Hacking EU Users: Super Ban - GDPR Template

[c80]

Then they aren't allowed to sell their product here at all.

Bullshit

So still, until you actually have something that provide substantial counter-pointers. I will just ignore you. You literally just throw stuff out and hope it sticks.

What's wrong with you? Ok, ignore me, but you're still wrong. Ignoring people who know more than you is just wrong.

 

[lytro]

Europens or anyone. If you're banned you're banned, period

Yup. It’s not that I expected anything else. It’s Nintendo’s playground, you either play by the rules or you’re out and can play in the ghetto behind the playground.

 

[c80]

It's unfair terms because not all users that have hacked the Switch have relied to piracy.

Bullshit. All users that have hacked their switch have hacked their switch. Period.

 

[crissal]

I'm still not defending the bans of the console. I'm defending a possible ban of users accounts on all digital platforms.
It's still a possibility that a carpet ban is illegal according to EU law, but as long as it haven't been tried. We shall never know.

Every company, when ban an account, is banning also the content the user paid. It is a good thing? Nope. Is it right? Maybe yes.
I mean, let's look at this scenario:
Company give the possibility to customer to rent items A, B, C;
Customer, after a while, find a way to have items free;
Customer stole (yes, stole) D, E, F, G...;
Company find customer stole items;
Company takes back items A, B, C
(Customer stole also A, B, C)

Should company gave customer the possibility to use some other features, like online, update, even re-obtaining the items customer paid... Or maybe company is sick of customer?

 

[Esjay131]

Thing is, the ToS agreement is what allows you to use the software. Sure you own the hardware, but not the software.

Every company, when ban an account, is banning also the content the user paid. It is a good thing? Nope. Is it right? Maybe yes.
-snip-
Should company gave customer the possibility to use some other features, like online, update, even re-obtaining the items customer paid... Or maybe company is sick of customer?

No, they should not support the product at all. If you're banned for modifying the software, you shouldn't be allowed to use their services.

 

[linuxares]

What's wrong with you? Ok, ignore me, but you're still wrong. Ignoring people who know more than you is just wrong.

Your argumentation is flawed in so many ways. I'm pulling up laws, you try to hold up a kind of shakey EULA. I already proved it's legal to modify your console, I already shown EULAs are pointless, I already shown you own your digital goods, I already shown ToS aren't legally binding depending on country. So no, I'm not wrong. I've just got a lot more ammo than you. That is all.

 

[ShadowOne333]

Your argumentation is flawed in so many ways. I'm pulling up laws, you try to hold up a kind of shakey EULA. I already proved it's legal to modify your console, I already shown EULAs are pointless, I already shown you own your digital goods, I already shown ToS aren't legally binding depending on country. So no, I'm not wrong. I've just got a lot more ammo than you. That is all.

Add to that the fact that fairly recently Nintendo and another gaming company were forced to modify the EULA so that even if the user modified the console, they still have their guarantee as long as the device's failure was not related to the modification done.

Yet, there are "certain" people that are so close-minded and stubborn that they won't listen to external output.
No reason discussing with people like that tbh, simply ignoring works for a better argument talk

 

[guily6669]

As far as I know all they can't do is cripple\brick the console main basic functions from a ban, other than that they can deny any access legally from online services.

Don't Nintendo allow you to at least update the console OS even after a supperban?

If they prevent you from updating the console in anyway offline and online then you have a chance to win as that would cripple the console since even if you buy a game in the future you would not be able to play it as it would require FWxxx update...

Sony and M$ already lost quite a few things from crippling user consoles, but M$ specially went too far ahead by corrupting all data on purpose from banned consoles that's why they lost and fixed it after thankfully someone with balls going on court for the good of all the rest of users on the entire Planet .

But if Nintendo let's you update the console, buy and play any game in the future, then I don't think you can do anything at all against the superban...

 

[Batpeter]

It is perfectly legal to save personal information that you need for a specific legal business purpose like an IP address bound to an account with an emailaddress and any other personal information you chose to provide. However if they use seperate data systems to store login information and payment information, then the login data system that holds your IP address and account name should not contain payment information, as they are not related and not necessary to store in that system. I work in a school library, we used to keep personal information like address and gender in our library systems. With GDPR we can't because we don't really need this information. Payment checks are sent by the financial department who has their own data storage system which does contain the address of the student. Perhaps the student administration system could contain the gender so they are able to confirm the identify of students for enrollment purposes and statistics. When gender disappears from government ID cards they probably will have to get rid of that too.

Console bans will stay as they are not bound to personal information. Account bans will also stay because this is information that is needed to run their business (anti-piracy measures are a perfectly legal business purpose). You can ask them to delete your data but if this would result in a ban lift then this will also delete your whole account. Just deleting information like IP-address will do nothing to unban you or your device.

The right to own a functioning device or game is totally not related to GDPR and is another discussion that i see this thread has already evolved into.

 

[c80]

Your argumentation is flawed in so many ways.

You only think so, because you have no clue what you are talking about. Maybe you should just ask someone who knows those stuff to explain it to you instead of posting false information here.

I already proved it's legal to modify your console

Ok, but did anybody say something different?

I already shown EULAs are pointless

But that is bullshit. EULAs are legal agreements and binding if they are not against the law.

I already shown you own your digital goods

But that is wrong too. You don't own the digital goods, you own a licence to use them (and in some places you are allowed to sell that license)

I already shown ToS aren't legally binding depending on country

And that means that in such a country, you have no right to use the online service at all. Why do you think you have the right to use the service without any kind of agreemend/contract?

So no, I'm not wrong.

Of course you are. lol

 

[Ashura66]

Don't Nintendo allow you to at least update the console OS even after a supperban?

They do but only from game cartridges, not from online updates

 

[Shelly88]

I've just got a lot more ammo than you.

more ammo than him, but you are Shooting with blanks. lol
Almost nothing you said made sense

 

[Townsperson]

Here's my point : Nintendo should not be allowed te prevent you from accessing games you bought no matter the reason. I insist, no matter why. However, they have the right to prevent me from playing online because it's a service, they don't owe me online play, however they owe me the right to play the game I bought, yes that's right, they owe me the right to play the game because like I said, I bought it. Steam for example doesn't prevent you from playing the game you bought, even if you're banned which is normal. It's my right you have to understand that. I gave you money now you give me the ability to play the game. It's a right you need to understand that.

Taking that to it’s extreme, is Nintendo required to maintain servers forever because you might need to download data at some point in the future?

The answer to that is obviously no. Just because you bought a game that requires a download doesn’t mean anyone is obligated to provide you means to download it.

Oh, and if your console was banned for hacking, just download the update on your own and load it locally. There’s zero reason to complain considering you can get the update from sources beyond Nintendo.

 

[c80]

As far as I know all they can't do is cripple\brick the console main basic functions from a ban, other than that they can deny any access legally from online services.

correct

Don't Nintendo allow you to at least update the console OS even after a supperban?

Sure, updates from e.g. carts are still possible

 

[kumikochan]

As far as I know all they can't do is cripple\brick the console main basic functions from a ban, other than that they can deny any access legally from online services.

Don't Nintendo allow you to at least update the console OS even after a supperban?

If they prevent you from updating the console in anyway offline and online then you have a chance to win as that would cripple the console since even if you buy a game in the future you would not be able to play it as it would require FWxxx update...

Sony and M$ already lost quite a few things from crippling user consoles, but M$ specially went too far ahead by corrupting all data on purpose from banned consoles that's why they lost and fixed it after thankfully someone with balls going on court for the good of all the rest of users on the entire Planet .

But if Nintendo let's you update the console, buy and play any game in the future, then I don't think you can do anything at all against the superban...

Don't know how it works with the ps4 but with the ps3 if you would be banned you could still use update your console because it had an option in the menu to do so through usb. With the switch that ain't the case so it could be that they're breaking the law by not allowing that and crippling your device so that it cannot do anything anymore futurewise. I'm not 100 percent sure about that but it could be true what ur saying. EDIT I just checked and it still possible to update offline, since I don't own a ps4 I did not know so in that regard Sony is doing a good thing compared to Nintendo. Seems Microsoft also allows an update through USB to be pushed through

 

[c80]

Add to that the fact that fairly recently Nintendo and another gaming company were forced to modify the EULA so that even if the user modified the console, they still have their guarantee as long as the device's failure was not related to the modification done.

So they are in fact forced to change their EULA if it is against the law. Interesting. And they were never forced to allow cracked consoles connecting to their online service. Interesting. So we can assume that it is legal if they exclude cracked consoles from their online service.

 

[crissal]

I already shown you own your digital goods

This is not true at all. You own something if you have the DRM-free version (like HumbleBundle and GoG do); if you, instead, rely on a client or an internet service (Steam, Origin, PSN, eShop...), you do not own anything.

 

[c80]

With the switch that ain't the case so it could be that they're breaking the law by not allowing that and crippling your device so that it cannot do anything anymore futurewise.

Prove that you cannot update your console from a cart if its banned.

 

[Ericthegreat]

Though I would be delighted if this actually turns out to be working the way you intend it to be, I highly doubt they will kindly grant your request as in "You asked for it, here we will reverse your ban even though you heavily violated our Terms of Service"

Edit: I never fully read their ToS (I mean who did and still remembers?) but I guess they are protecting their butt against anything like this. Or at least they will in the next ToS update

Yes, they violated terms of service, but they still might win, but theyed need to take it to court, it would be a multi year battle, and someone would have to pay the lawyer fees (probably millions to fight nintendo).

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

This is not true at all. You own something if you have the DRM-free version (like HumbleBundle and GoG do); if you, instead, rey on a client, or an internet service (Steam, Origin, PSN, eShop...), you do not own anything.

You own a license, they they probably have the right to take away from you.

 

[Absintu]

so many ppl in this forum, i'm hoping someone is a lawyer and bring us some light, because i can see the 2 sides, but im not sure of anything