Hacking Copyright warning from Ebay when selling CFW 3ds

[Monty Kensicle]

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post this. I got an email from ebay saying that my listing of a N3DS was taken down because of copyright violation from Nintendo. Here's part of the email.

"After reviewing your eBay account, we've taken the following action:
- Violating listings have been removed. A list of items that were removed can be viewed at the bottom of this message.
- We have credited all associated fees except for the final value fee for your listing(s).

Your listing was reviewed after the rights owner notified us that your item violated their copyrights. We urge you to contact the rights owner directly for more information about why they requested the review of your listing and whether you can relist the item."

Did they fine me for putting it up, also I don't know if it's because I was lazy and just snagged a photo from google images instead a picture of the actual product. Could it be the picture that violated the copyright or has this happened to anybody else.

I've had much success listing my modded systems as "Region Free" that seems to go under the radar.

 

[Majickhat55]

It is if you're circumventing copyright protections by doing so. I suggest you read 17 U.S.C § 1201 over again: reverse engineering does not apply if doing so constitutes copyright infringement (which is does in this case; for example, there's a reason why Plailect's guide uses Magnet links for particular files).


I don't disagree, but obviously Nintendo also doesn't want people to be able to pirate their property.


The point is that it constitutes a crime in and of itself.

True, that's why I said it's a grey area. It's a bit of a double-edged sword it's legal to do it as long as you don't. Lol

Like other backups, it's legal to have/make backups but the way you create them is illegal. Since the programs as you said infringe copyright.

 

[OrGoN3]

Which is exactly why it's dependent on the intent of the user, as per the Act. Just because it could be used to commit a crime, doesn't mean it will or that is why it was created. It means it's not illegal to do period as long it's it's intended for personal use and not for sale or widespread consumption. Same reason why backing up your own games is legal but selling the ROMS wouldn't be.

You're kind of missing the point of my post. It's dependent on the intent of the user, and 99.99999% of the time it's for illegal purposes. So that 1 person in a million is affected, and I'm sure it's not you. I'm sure you modded it with CFW. If you are claiming that the removal of the encryption is not violating DMCA, then the CFW that allows unsigned content to run certainly is. Regardless of the intent.

Backing up your own games is typically not legal. It first depends on the country, and second, depends if you are bypassing any encryption. For nearly every game that you own, you would need to bypass encryption to backup the game, which goes against DMCA.

Your points have less and less merit to them as you continue to use them. It's a one-shot case that did not apply to OP's listing.

And in that one-shot case, you can contact Nintendo to have them remove the DMCA, as long as you can prove 100% intent is and always will be only for interoperability with other devices/OS.

 

[wurstpistole]

That's nothing too uncommon when trying to sell modded stuff. Has been like that for years. I sold various modded 360's over time, some were removed by ebay, some were not. Last time I tried was last year, JTAG 360, was also taken down by ebay. Everything that is directly stated as equipped with CFW, flashed or otherwise modded to allow piracy is very likely to be removed.
Only thing that works is if you, like on PS Vita, need a special firmware to use Homebrew and make it explicitly clear that the device is on this firmware. Everyone interested in this kind of stuff will then know what it means. But you can't write "PS Vita Homebrew 3.60 Henkaku" in the title and you also can't state that your N3DS has A9LH, CFW or the like.

 

[OrGoN3]

I've had much success listing my modded systems as "Region Free" that seems to go under the radar.

Nintendo seems to search for "A9LH", "CFW" and "Luma" and then DMCAs them.

 

[Majickhat55]

You're kind of missing the point of my post. It's dependent on the intent of the user, and 99.99999% of the time it's for illegal purposes. So that 1 person in a million is affected, and I'm sure it's not you. I'm sure you modded it with CFW. If you are claiming that the removal of the encryption is not violating DMCA, then the CFW that allows unsigned content to run certainly is. Regardless of the intent.

Backing up your own games is typically not legal. It first depends on the country, and second, depends if you are bypassing any encryption. For nearly every game that you own, you would need to bypass encryption to backup the game, which goes against DMCA.

Your points have less and less merit to them as you continue to use them. It's a one-shot case that did not apply to OP's listing.

And in that one-shot case, you can contact Nintendo to have them remove the DMCA, as long as you can prove 100% intent is and always will be only for interoperability with other devices/OS.

That's..... Exactly what I said Lol. Yes, the intent DOES matter as it's not economically reasonable to open civil cases against end users. Criminal charges are more often than not reserved for those who participate in the widespread dissemination and for profit. They don't give a rats ass if you modded your own console. They only care about the people infringing copyright from bypassing encryption protections on their firmwares, etc and sharing their tools to do it. Or doing it and selling the end product for profit. Otherwise, they really don't care about your basic "I hacked my console" guy. When I say, "they" I mean the government, not Nintendo. Ninty cares very much but they also know it's not worth their money in costs to take every end user to court for a DMCA violation. They have nothing to gain from that. All they will do is send a C&D and remove associated accounts etc, over and over.

 

[OrGoN3]

That's..... Exactly what I said Lol. Yes, the intent DOES matter as it's not economically reasonable to open civil cases against end users. Criminal charges are more often than not reserved for those who participate in the widespread dissemination and for profit. They don't give a rats ass if you modded your own console. They only care about the people infringing copyright from bypassing encryption protections on their firmwares, etc and sharing their tools to do it. Or doing it and selling the end product for profit. Otherwise, they really don't care about your basic "I hacked my console" guy.

Umm..but no. They DO care about the basic "I Hacked my console" guy if he is selling it on eBay. They have no proof that you yourself modded it, so they can't DMCA you, but only your for-sale listing.

You seem to be equating this to our country's law enforcement's outlook on drugs, which is just not at all the same. If it were, they wouldn't DMCA a single hacked console on eBay. And if they were after the ones that hacked it, they would've pressed charges by now.

You said they don't give a rats ass if I modded my own console, but they clearly do. Their actions speak to this very loudly. In their eyes, and in the eyes of nearly everyone else, hacking a console is bypassing encryption to load illegal roms. End of story really. Nintendo has shown us this through their eBay actions.

 

[Majickhat55]

Umm..but no. They DO care about the basic "I Hacked my console" guy if he is selling it on eBay. They have no proof that you yourself modded it, so they can't DMCA you, but only your for-sale listing.

You seem to be equating this to our country's law enforcement's outlook on drugs, which is just not at all the same. If it were, they wouldn't DMCA a single hacked console on eBay. And if they were after the ones that hacked it, they would've pressed charges by now.

You said they don't give a rats ass if I modded my own console, but they clearly do. Their actions speak to this very loudly. In their eyes, and in the eyes of nearly everyone else, hacking a console is bypassing encryption to load illegal roms. End of story really. Nintendo has shown us this through their eBay actions.

No, they care about you selling your hacked console. There is a difference dude. Not to mention hacking does not always equate to piracy. Period. Regardless if most people would use it that way, there are tons that break encryption for the experience, pleasure, learning process etc.... It's not that black and white.

 

[OrGoN3]

No, they care about you selling your hacked console. There is a difference dude. Not to mention hacking does not always equate to piracy. Period. Regardless if most people would use it that way, there are tons that break encryption for the experience, pleasure, learning process etc.... It's not that black and white.

Again, they can't prove that I myself hacked it, so they cannot DMCA me. Selling a hacked console, well that doesn't go against any DMCA you provided. The DCMA would just be for the bypassing of the encryption.

It's not black and white, and I do not agree with most of what you have said. Unless I create a YouTube video of myself, hacking my console, for the sole purpose of piracy, Nintendo would have no evidence to take me to court to slap a DMCA at my face. So, they do the next best thing.

Hacking doesn't always equate to piracy, sure. But laws are written based on the majority, so they do apply here.

Advertise your A9LH/CFW console to not be able to play pirated games and to be able to run unsigned content. If Nintendo doesn't DMCA, you are correct. Otherwise, no. Also, how exactly would you go about doing that? Hacking a 3DS for unsigned content but not roms? Oh right, you can't. So since there is no way to differentiate, they make a global assumption on the safe side.

It actually is more black and white than you are making it out to seem.

Lastly, DMCA doesn't cover someone hacking for pleasure. Kthx!

Lastly, if anything of what you were saying were to hold up in court, why did George Hotz get successfully sued and unable to hack or comment on hacking anything Sony for the rest of his life?

 

[Majickhat55]

Again, they can't prove that I myself hacked it, so they cannot DMCA me. Selling a hacked console, well that doesn't go against any DMCA you provided. The DCMA would just be for the bypassing of the encryption.

It's not black and white, and I do not agree with most of what you have said. Unless I create a YouTube video of myself, hacking my console, for the sole purpose of piracy, Nintendo would have no evidence to take me to court to slap a DMCA at my face. So, they do the next best thing.

Hacking doesn't always equate to piracy, sure. But laws are written based on the majority, so they do apply here.

Advertise your A9LH/CFW console to not be able to play pirated games and to be able to run unsigned content. If Nintendo doesn't DMCA, you are correct. Otherwise, no. Also, how exactly would you go about doing that? Hacking a 3DS for unsigned content but not roms? Oh right, you can't. So since there is no way to differentiate, they make a global assumption on the safe side.

It actually is more black and white than you are making it out to seem.

Lastly, DMCA doesn't cover someone hacking for pleasure. Kthx!

Lastly, if anything of what you were saying were to hold up in court, why did George Hotz get successfully sued and unable to hack or comment on hacking anything Sony for the rest of his life?

I'm just trying to say they don't care about the average Joe. Was that dude all up on YouTube, Reddit, etc? It isn't even feasible for them to try to go after people in general. I said it was only because he was selling it, not necessarily because he did it. I said the exact same thing regarding the legality of the situation in an earlier post, it's clear how the law works in the US. It's also clear that they aren't going to drag every other person into court for an assumed DMCA violation unless they are making it commercially available to the public. i.e doing whatever that guy was doing, selling on eBay etc

 

[OrGoN3]

I'm just trying to say they don't care about the average Joe. Was that dude all up on YouTube, Reddit, etc? It isn't even feasible for them to try to go after people in general. I said it was only because he was selling it, not necessarily because he did it. I said the exact same thing regarding the legality of the situation in an earlier post, it's clear how the law works in the US. It's also clear that they aren't going to drag every other person into court for an assumed DMCA violation unless they are making it commercially available to the public. i.e doing whatever that guy was doing, selling on eBay etc

I guess it was difficult for me to read that in between your constant defense of the DMCA not being legit.

Edit: Hey Kitty!!!

 

[Majickhat55]

I guess it was difficult for me to read that in between your constant defense of the DMCA not being legit.

Edit: Hey Kitty!!!

No it is, I just think it's harder to apply in a court of law than most people think regarding personal use. If I had a nickle for every time I got a copyright notice from my ISP for downloading torrents 10 years ago, I would have enough money to pay a lawyer to get me off the hook.

 

[OrGoN3]

No it is, I just think it's harder to apply in a court of law than most people think regarding personal use. If I had a nickle for every time I got a copyright notice from my ISP for downloading torrents 10 years ago, I would have enough money to pay a lawyer to get me off the hook.

I'd be rich as frack if that were the case. Of course I always deleted the suspected items within the 24 hour period, so no legal action could be taken against me. That and I'm a leecher

Most law in the USA relies on intent. With the whole innocent until proven guilty, yes, they would have to prove your intent was for piracy. Now, this could be quite easy, using forums posts, especially from here. Worth the time? No. Possible? Yes.

Also, stop downloading torrents brah. Kazaa is where it's at!

 

[Majickhat55]

I'd be rich as frack if that were the case. Of course I always deleted the suspected items within the 24 hour period, so no legal action could be taken against me. That and I'm a leecher

Most law in the USA relies on intent. With the whole innocent until proven guilty, yes, they would have to prove your intent was for piracy. Now, this could be quite easy, using forums posts, especially from here. Worth the time? No. Possible? Yes.

Also, stop downloading torrents brah. Kazaa is where it's at!

Lol suddenly I'm having Napster flashbacks......

 

[OrGoN3]

Lol suddenly I'm having Napster flashbacks......

You're USA, right? Listen to the Radio at all? I did the other day. And this is what I heard: "iHeartRadio POWERED BY NAPSTER". WTF?

 

[Joom]

You're USA, right? Listen to the Radio at all? I did the other day. And this is what I heard: "iHeartRadio POWERED BY NAPSTER". WTF?

Napster isn't an illegal service anymore. It's kinda like Spotify or Pandora now.

 

[Sketchy1]

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post this. I got an email from ebay saying that my listing of a N3DS was taken down because of copyright violation from Nintendo. Here's part of the email.

"After reviewing your eBay account, we've taken the following action:
- Violating listings have been removed. A list of items that were removed can be viewed at the bottom of this message.
- We have credited all associated fees except for the final value fee for your listing(s).

Your listing was reviewed after the rights owner notified us that your item violated their copyrights. We urge you to contact the rights owner directly for more information about why they requested the review of your listing and whether you can relist the item."

Did they fine me for putting it up, also I don't know if it's because I was lazy and just snagged a photo from google images instead a picture of the actual product. Could it be the picture that violated the copyright or has this happened to anybody else.

If it was named "hacked/a9lh'ed/emunand/cfw" setup 3ds, then it should be pretty self explanatory why it got taken down :/

But its best to just sell it as a regular 3ds anyway because all if them are hackable. You dont need to charge extra by branding it "hacked" if people can do the same shit for much cheaper.

 

[Quantumcat]

If it was named "hacked/a9lh'ed/emunand/cfw" setup 3ds, then it should be pretty self explanatory why it got taken down :/

But its best to just sell it as a regular 3ds anyway because all if them are hackable. You dont need to charge extra by branding it "hacked" if people can do the same shit for much cheaper.

By selling it as "hacked" you're hoping to find people who don't know it is so easy. You're profiting from your knowledge.

 

[Xenon Hacks]

FYI next is a nasty letter from Nintendo basically telling you to stop or get sued, don't do it again.

 

[Smoker1]

List your Device again, but this time, have the Listing as Gateway Ready or CFW Ready.