Hacking Hacking: What qualifies as illegal?

[WiiUBricker]

First off, I'd just like to say unless someone here is a lawyer, none of us are qualified to give a definitive answer as to what is or is not illegal. Everything in this thread is pure speculation.

Right, I speculate that clear copyright laws weren't written just for fun.

 

[the_randomizer]

If it means getting rid of restrictive region locking and asinine DRM on games you own, I see nothing immoral about hacking your Wii to play games that never had a chance to be sold in a specific region. Region locking is plain and simply unfair advantage, and a half-a**ed excuse to combat piracy.

That is the primary reason I hacked my Wii; to make it region free and to block mandatory disc updates.

 

[Rydian]

First off, I'd just like to say unless someone here is a lawyer, none of us are qualified to give a definitive answer as to what is or is not illegal. Everything in this thread is pure speculation.

The whole "only lawyers can interpret the law" thing isn't true as far as I've seen. I remember reading an article about a case where it was deemed that the programmers in question, being computer programmers, were undoubtedly smart enough to read and interpret the laws and agreements involved in the case and therefore couldn't use the "it's legalese I didn't understand when agreeing to it" excuse.

 

[Anon10W1z]

Have you ever DVR'ed a football game, or any game on TV?
Without written consent by the league, you have just committed piracy.

*switches into friends context* Oh god.... *switches back to my context* It's a good thing I don't have DVR service.

 

[mauifrog]

I don't think there is any law the stipulated what you can and can not download. Such a law would require you to know the statues of all copy rights of all material which is above and beyond reasonable. I do believe that all laws, at least those that have any hope of standing up in court deal with the distribution of copyrighted work. It is very very illegal to distribute copyrighted material to anyone, be it in the park or on the net, however should someone give you such material I do not believe you have any legal obligation to validate the statues of such materials copyright prior to using it for your own personal use. So, obviousness it is a big world and this topic is stupid sense there are a thousand different possibilities, but don't distribute copyrighted material and your will be fine. And with that said, never question the status of copyrighted work, ignorance is bliss. If a copy of this or that falls from the sky, it is not your responsibility to verify anything.

Of course that moral plausible deniability only works if you don't ask yourself stupid questions, like is it illegal for me to download this thing the was uploaded by someone illegally? Keep in mind that most of this shit is add supported, so they very well may nail you for financial support of terrorist organizations. Your best bet is to get your news form usenet, no google adds there. Stay safe, don't fund pirating terrorists.

illegal = distribution of copyrighted material
illegal = bypassing, circumvention encryption
Use of such illegally distributed works is not well defined.

Hacking your wii violets many laws in many countries, hacking your wii to play homebrew is likely much more illegal than downloading this or that.

Depending on your country, if is very likely that fair use backups of legally owned material may be hosted and provided to owners of such material to facilitate there backup needs, aka roms which you and I can not make but joe can. It is legal for Joe to host such backups and provided them to use, so long as we legally own such copyrighted material. Also, Joe may or may not be responsible for any need to validate such ownership, a simple statement from the user may to good enough.

IOS, System menu wads, clearly anyone owning a wii has a fair use right to have these, so possession of them is not illegal. However, depending on your country of origin, distribution of such wads may or may not be illegal.

Forums- for a site to stay up they must ad-hear to the laws of the country in which there server is located. Forms may express rules that are above and beyond any well defined law in an attempt to shield itself from litigation. AKA, the forum does not have the money form any lawyer, legal or not, so don't tell the forum when you piss in the shower, they don't want to know what you did with your sister (in-law?), they just don't need to know.


PS. you can pm me all the details about your sister, just leave yourself out of it.

 

[SifJar]

First off, I'd just like to say unless someone here is a lawyer, none of us are qualified to give a definitive answer as to what is or is not illegal. Everything in this thread is pure speculation.

The whole "only lawyers can interpret the law" thing isn't true as far as I've seen. I remember reading an article about a case where it was deemed that the programmers in question, being computer programmers, were undoubtedly smart enough to read and interpret the laws and agreements involved in the case and therefore couldn't use the "it's legalese I didn't understand when agreeing to it" excuse.

I agree completely, "not understanding" the law is no excuse to break it. My point is just that some laws are vague and there is a reason people are trained to interpret such laws. We can't assume our interpretation of any particular law is correct. Plus I'm sure I speak for many in this thread when I say I have never read a law in my life. All my legal "knowledge" comes from word of mouth and what I've heard/read from others. I'd say plenty of others are in the same boat. Perhaps I am wrong and the individuals commenting here have studied books of relevant law in great detail, in which case I apologize for my foolish assumption.

 

[Rydian]

First off, I'd just like to say unless someone here is a lawyer, none of us are qualified to give a definitive answer as to what is or is not illegal. Everything in this thread is pure speculation.

The whole "only lawyers can interpret the law" thing isn't true as far as I've seen. I remember reading an article about a case where it was deemed that the programmers in question, being computer programmers, were undoubtedly smart enough to read and interpret the laws and agreements involved in the case and therefore couldn't use the "it's legalese I didn't understand when agreeing to it" excuse.

I agree completely, "not understanding" the law is no excuse to break it. My point is just that some laws are vague and there is a reason people are trained to interpret such laws. We can't assume our interpretation of any particular law is correct. Plus I'm sure I speak for many in this thread when I say I have never read a law in my life. All my legal "knowledge" comes from word of mouth and what I've heard/read from others. I'd say plenty of others are in the same boat. Perhaps I am wrong and the individuals commenting here have studied books of relevant law in great detail, in which case I apologize for my foolish assumption.

Many laws do use legalese, but a lot of them are pretty clear as well. "US Code" is the term used for US laws in general (the collection), and it's available online.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text
(That's just my preferred source.) Title 17 is Copyright law, and the chapters there are self-explanatory for the most part (a chapter about what is and is not covered by copyright law, how copyrights come into effect and how they transfer, stuff like that). Most people here have the reading capacity to understand the basic things covered there, but it is an annoying read, so...

For some basic F.A.Q. stuff in a more human language, the US government set this site up.
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/
It answers basic questions without needing 28 paragraphs of crap to be read, at least, so I sometimes reference this instead.

 

[crono141]

Just a correction: It is not illegal to download anything (in the US).

Really? You think so. I can think of one situation that will prove your statement wrong. Child porn.

Clearly, I was talking about copyrighted works, not kiddy porn. Stay on topic, plz.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

Just a correction: It is not illegal to download anything (in the US).

Really? You think so. I can think of one situation that will prove your statement wrong. Child porn.

Clearly, I was talking about copyrighted works, not kiddy porn. Stay on topic, plz.

I was on topic. You clearly said "It is not illegal to download anything (in the US)", If you meant something else then you should specify exactly what you mean because we are not mind readers here and can only understand what is precisely said, not what you are thinking.

But, go ahead, and try to prove to me that it is not illegal to download copyrighted works. We all know that you will only really get in trouble if you are distributing copyrighted material, but how can you say that it is not illegal to download it? Do you have anything factual to back that up?

 

[crono141]

Just a correction: It is not illegal to download anything (in the US).

Really? You think so. I can think of one situation that will prove your statement wrong. Child porn.

Clearly, I was talking about copyrighted works, not kiddy porn. Stay on topic, plz.

I was on topic. You clearly said "It is not illegal to download anything (in the US)", If you meant something else then you should specify exactly what you mean because we are not mind readers here and can only understand what is precisely said, not what you are thinking.

But, go ahead, and try to prove to me that it is not illegal to download copyrighted works. We all know that you will only really get in trouble if you are distributing copyrighted material, but how can you say that it is not illegal to download it? Do you have anything factual to back that up?

I'm in a topic about downloading copyrighted works. If you can't understand the associated context attached to "anything", then you need to work on your reading comprehension.

Also, see http://gbatemp.net/topic/330472-hacking-what-qualifies-as-illegal/page__view__findpost__p__4304624 for a very simple and concise explanation as to why its impossible to legislate against downloading copyright work. That is, if you're reading comprehension skills don't get in the way.

 

[lovewiibrew]

Don't worry, the bama will keep the pirates at bay.

 

[SifJar]

I'm in a topic about downloading copyrighted works. If you can't understand the associated context attached to "anything", then you need to work on your reading comprehension.

Also, see http://gbatemp.net/t...ost__p__4304624 for a very simple and concise explanation as to why its impossible to legislate against downloading copyright work. That is, if you're reading comprehension skills don't get in the way.

The first three words in the linked post where "I don't think...". DeadlyFoez clearly asked for factual evidence, not someone's thoughts. And you criticized his "reading comprehension" skills?

 

[DeadlyFoez]

LMFAO! I was going to leave it alone and not carry on with him/her because it's obvious that there is no reasoning with him/her at all. He's/she's getting all pissy and borderline insulting over the fact that I took him/her for exactly what he/she wrote instead of assuming he/she meant something else.

One thing that I've learned after many years is to never assume that someone means one thing when they in fact said something else. The courts certainly don't like assumptions and they will take you for exactly what you said and if you try to correct them with "well, I meant this", then the court will bitch at you for not being clear the first time and hold it against you.

Woman, on the other hand, constantly tell you one thing but hope that you will read their mind and understand that they want or mean something else.

Now, what I also find funny about crono141's post is that he/she is saying that he/she is on topic, where as this thread has gotten off topic in some ways, even in the post that he/she linked to where mauifrog is talking about sisters and stuff, and gbatemp is well know for people constantly going off topic all the time. But when I take him/her for he/she literally said, I get crapped on for not reading his/her mind and assuming he/she meant something else. And it is for this reason that I leave the option open for the fact that crono141 could possibly be a woman. It would make a lot of sense then.

 

[crono141]

In this thread: morons with no reading comprehesion skills.

 

[SifJar]

In this thread: morons with no reading comprehesion skills.

They also appear to lack spelling skills...

EDIT: I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I can't resist.

 

[crono141]

I'm not trolling. I made a serious comment and got trolled (herp derp kiddy porn, your comment invalid).

And then when called out on it, I pointed to a block of text that full of logic and then get trolled again (herp derp, "I believe" isn't factual, derp).

And then when I point out that nobody has the reading comprehension skills to actually understand the logic and reasoning to understand what either comment means, I get trolled a third time (herp derp, can't spell LULZ).

There are trolls here all right, but I'm not one of them.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

This guy/girl should be a fucking comedian.

(With your reading "comprehesion" logic, you should understand that I'm really trying to say that you are a troll)

 

[smf]

I don't think there is any law the stipulated what you can and can not download. Such a law would require you to know the statues of all copy rights of all material which is above and beyond reasonable.

It depends on the country you live in. Generally however, unless you have been given permission by the copyright holder then you may not make a copy. There are some strict circumstances where you don't need permission in the US under fair use doctrine.
Ignorance is no excuse if you find a motion picture that is still in cinemas on a torrent site for example.

You can be sued under patent law for violating someone elses patent, even if you independently came up with the idea. The courts don't find that above and beyond reasonable, so why would they for copyright violations.

Your parents should have taught you right from wrong.

 

[mauifrog]

I think if you sleep well at night, your ok. There are many many laws in the world, which make most anything illegal. Hell, how many laws does the average person violate just driving to work on a daily basis? Simple fact is that most people don't give a shit about what the government says is illegal. We only follow the rules for two reasons-
1- fear of being stuck in hell with DeadlyFoez
2- fear of shower prisons
Other than that, who gives a shit. It is illegal to drive very fast, but almost the whole country goes 10+ over the limit. If you want to sell something and make money you have best have good control over it. Digital media is not the best thing to be selling. The good thing is most people are to stupid to steal stuff, so they buy. And most people who steal never would be it to begin with. They don't buy it because the product is crap, the only good think about it is that it is free.

Now most people will pay for good products. Most people will donate lots of money to good products that are free. I know I do. Also, at the end of the year I am broke just like everyone else, so I don't think there is anything think else for me to give.

Most games are fixing this issue, free game but you have to pay all the time for subscription, bonus items, etc. Play the game all you like for free, if it sucks you just quite, but if you like it you give it all your money.
Movies must suck, so good luck to them. Possible if they could develop some creative capacity to make something good, not much hope there.
Music just needs to get rid of the labels. No one wants to give money to a label, but most would happily give some dollars directly to a good band.

For the wii, they sold a lot of wii and I think it is safe to say that they sold a lot of games. So what they are doing must be working well for them and the others.

Of course if Nintendo ever did wish to do anything about the issue, they are not going to go after individual downloaders. They are going to go after the creators of the exploits that make it possible, the sites that host the instructions to do it, the sites hosting the torrents, etc. I think they call it "aiding and abetting copyright infringement", so if you help someone do it, even if you don't know they do it, your in the shit. I don't think that hacking a wii for homebrew games would be a strong case, it is pretty safe to assume that most installs of HBC lead to piracy, its like a gateway drug.

@[member='smf']
What you are basically saying is that I am responsible for the copyright status of every music video watched by me posted on youtube that violates copyright. It is probably true that I am liable for that, but I refuse to live under those type of rules. If you don't want your stuff to be downloaded I think the copyright holder should be responsible for their material and ensure it is not available through unauthorized channels.

Copyright laws are so broad, I think it is safe to say that almost everyone has violated one, most without even knowing it.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

We only follow the rules for two reasons-
1- fear of being stuck in hell with DeadlyFoez
2- fear of shower prisons

^^Fucking awesome.
I have to admit, being stuck with my wife is a rather shitty hell, I wouldn't want anyone ever stuck here with me.