(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2009/10/3rdpartymu580pxheaderimg.jpg)
Datel announced that it has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft, in response to Microsoft's lockout (via Xbox 360 firmware update) of the company's Max Memory Cards. We doubt this is the "remedy" for the lockout issue to which the company previously referred, but it's certainly one way to address it.
"Microsoft has taken steps to render inoperable the competing Datel memory card for no visible purpose other than to have that market entirely to themselves," Datel attorney Marty Glick explained in a press release. "They accomplished their recent update by making a system change that will not recognize or allow operation of a memory card with greater capacity than their own. We believe that with the power Microsoft enjoys in the market for Xbox accessories this conduct is unlawful."
In the press release, Datel goes on to say that the lawsuit is intended to "restore competition" which, the company suggests, is beneficial to consumers. It's now up to a federal court in San Francisco to determine whether the Max Memory-crippling Xbox update constitutes unlawful anti-competitive behavior on the part of Microsoft.
The last time Datel went to court, it viewed the experience from the other side. Sony filed suit against the peripheral maker over the "Lite Blue Tool," which would have enabled users to run unsigned code on PSP hardware.
I'm very mixed on this issue, which is actually why I'm glad to see it going to court for an official end.
I do not support market monopolies, so I want alternative options to the proprietary Microsoft Memory Unit.
I do not support online cheating and hacked achievements, which the Datel Memory Unit encourages (perhaps unintentionally).
I replay the same contradicting arguments in my head. (1) Pirates and hackers are not going to stop just because you create a new obstacle for them, so why continue inhibiting honest customers? (2) Pirating and hacking is a small subsect of the overall customer base because it requires a level of dedication that most customers do not have. Devices that 'streamline' the process not only makes life easier for current hackers, but also encourages non-hackers to do things they normally wouldn't consider.
There's not real "right" or "wrong" answer, really. But if the case sees its way through (and doesn't settle out of court), I'll agree with the outcome.
I agree with Microsoft just because of the fact that IF they didnt do anything about it.. everyone would buy the aformentioned device and use it to cheat or mod their xbox.. purely because microsoft didnt do anything about it.. Happend with PS2's everyone chipped their PS2 because sony didnt do anything about it.. this mega corp's need to protect not only their hardware but the fact that 20million+ people are playing online games and expect a level playing field!
Quote from: KoreRupt on November 24, 2009, 02:35:35 PM
I agree with Microsoft just because of the fact that IF they didnt do anything about it.. everyone would buy the aformentioned device and use it to cheat or mod their xbox.. purely because microsoft didnt do anything about it.. Happend with PS2's everyone chipped their PS2 because sony didnt do anything about it.. this mega corp's need to protect not only their hardware but the fact that 20million+ people are playing online games and expect a level playing field!
not me :)
I chipped my ps2 then bought a slimline one and went all legit. I wouldnt abused my xbox though.
I had a chipped PS1 and was finishing games before they were even released in this country, i wasn't really into the PS2 as much as the PS1 so i never bothered chipping that, plus i still had my Dreamcast which played copied games straight from the box so i just abused that for a bit, then the original xbox arrived & the rest is history ;D
yeah I screwed around with my dreamcast too. I didnt with my sega Saturn though
Quote from: TaraJayne on December 11, 2009, 11:25:32 AM
yeah I screwed around with my dreamcast too. I didnt with my sega Saturn though
The Dreamcast was weird in that all you needed at first was the boot disc & it would play copies without any need for internal modding, then people realised you could put the boot disc data on the copies themselves it was even easier, you did lose FMV on games though as Dreamcast discs were around 1GB in size while the blanks were only 700MB, great times though :)
I never owned a Sega Saturn.
I had a 100 megadrive game romulator for the dreamcast
Quote from: Failed on December 11, 2009, 07:51:48 PM
I had a 100 megadrive game romulator for the dreamcast
I have over 300 megadrive games on my chipped original xbox's hard drive, along with about 30 snes games. i would never mess with my beloved 360 though!
Quote from: Failed on December 11, 2009, 07:51:48 PM
I had a 100 megadrive game romulator for the dreamcast
I have one for the pc and a spectrum one. But no DFUSE I would never do this to my Elite
Microsoft files motion to dismiss Datel suit, cites Apple and others in defense
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2010/01/datellawsuitmsmotion.jpg)
Microsoft has registered a motion to dismiss the antitrust lawsuit originally filed by unofficial memory card maker Datel, in which Datel claimed that by locking out its cards, Microsoft was being illegally anti-competitive in the field of 'Multiplayer Online Dedicated Gaming Systems" and their accessories. Microsoft's motion to dismiss (here's the PDF link) actually cites one of its biggest rivals, Apple, who fought off another unofficial vendor by claiming that its users (us) had knowingly agreed that by using its products, any aftermarket products had to come from Apple as well. You can't run OS X on any computers not made by Apple, says Microsoft, and so you can't use any non-Microsoft memory cards on your Xbox.
As with most legal filings, the situation is complicated. Datel is also trying to claim that Microsoft has a grip on the console market by claiming that the much better selling Nintendo Wii isn't actually a part of that market, which leaves Microsoft in the weird position of arguing that yes, there are plenty of consoles (including the PSP and even the PlayStation 2) that "have outsold the Xbox 360." And Microsoft also argues that Datel's cheat-enabling memory cards "undermine quality user experience" on Xbox Live, which would also be reason enough to keep them off the system. Interesting arguments, all, but we'll have to see which emerge victorious after a hearing scheduled for March 2 in San Francisco.
Easy solution to make everyone happy ...
Allow the Datel cards to work. Ban people that use them (or anyting else for that matter) to cheat.
Was that so hard? I should have been a Judge.
I have to admit that I am stuck in the middle on this one.
I don't agree with Microsoft arbitrarily blocking everyone who doesn't comply with their wants but then again I also agree with them wanting to protect their product and their users.
If Neato's solution was so simply I would have no problem with it seeing as I wouldn't be affected by it.
Policing it would be a nightmare though, with over 3 million users how can you check every single one all the time? Without infringing liberties??
Tricky catch 22 and I wouldn't want to be the judge on this one.
I just wish they'd allow USB drives, it's so handy to use be Cruzer drive on the PS3 for system updates and game saves or file transfers.
I can see why they don't, but it's handy for me.
Just slap Bill Gates in the face.
Not sure what it will solve but everyone will be happy anyway.
Court rules not to dismiss Datel antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft
Datel's antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft will continue, now that a US District Court has rejected Microsoft's motion to dismiss the case. In all, five of Datel's six allegations against the Xbox 360 maker will be weighed. The court did dismiss Datel's claim that Microsoft would be blocking the company from competing in the console market, since Datel does not actually manufacture game consoles. (Find Datel's full announcement of the court's rejection posted after the break.)
The antitrust case claims that by locking out Datel's Max Memory Card with a firmware update, Microsoft used its status as the platform holder to unlawfully prevent competition. In Microsoft's motion to dismiss, it claimed that language in the "Additional Terms and Conditions" clause in the Xbox 360 product warranty barred the use of unauthorized peripherals. The company back upped its case by citing Apple's successful defense of its right to limit use of OS X to its own hardware.
The court rejected Microsoft's motion, however, finding the language in the "Additional Terms and Conditions" vague and too wide-reaching. For example, if Microsoft's interpretation of the terms was accepted, it could prevent the use of certain televisions with the console.
Since Datel's suit was first filed, of course, Microsoft has enabled the use any USB drive as a memory unit for the Xbox 360, which means that even if Datel is able to continue to sell the device, there likely won't be much demand for it. Meanwhile, Microsoft recently filed its own suit against Datel over claims that one of Datel's controllers is too similar in design to the official Xbox 360 gamepad.
Datel's official announcement:
"DATEL'S ANTITRUST CLAIMS AGAINST MICROSOFT FOR MONOPOLIZATION OF XBOX 360 ACCESSORY MARKET MAY PROCEED"
"SAN FRANCISCO, CA – April 26, 2010. In a decision released April 23, 2010, the United States District Court in San Francisco rejected Microsoft's motion to dismiss Datel's lawsuit concerning monopolization of the Xbox 360 accessory market. The Court's ruling permits Datel to proceed with five of the six claims it originally asserted.
"'We're gratified that the case will proceed and Datel looks forward to reestablishing the benefits of competition in the accessory market for all Xbox 360 users,' said Daniel Asimow, a litigation director at San Francisco-based Howard Rice who argued the motion on Datel's behalf.
"UK-based Datel is a leading manufacturer of video game accessories. Among Datel's many innovative products are memory cards and controllers for the Xbox 360. Datel's memory card, released in May 2009, offered four times the memory of Microsoft's memory card accessories for the same or a lower price. Rather than responding with a better product or lower price, Microsoft instead deployed a mandatory November 2009 software update that disabled all memory cards over 512 megabytes (the largest size sold by Microsoft). This exclusionary act not only cut off the market for future Datel sales of memory cards but disabled Datel memory cards already sold. In addition, Microsoft arbitrarily altered its software authentication scheme for game controllers in an attempt to disable Datel's competing products.
"On November 23, 2009 Datel sued Microsoft for antitrust violations. Microsoft responded with a motion to dismiss, claiming that because of a provision in a section entitled "Additional Terms and Conditions" buried in the product warranty, consumers agreed at the time of their Xbox purchase that they would not use unauthorized accessories.
"In its 31-page ruling, the Court rejected this argument, finding that those terms and conditions were at best ambiguous and did not support Microsoft's contention. Indeed, if Microsoft's reading were accepted, it would be impermissible to use the Xbox with a variety of accessories not manufactured by Microsoft, including televisions and music players. The Court rejected Microsoft's reliance on Apple v. Psytar , in which Apple succeeded in dismissing antitrust claims based on a provision in the Mac OS user license restricting the use of the software to Apple computers. Unlike that case, here there is no clearly binding contractual restriction and it is not possible for a consumer to forecast all of his or her accessory needs at the time of the initial purchase.
"The Court also found that Datel had properly alleged claims against Microsoft for unfair competition and for unlawful tying of consoles to accessories and that Datel had properly alleged that Microsoft enjoys market power in the console market as well as the accessory market. The Court dismissed claims against Microsoft for monopolization of the console market, solely on the grounds that Datel, an accessory manufacturer, was not direct participant in the console market."
I think the public interest in this case is now moot, following the latest USB-support update for the console.
USB drives are far cheaper than MicroSD cards, so buying the Datel solution is no longer the cheaper option. I know that doesn't actually change anything regarding the legalities of the suit, it's just common sense worth mentioning. ;)