XBOX360 Ban (modded consoles) class action lawsuit - update - I got my stuff back :D

[skaar]

http://www.abingtonlaw.com/Xbox-Live-class-action.html

I thought I'd share. I don't see it going anywhere but I wish them all the best. They do raise some good points on the timing of this ban.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

While the timing is certainly opportunistic for Microsoft, they still have every right to ban at their discretion.

While I haven't read the TOS for XBL, I'm sure that if you're banned for console modification or software piracy that you forfeit any right to a pro-rated refund of membership costs.

[Porksta]

IIRC they do not ban the gamertag, just the system so you shouldn't have to worry about losing your subscription.

Oh noez, my Xbox was banned right before the game of the year came out! How could you do that Microsoft?

Lol.

[kupomogli]

People know the risks of modding a console. Microsoft shouldn't be required to prorate your XBL account just because you're not following the rules. It's also a guarantee that many of these people with modded systems were pirating software(I'd say probably 90% were.)

[BetaWolf47]

"Oh no, we can't get Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 for free! Let's sue Microsoft!" Yep, this isn't going anywhere.

[Porksta]

1) How would sales of the games been affected? Most of those people would not have been playing legit copies anyways.

2) Microsoft has made it clear that they only ban consoles (like they reset gamerscore) when they are 100% certain the TOS have been violated. In no way has any Xbox 360 owner been unjustly banned.

I like how the site uses quotes and italics in an effort to act like Microsoft is the bad guy.

[Clownzilla]

The real winner of this case will be the lawyers in charge of "being there for the downtrodden gamer".

[s1lence]

This lawsuit is fail as are 99.9% of all the people saying they are going to file a lawsuit against MS on xbox.com. It is THEIR service that you CHOOSE to use so they can have whatever TOS that they see fit.

[jcalder8]

The real winner of this case will be the lawyers in charge of "being there for the downtrodden gamer".

The lawyers won't be getting anything from this. The lawyers would only get payed if they won and there is no way any money will be coming from this useless lawsuit.

[dylan0228]

What a joke!

[TonyTheTiger]

The only legal avenue that may be possible is attacking Microsoft's interest in the user purchased console itself. Though that requires a concession in part that Microsoft is allowed to ban people on Live whenever the hell it feels like it. I can envision an argument that goes something like this. "Microsoft is fully within its rights to ban users from participating in its ongoing online service. But the extent of the ban in this case goes beyond that and cripples the console's ability to function in ways completely separate from the online component thus diminishing the value of the machine by causing irreparable damage to it."

The difficulty with this argument is that it would require a direct attack on the idea of a hardware license agreement and would in fact be implicitly arguing that the purchaser actually owns the machine and as such Microsoft, while allowed to restrict users from accessing an ongoing online service via that machine, cannot actually destroy the machine which is the private property of the consumer. It would have to be an argument comparing it to a situation like, oh, a message board not only banning you from posting but actually screwing up your computer in the process. Granted, this kind of thing with licenses is controversial and by no means set in stone either way. But a lawsuit would require more than just the standard "waah waah, u lamerz!"

[Porksta]

The only legal avenue that may be possible is attacking Microsoft's interest in the user purchased console itself. I can envision an argument that goes something like this. "Microsoft is fully within its rights to ban users from participating in its ongoing online service. But the extent of the ban in this case goes beyond that and cripples the console's ability to function in ways completely separate from the online component thus diminishing the value of the machine by causing irreparable damage to it."

The difficulty with this argument is that it would require a direct attack on the idea of a hardware license agreement and would in fact be implicitly arguing that the purchaser actually owns the machine and as such Microsoft, while allowed to restrict users from accessing an ongoing online service via that machine, cannot actually destroy the machine which is the private property of the consumer. Granted, this kind of thing is controversial and by no means set in stone either way. But a lawsuit would require more than just the standard "waah waah, u lamerz!"

The thing is, the consoles work fine. They just can't go online.

[heybtbm]