willing to spend the money, because the hardware manufacturer is afraid that that title will make their system look bad. That's bullshit. Take a look at the PS2 as a great example - modchips appeared within a small number of months of the console's release allowing pirate games to be played, but NO ONE made a chip allowing imports until this year! It was a much more difficult process... Now why is that?
I want to play the games I want to play. If I am not able to do so, I will pass the console by, plain and simple.
Was M$ forced to design an expensive box? (Score:2, Insightful)
Detroit designed expensive to build cars and Japan beat them. Would you think it proper for Detroit to have shut down the Japanese car makers?
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Where in the hell is it written that I can't build a device to alter the behavior of an X-box and then sell that device? What law are you referring to?
More to the point, should this be a law? I can sell hardware to modify the behavior of my car, of my blender, of my computer even, but somehow that's not right when it's a game console?
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not so much that MS is abusive, more that the laws are easily abused.
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:5, Insightful)
In fact the whole reason why I bought my GBA was because I wanted to program it.."
I believe the product was called 'Flash Linker', and yes Nintendo was very aggressive about getting it shut down.
Sony's done similar stuff against mod chips.
Frankly, the only reason this is of interest to Slashdot is because it's bent out of shape until it looks like MS is being an aggressive bully.
More B.S. from Bill... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, these modchips facilitate piracy. But they also have legitimate uses on every console they exist for. Not to mention that people should be able to use the modchip for "copied" games so long as those are backup copies.
Lik Sang offered plenty of legitimate products for people who enjoy modding their consoles, tinkering, homebrew developmenet, etc. Of course, Microsoft doesn't want people to tinker and mod for ANY reason, because this undermines the next step in MS's business plan.
Microsoft is trying very hard to establish a sense that you don't own your X-Box, but they do. With Palladium, they are going to extend that idea to the PC... you don't own your computer... MS does.
Microsoft is going to use their money and power to take out any companies like Lik Sang in the future that give people the ability to mod their X-Box, or mod their PC's hardware after Palladium is released.
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who the Fsck do these people think they are!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Ambiguous my ass... (Score:5, Insightful)
Say I go buy a used '89 Chevy pickup from a used car dealership. Perfectly legal.
There's a company in town called Classic Roadsters. They've produced a modded body for the '89 line of Chevy pickups that is very similar looking to a Hummer. Perfectly legal (the body shape doesn't breach any size requirements stipulated by the DOT).
but consider that most users would utilize their modchip to play copied games or ROMs or Linux, etc.
Now, say I took that modded truck, dressed myself into some army get-up, and drove onto the local army base, pretending to belong to the armed services (I don't). Now I'm doing something illegial.
My point is this: the XBox is a piece of physical hardware. It can be patented. It cannot be licensed. Once I purchase an XBox (if I ever do), I will OWN it 100%. Nothing that Microsoft ever says or does can change that. If I want to take the bloody thing apart and turn it into a toaster oven, Microsoft can't do a thing about it.
People have outfitted their cars for over 60 years now making them better. Say I had a beat-up Ford pickup that didn't work anymore, so I put in an engine from a Dodge pickup so I could get the Ford working again (please don't tell me if this is possible or not... I don't know, but it's all for the sake of argument). I don't think Dodge or Ford would complain. I'm sure you know someone who put a new stereo system into their car. They didn't have to buy a whole new car to get that stereo system they wanted. They put one into their own car so they could have better sound. People soup up their cars all the time specifically so that they don't have to buy a new car just to get the same features. It's perfectly legal to do so. It should be perfectly legal to do the same with consoles.
Xbox is sold at a loss.Microsoft needs to sell games for the xbox in order to recoup the losses it incurs for every unit sold.
Tough shit. Do you see Lincoln selling their Towncar at $9,999 brand new missing an air conditioner, and then selling air conditioners for $20,000 more? And on top of it all, making the Towncar so that no other AC would work in it except for Lincoln's own AC? Of course not! But this is what Microsoft is doing! Don't blame the customer for finding a better deal which is less profitable to Microsoft.
This just fucking sucks. (Score:2, Insightful)
I can add a new cat-back exaust system to my car.
I can add a new hard-drive to my computer.
I can add an aftermarkt remote for my tv.
I can add a network card to my PDA.
I can add headphone to my stereo.
I hope my sentiments express fully my displeasure:
Microsoft, your unethacal employees, and your astro-turfers here on Slasdot: suck my dick and add me to your Foes. I don't need friends like you.
For chrisssakes. (Score:5, Insightful)
All of you saying Microsoft has the right to do this:
Are you all complete and utter retards? Does this really have to be explained to you anew each time something actions such as this (Not necessarily by Microsoft) has been taken?
Let's try again, slowly for those of you who can't understand it.
1) Although there aren't enough details available (That I've seen) to judge this particular instance, virtually every time a purveyor of products that let you change what you've legally purchased to do something else gets shut down it is NOT with actual legal action, it is with the THREAT of legal action. The sickening fact of all this isn't whether or not these entities are within their legal right to do this, but that the question is never asked. Lawsuits are so onerous that the mere threat of one is sufficient to stop what MAY BE legal. The crucial legal court test NEVER OCCURS.
2) The 'slippery slope', while being largely a strawman argument, in cases like this is perhaps valid. If you don't think ANY hardware company is absolutely DROOLING at the prospect of extending it's reach far beyond the change of posession (purchase) of a product you're living in a fantasy world. Precendents such as this will of course start with a basis in what are apparently legal and moral positions, right now in the name of stopping piracy, but there is absolutely no reason to stop there. Once you've established the precedent of extending so-called 'rights' beyond the customer taking posession of your product you have infintely more control over what they can and cannot do, spanning legal and illegal uses.
3) The fact that devices such as mod chips (And P2P networks, for that matter) have both legitimate and illegitimate uses is not just a side argument. It is important to realize that many freedoms enjoyed by Americans (And for that matter, citizens of many other countries) are freedoms that could be used for both legitimate and illegitimate purposes. Drawing comparisons between the use of mod chips and free speech is more than just hyperbole, it is an attempt to illustrate that once you start allowing the restriction of something based on it's (in this case potentially) illegal uses you are setting a very dangerous precedent, and one that because of the DMCA has criminal and not just civil ramifications.
The DMCA is the bridge between a civil lawsuit brought by Microsoft and someone going to jail for making or using something that could be used to violate IP 'rights'. If you still don't believe me, ask yourself why they need the DMCA then? Why was it necessary for the government to enact legislation that allows companies and the government to take punitive actions against those who violate IP, or more accurately those who MAKE things that COULD be used to violate IP, rather than stick with civil proceedings? (Even the threat of which, I might add, seem to work just fine.) In other words, if you're going to say no one's going to get sent to jail for this, why is there a law that says you will? Do you honestly think that mod chip makers should go to jail?
4) Microsoft's choice to sell their products (X-box) at a loss does not automatically give them the legal right to take any and all action they see fit to try and make money through other means, in this case through game licenses. It's been said time and again but you still don't seem to get it, just because somebody WANTS to make money doesn't mean they GET to. It's very possible that their choice to try and pursue this method of profit is foolish and could result in failure due to the boxes being modded for uses besides purchasing the products they do make money on, but because of point (1) we may never know. By using the threat of legal action they may have secured a business model that is unavailable to other companies without as deep pockets. Do you think Microsoft would have succeeded in beating down Lik Sang if Microsoft were a small startup? (Not that X-box's major competitors, such as Sony, are small startups.) No. They can do this because of point (1), and because other companies realize the law being on their side (perhaps) is a moot point. In this case, Might Makes Right.
I hope this explains a bit to those of you comparing modding your X-Box to rolling your odometer back on your car (boggle) or simply accusing posters of being Microsoft/other large coporate entity bashers. It IS about essential rights, albeit indirectly, whether you choose to believe ir ot not.
Re:How long must we pretend... (Score:2, Insightful)
Unauthorized ?!# (Score:5, Insightful)
Unauthorized by who?
Repeat after me: (Score:2, Insightful)
"There is no right to profit."
"There is no right to profit."
Re:As a general rule (Score:2, Insightful)
Why Microsoft does this - Lost in the noise (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically, MS could care less about someone making money doing this. What they really care about is what this enables. A commercial outfit, manufacturing and selling components *enables* virtually all people to purchase xboxes with the *intent* of using them for alternate purposes. If they leave hack-shops unchecked for long, they have basically allowed a competing market to develop against what they really want to sell - games and service.
If I want to purchase an xbox because I want to mod it AND I know I can just buy a chip online with ease, Microsoft would rather not sell me the xbox in the first place. Since they can't discriminate against buyers, they can make it more difficult for me to purchase a chip. Microsoft is not targetting the hardcore hackers. If you want to hack an xbox that badly and you have the skills, you'll do it. Who they *are* targetting is the average Joe Sixpack who buys an xbox. If he buys it and later sees he can easily purchase and install a mod to do things like play pirated games or run a webserver, Microsoft has just lost marketshare in the market that counts.
THAT's what they are trying to stop. Not hacking, but the widespread usage of manufactured mods by average users.
Re:Hate console makers (in a way) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you build a product that is more expensive than a similar one from a competitor, expect people to buy the cheaper one. If you can't make yours cheaper, don't expect regulation to help you make up the cost difference. There is no inherent right to make profit in a capitalist system-- if you can't get your production costs down as low as your competitors, you will be priced right out of the market. This happens all the time.
Why should microsoft be able to sell things at a loss with profits ensured by law, while their competitors are capable of making a profit on the hardware even at lower price points? (Nintendo is making a profit on the gamecube at $150)
But I digress. All of this is nearly irrelevant in the first place-- mod chips are no more illegal than guns. Just because they can be used illegally does not make them intrinsically illegal. (Unless they contain copyrighted code by MS!!) Whether or not MS has to lower their prices below cost to keep up with their competition's superior designs has no bearing on whether or not modchips are legal.
Re:Abuse of power? (Score:3, Insightful)
Look at this current action by Microsoft. The XBox is the test system for a secure PC that only runs Microsoft code.
Palladium's only reason for existince (I believe) is to be used to prevent any OS (or application for that matter) to not run without Microsofts consent. It will undoubtedly be the most evil thing Microsoft will ever do and failure to respond to issues like this will only help them achieve there goals.
Tell everyone you know not to buy an XBox.
The real difference here between MS and the other console manufacturers is that Microsoft is hellbent on bringing this kind of crap to your PC. Palladium must fail.
Re:Score one for Tha Man (Score:1, Insightful)
The linux xbox hackers aren't even a blip on the radar, and you're fooling yourself if you think they are. The people Microsoft is after are the guys that mod their machines to pirate software.
There are three reasons to mod an XBox: to get games for free, to defeat region control, to use Linux. In that order. People who mod their box to use linux are a minority. People who mod their box to use linux and pirate Xbox games are probably a minority. The majority: people who mod their xbox for the sole purpose of pirating games.
Re:Was M$ forced to design an expensive box? (Score:5, Insightful)
You are correct, sir.
I do not know if the modchips contain copyrighted MS code. I suspect some do and some don't depending on the method used.
If they do not, however, NO ONE is reselling copyrighted materials.
Your example is slightly incorrect, too. There is no difference between what a reseller of mod-chipped xboxes is doing, and a reseller of modified cars, except that only an idiot would sell the reseller a car at a loss. How can you claim that "Company A" is keeping "all the profits?" when "Company B" has no profit to start with? If "Company B" has a poorly designed product that they can't manufacture at a low enough cost to keep up with their competition AND make a profit, why should the courts enforce their profits? Is it illegal to buy an xbox and then just leave it sitting around? Hardly. Yet that leaves MS in exactly the same money-losing situation as putting a mod chip in and using it for legal purposes.
Pirating games is illegal. Building a modchip containing modified MS XBox BIOS code is illegal. Building a modchip that contains no MS code and using it to play a European game or make backups of your games is legal.
Re:Remember the Xbox upgrade article. (Score:3, Insightful)
Instead of just blaming Microsoft (the easy way), why not blame the other console corps as well? Blaming MS might be easy, but in console-country they aren't the only ones trying to keep hackers away from their so-called IP.
*note: I hate Microsoft like the next guy. I have a MS free zone at home.
PS: the M$ thing is old, give it a rest. I'm serious. Stop that. You will be taken more seriously if you refer to things by their real names/abbreviations. The Co$ is of course the exception of the rule. :)
Re:Who the Fsck do these people think they are!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Luke 21:1-4
1. And he looked up, and saw the rich men casting their gifts into the treasury. 2. And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites. 3. And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all: 4. For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God: but she of her penury hath cast in all the living that she had.
Donating time and money are two different things to a rich person. Do not make out Gates' charity to be more than it is. If I made billions and billions of dollars, and gave all but a billion of it to charity, I would still have a billion dollars, living more easily than most. I have not truely given of myself.
Further, in the whole scope of the world, it is more than a karma thing. But then that is a discussion completely unrelated here.