Mod chip raid victim details the experience
By Darren Murph 
posted August 4th 2007 1:42AM
posted August 4th 2007 1:42AM
While US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement are remaining tight-lipped about what exactly they have seized thus far, a certain modder has come forward to depict his story and explain the experience of getting raided by the fuzz. After agents woke up his grandmother and perused her domicile with a warrant in hand, they confiscated a number of consoles and spare parts around the house before heading out to find the man behind FallsInc. Once locating him at his girlfriend's dwelling, they persuaded him to hand over everything even remotely related to modding, and he was left with "nothing of worth" outside of a computer monitor and his vehicle. Unsurprisingly, the culprit (or victim, depending on perspective) feels that his "life was taken away by a ludicrous interpretation of the DCMA" as the "little guy" was taken down while mass piraters remain at large. To read his whole account, be sure and tag the read link.
Mod chips are illegal because of United States Code section 1201(a)(1)(A)
"No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00001201----000-.html
That is what mod chips do. They allow you to run pirated, copyrighted games by circumventing the console's DRM.
It doesn't matter whether or not that's what the end user of the mod chip does with it. It doesn't matter if none of this guy's customers pirated a single game. DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER. I'm not saying I like the DMCA. I'm just explaining, this is what the DMCA is, and why it's such an oppressive law.
Thank you for noting this. People here need to stop opining on the law when they have no idea about it. As I stated in another place on this thread, I think that provision of the Copyright Act is wrong and I also believe, personally, that it is unconstitutional. HOWEVER, no court would likely agree with me, and moreover, if I hear another person say "fair use" I am going to scream -- there is NOT a fair use exception to this provision. NONE. Just because you want there to be does not mean you should say there is. This guy probably listened to idiots on internet fora who told him what he was doing was fair use and look what happened to him. Again, I don't like this provision, but people should know what they are doing is illegal.
There was a case a while ago, and I think it was posted on engadget too. About some printer company suing a generic ink company for reverse-engineering their thingies so they could make ink modules that worked on said company's printers. The printer company lost, basically saying it was fair for a company to reverse engineering something for whatever reason.
But this has to be a violation of civil rights. Just because someone sells something that could be used for illegal purposes doesn't mean the person who sold it is responsible for how the purchaser used it. If so, then Maxtor and Seagate and Western Digital are all liable for anyone who buys their hard drives and uses it to store downloaded music or movies, or Smith and Wesson is clearly at fault for every school shooting. And it is all Ford's fault that their cars suck. No wait...
when was the last time anyone used a bong (legal to buy) to smoke tobacco ...
in many places, its legal to buy radar detectors, just not USE them...
fundamentally, bongs, radar detectors and mod chips are all items that CAN be used to break the law DIRECTLY but the first two examples are legal while the last isn't?? ..how does that make sense?
because a mod chip does directly break the law. United States Code section 1201(a)(1)(A).
Itspecifies you can't circumvent the electronic devices copy protection, and it has been quoted and linked a couple times already.
so to make a proper comparison it would be more like owning a bag of cocain but not using it. Or owning an unlicensed handgun and not firing it.
not only was this person in possesion of mod chips that were installed in systems, he was the person installing them and selling them. So in his case it would be more like... he was refining and dealing the cocain, or building the handguns and selling them to people. Its an extreme example, but it helps illustrates why the law is a lot more likely to crack down on people like him than the people that use hacks or have purchased a modded system. Though these things are also considered illegal, they are considered lesser crimes than the manufacturing and sale of hacked systems.
@ Baratacus
Whether or not a mod chip DIRECTLY breaks the law is actually an interpretation DMCA. It must be proved that the MOD chip’s only commercially significant purpose is to circumvent a works copy protection.
To be specific FallsInc would fall under United States Code Section 1201(a)(2).
(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person’s knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
I love your analogy. I don’t know if that was your intent, but it quite clearly illustrates to absurdity of the DMCA.
Under the DMCA MOD chips (tiny benign pieces of circuitry) are the equivalent of cocaine / unlicensed hand guns / kiddy porn / etc. which are all items so dangerous it is illegal to possess, manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic.
I for one know that I feel much safer knowing that dangerous criminals like FallsInc. (which are essentially the equivalent drugged up, gun welding, child predators) are being actively pursued by my governments highest levels of law enforcement.
Mod chips themselves do not break any laws. It depends on what software (BIOS) you put on them, e.g. A Hacked BIOS is illegal, however a Linux BIOS is perfectly legal (referring to a original xbox). So I see no reason why people who sell mod chips are getting busted. I have a linux BIOS on a mod chip in my old xbox, my sister uses linux on it to browse the internet and with a flick of a switch she plays our legally purchased games. What's the problem with that? As far as pirating games, heh... what about my Forza 2 game that I paid $60.00 for just so a week later my xbox 360 can destroy the disc, you think MS is going to replace it... Nope, they tell me that it was MY fault that I didn't take the disc out quickly enough when it started grinding against the drive tray. WTF! Sure they will replace or rig the drive, but how long before that new china POS drive craps out and destroys another disc. We should have every right to back up are games. Go after the people who are making a fortune selling pirated games, not the people who want to get more out of their systems and protect their invesment.