Hacking EU Users: Super Ban - GDPR Template

[C_catVideogames]

why am i reading this, im in the us lmao

 

[Wierd_w]

why am i reading this, im in the us lmao

Because useful consumer protections can be a windfall for us dumbshit yanks who cant seem to understand that sucking corporate cock is not good for us. The GDPR is such an example.

Likewise, the "FTC says "Warranty void" stickers are unenforcable" thing is totally a US thing, but has windfall potential for other nations.

 

[Foxi4]

Actually no, with a ps3, xbox 360, ps4, xbox one even if banned you still have the means to download the update through their website and install if offline through an usb connection. Nintendo doesn't provide this

They don't have to - games have updates embedded into the ROM image. You're in no way restricted from using your device.

What counts as the online services. The eshop? the multiplayer parts? Because right now the laws against banning content (your eshop account) that you own is pretty weak for the companies.

Arguably all of the above. You do not "own" your account, or the content on it for that matter, you merely poses the license to utilise it. If you haven't downloaded your copy and you've broken the terms of service of the system capable of delivering the content to you, that's sad, but it's also your loss. Nintendo is under no obligation to provide any service to you as the agreement between you and the company is void.

lol nah they r restricting updates to ur console/ games to

Online updates, yes. Servers cost money to run. Since the agreement between you and the company was broken, they are no longer obligated to provide support. You own the physical machine, you are a license holder for the software (including the OS). As such, you can keep the machine, but you're in no way entitled to the software.

If there is no data personally identifying you, how do they know that YOU entered the agreement?

Again, consider the circumstance where a person purchases a second hand console that has been banned.
Further consider the circumstances of right to repair, which already busted Microsoft across the chops concerning "warranty void" stickers.

Physical goods and services are two different things entirely. You still own the console, you don't own the software - you never have. You can do whatever you please with the system, take a hammer to it, it's yours. The information isn't personally identifying *you*, it identifies the system and asks for an agreement from the system holder. You can verify that this is the case by buying another system - miraculously it won't be banned.

 

[Wierd_w]

Concerning software necessary for hardware to function (which in this case, would be HorizonOS, due to the unchangable nature of the bootrom)

See also, the whole fiasco that has initiated the "right to repair" shitstorm in a teacup-- The ongoing dispute between farmers and JohnDeer, concerning the distribution and use of firmware images.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...aska-farmers-right-to-repair-john-deere-apple

The old canard of "No, not our software!!" is being challenged, right freaking now.

 

[kumikochan]

They don't have to - games have updates embedded into the ROM image. You're in no way restricted from using your device.
Arguably all of the above. You do not "own" your account, or the content on it for that matter, you merely poses the license to utilise it. If you haven't downloaded your copy and you've broken the terms of service of the system capable of delivering the content to you, that's sad, but it's also your loss. Nintendo is under no obligation to provide any service to you as the agreement between you and the company is void.
Online updates, yes. Servers cost money to run. Since the agreement between you and the company was broken, they are no longer obligated to provide support. You own the physical machine, you are a license holder for the software (including the OS). As such, you can keep the machine, but you're in no way entitled to the software.

Physical goods and services are two different things entirely. You still own the console, you don't own the software - you never have. You can do whatever you please with the system, take a hammer to it, it's yours. The information isn't personally identifying *you*, it identifies the system and asks for an agreement from the system holder. You can verify that this is the case by buying another system - miraculously it won't be banned.

Do all games contain firmware updates on cart ? If so then you're right but if not then that wouldn't be correct

 

[linuxares]

@Foxi4 However that have been ruled out in court. You own the software, the license etc. Usedsoft vs. Oracle. This is why the ToS isn't written in stone and can't be thrown as a weapon. As long as there are conflicting laws such as unfair ToS, it probably don't hold it's water in court. But someone needs to take them there, or get FESF to do a test trial. Because this affects so much more than just Nintendo. It affects Valve, EA, Ubisoft, GOG etc.

 

[Foxi4]

Do all games contain firmware updates on cart ? If so then you're right but if not then that wouldn't be correct

I'm not entirely sure. As far as I know the carts feature the minimum firmware required to run the software *or* the firmware that was current at the time of production, as was the case with the 3DS, but I may be wrong.

 

[tyler004]

Do all games contain firmware updates on cart ? If so then you're right but if not then that wouldn't be correct

yea they do I beive cuz u need to be on certain firmware to use plu there is a thing called choidourjournx that gets them off of carts I believe

 

[kumikochan]

I'm not entirely sure. As far as I know the carts feature the minimum firmware required to run the software *or* the firmware that was current at the time of production, as was the case with the 3DS, but I may be wrong.

yeah it could be but if not then they're in the wrong and should provide a means to install firmware updates through the means of a usb connection. I don't know for sure either if all cartridges contain a firmware update necessary to play the game

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

yea they do I beive cuz u need to be on certain firmware to use plu there is a thing called choidourjournx that gets them off of carts I believe

If so then they're legally in the okay

 

[Foxi4]

@Foxi4 However that have been ruled out in court. You own the software, the license etc. Usedsoft vs. Oracle. This is why the ToS isn't written in stone and can't be thrown as a weapon. As long as there are conflicting laws such as unfair ToS, it probably don't hold it's water in court. But someone needs to take them there, or get FESF to do a test trial. Because this affects so much more than just Nintendo. It affects Valve, EA, Ubisoft, GOG etc.

This is untrue. Usedsoft V Oracle is a case regarding resale of used software, which you're entitled to do. It has nothing to do with ownership - if you owned it, you would be able to freely replicate and resell it, which you're not. You have a license for 1 copy of software and that license can be transferred.

 

[ghjfdtg]

Every physical game comes with a full set of update files. It's probably the most up to date firmware at manufacturing i don't know.

 

[tyler004]

cuz if check an xci it will tell u required firmware for the game , should have that update on the cart if u cant extract which is possible now

 

[linuxares]

This is untrue. Usedsoft V Oracle is a case regarding resale of used software, which you're entitled to do. It has nothing to do with ownership - if you owned it, you would be able to freely replicate and resell it, which you're not. You have a license for 1 copy of software and that license can be transferred.

42 According to a commonly accepted definition, a ‘sale’ is an agreement by which a person, in return for payment, transfers to another person his rights of ownership in an item of tangible or intangible property belonging to him. It follows that the commercial transaction giving rise, in accordance with Article 4(2) of Directive 2009/24, to exhaustion of the right of distribution of a copy of a computer program must involve a transfer of the right of ownership in that copy.

It's ownership of said product/license.

 

[Foxi4]

42 According to a commonly accepted definition, a ‘sale’ is an agreement by which a person, in return for payment, transfers to another person his rights of ownership in an item of tangible or intangible property belonging to him. It follows that the commercial transaction giving rise, in accordance with Article 4(2) of Directive 2009/24, to exhaustion of the right of distribution of a copy of a computer program must involve a transfer of the right of ownership in that copy.

It's ownership of said product/license.

That's correct. You can transfer your license to somebody else by selling it. What does that have to do with ownership of the software? You're a license holder and you own a storage medium with one copy of the software, you don't own "the" software.

 

[linuxares]

That's correct. You can transfer your license to somebody else by selling it. What does that have to do with ownership of the software? You're a license holder and you own a storage medium with one copy of the software, you don't own "the" software.

Of course not, but you own the access to the software, a product. You paid for it, you own it. You don't own the copyright holders property. It's like a physical game. You own the game, not the source.

I've asked a person if he could still access his eshop account via Nintendo.co.uk and he can. So it's the console that are fully blocked. They don't ban your account thankfully. That would open a whole new can of worms.

 

[Foxi4]

Of course not, but you own the access to the software, a product. You paid for it, you own it. You don't own the copyright holders property. It's like a physical game. You own the game, not the source.

I've asked a person if he could still access his eshop account via Nintendo.co.uk and he can. So it's the console that are fully blocked. They don't ban your account thankfully. That would open a whole new can of worms.

See, that's why I don't like to use the word "own" when discussing software - for all intents and purposes you don't own it. It's much more prudent to use the correct terms here. By the way, you don't "own access" to anything - if your medium is destroyed, you may or may not be entitled to a replacement. It's murky waters.

 

[Slim45]

I cannot afford a lawyer but if anybody here is rich enough to how about running this by one?

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

Congrats, the delete the IP, you are no longer IP banned (Which usually changes daily anyways)

Now you're still Cert banned. Good job on that.

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


EXACTLY. You are even pointing the right things out!
GDPR = Restricts data that can Identify you as a person.
Your Console is NOT a person.

but owning that said console can identify you. just like being identified by having a certain unique scratch on a car or your car registration which ties back to you?

 

[c80]

Or can you force them to only delete the data that is a responsible for a ban?

No. You cannot force them to unban you. Everybody who thinks this might be possible is naive. If you are able to think only a little, you know that this is not possible.

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

for all intents and purposes you don't own it

Thank you for correcting him. He said so many wrong and stupid things, good to know that not every mod here spreads wrong information.

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

And people have the will to fight for their customer rights.

Fighting is a stupid idea, if you know for sure that you hav exactly 0 chance to win, like in this case

 

[Draxzelex]

but owning that said console can identify you. just like being identified by having a certain unique scratch on a car or your car registration which ties back to you?

No it does not. All Nintendo sees is a console certificate acting inappropriately. It does not matter who owns it and anybody can use said console certificate. This is also why people who buy banned consoles can give up hope on it being unbanned; the console is banned, not the user who used it. Bans are tied to the console, not the current owner.

 

[tides]

it's amazing how many lawyers we have giving advice about the law here.

regardless of what these "lawyers" say, why not just send this to nintendo so we all can know what kind of info they are logging without our permission?

the fact that they are doing this is already against the law and just because we install cfw or pirate, it still doesn't give them the right to do so. if you lawyers want to argue otherwise, please leave your name so we can tell your bar society how you are giving the wrong advice here and get you suspended.