Lawyers pursue banned Xbox Live gamers
Anti-Microsoft class action in the offing?
Are you an Xbox 360 owner recently banned from Xbox Live? Has the ban left you feeling short changed? Perhaps you’ve experienced other console problems as a result of the ban? If you can answer 'yes' to any of these questions, then US law firm Abington IP wants to hear from you.
The “intellectual property law and consumer class actions” specialist has taken an interest in Microsoft’s well-publicised ban of at least 600,000 gamers from Xbox Live for alleged console modification, with a view to launching a class action lawsuit against the software giant.
To get the ball rolling, Abington has posted a page on its website calling for anyone remotely connected to the Xbox Live ban to come forward.
“Modification of Xbox consoles is arguably against the terms of use for Xbox/Xbox Live”, Abington states (our emphasis). The firm describes it as “convenient” that Microsoft timed the ban to coincide with the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 “less than two months” after the Halo 3: ODST launch.
The implication seems to be that Microsoft wouldn’t have dreamed of cutting Xbox Live gamers off prior to the launch of such high-profile titles.
To be fair, Microsoft has never said over what period the circa 600,000 Xbox Live gamers were disconnected. Xbox Live has been available since 2002, let’s not forget.
Abington also wants to hear from gamers who have, for example, experienced problems with their Xbox 360 that are unrelated to Xbox Live or piracy. “Obtaining information from Xbox consoles with permission of the owner,” also features on Abington’s list of things to do.
Further information about the potential lawsuit is available online now. ®
COMMENTS
@asdf
It still amazes me there are fanboys on el reg, I've come to expect a better class of comment here. It may surprise you to know there ARE legitimate reasons to choose a 360 over a PS3 - I should know, I've got both and, hey! They're both good.
If I've got you wrong and you're just a troll I apologise. You should really think of some funny names for the systems you don't like, it'll give people more warning of what type of post they're about to read.
As for pirates getting booted off live, I love it!
re..Imagine...#
Er....we don't need to imagine, we can see that on the internet. It's full of viruses and malware and scareware and lots of other nasty words with ware added to them.
The point MS are making is that you mod the console then you risk the service for everyone else. Therefore you are more than welcome to mod the console, but as a result we won't let you use the service. If you don't like it...get a Wii.
MS and security....dammed if they do and dammed if they don't.
Contract Law
IANAL, true, but I know a little baout contractual law, and clicking "I Agree" on a e-EULA does *not* amount to a 'contractual agreement'. Instead, it operates as a disclaimer, inasmuch as it acts as evidence that you have read and understood the EULA, not that you have contractually agreed to it, even if the button says "I agree" rather than "I understand the terms and conditions".
The key element missing from this transaction that would convert the EULA to a contract is the signature of BOTH parties. After all, *anyone* could've clicked that button....
Also, the power of a EULA is limited in a large number of countries. In the UK it falls into a very grey area that is still disputed in contractual law, and in Germany it hold no weight at all because it could only be read *AFTER* the purchase was made, making it an 'unfair imposition of terms'.
It may well be that Microsoft is on good ground in the US, but I think a class action coming out of Europe might give them cause for concern if they rely on the argument that the end user breached the EULA.
On the other hand, opening a box and tinkering with it certainly breaks the Warranty and the manufacturer is no longer obliged to provide technical services, including support, and that may provide for the withdrawal of software services as well (Such already happens if you crack open a digitial TV decoder ~ your service can be withdrawn if you're detected.) and, I believe, that ANY service can be withdrawn by the provider under any circumstances they wish without need to give notification or reason ("The management reserves the right to refuse entry").
I think it's going to be an interesting debate....
I have to wonder...
...if any of these people whinging about 'rights transferral upon purchase' or 'denied use of a service' actually reading the article? Or more importantly, understanding?
1) Microsoft are not bricking your console. You can still use it, just not on XBox Live
2) Microsoft are not bricking your profile. You can still use it, just not on your modded console.
Microsoft provide a service. It's not a god-given right that you are allowed to play on XBox Live. You use THEIR service on THEIR terms. Welcome to the concept of 'business', you bunch of mindless, dribbling, morons.
Imagine...
Imagine if anyone tried this same heavy-handed approach to the Internet - "OK, you're not using precisely the same hardware/software config as when you bought your computer, so you can't get on the Internet. Meanwhile, you can't even write your own software or use software a friend wrote without either (a) paying us money so we can slap our logo on the disc or (b) modifying your PC" Meanwhile, Corruped Shadows, the XBL network as it exists now is ripe for virus attack. Just like when Dutch Elm Disease wiped out nearly every elm tree in the United States, every box hooked to the VPN has the exact same hardware/software config and therefore the entire network is incredibly susceptible. A healthier network, as a healthier biodome, has a variety of "species" and "varieties" so that what damages one will not harm all.
