|
Microsoft sued over Xbox 360 memory unit lockdown
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 24 November, 2009
In late October we reported that Microsoft was blocking all "unlicensed" Xbox 360 storage devices, successfully forcing gamers to only purchase memory cards sold by Microsoft, at a higher price.
Large peripheral manufacturer Datel has struck back today however, filing an antitrust lawsuit.
Says Datel representation Howard Rice: "Microsoft has taken steps to render inoperable the competing ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. November 2009 @ 09:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
M$ dose not have a proper 3rD party licensing system which adds to the problem of people making crap for the 360. Its MS's fault for proving a proper setup so they can easily ban stuff that dose not meet basic hardware standards.... but no they want a highly controled and antiseptic environment on the 360 and that makes gaming generic and weak....
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
machacker
Newbie
|
27. November 2009 @ 15:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
Just another example of how cruel MS can be. Knowing its wrong but doing it anyway.
|
|
pspbarry
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. November 2009 @ 17:29 |
Link to this message
|
"For what it's worth, I'm an attorney in the US with 20 years experience in business litigation, including antitrust matters.
Here's the bottom line: No amount of "proprietary rights" allows you to keep a competitor from selling an accessory or peripheral that consumers can use with your product. Like it or not, that's how the antitrust laws work.
This case is really not that different than the prior Microsoft antitrust case. In that case, a federal judge concluded that Microsoft had violated antitrust laws by trying to prevent competitors from making and selling internet browsers compatible with Windows. That case cost Microsoft many billions of dollars, and Bill Gates has acknowledged that the stress of that litigation played a significant part in his decision to retire. Beyond that, the federal prosecutors ultimately forced Microsoft to turn over its proprietary source code to its competitors so that they could develop internet browser add-ons that would compete with Internet Explorer. The courts in that case said what every antitrust lawyer will tell you: You don't get to keep competitors from making accessories/peripherals for your product -- not even in the name of "proprietary rights" or "guarding against piracy."
The laws may or may not make sense to you, but that's how they work. Microsoft is going to get killed in this one."
I would be amazed if some where in the xbox 360 gobble de gook it doesnt say xbox 360 is ours and we have the right to do what the hell we want to it and stuff the lot of you!
|
|
pmshah
Member
|
28. November 2009 @ 07:44 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by atomicxl:
It's MS' device that they made. To me this feels like Honda getting sued because (made up example) their cars are built in a way that only fits Honda engines. With the Windows stuff I can kinda sorta understand it since Windows dominates and including certain software with it would make that dominate Windows, which means dominating the large bulk of computer owners. You can't make that claim about the 360 and video games though. There are two other consoles (one with almost double the sales of the 360) and hundreds of computer manufacturers Datel could turn to. It's not like they are locked out of the gaming data card market.
Anti-trust was never the part of business law I took a liking to, but can they honestly sue MS for this? Are proprietary systems against the law? I don't think that officially licensed products are the calling card of anti-trust. Whatever I guess. Sucks for MS that they spend millions or billions creating products and aren't allowed to have say so in how their product operates.
If a Sony camera only has a slot for the Sony brand memory sticks, can they be sued for eliminating MicroSD from the handheld Sony product card memory storage market?
This all sounds like Datel going belly up because the days of Memory Cards are dead, even on the 360. Technology changed and now their company is obsolete. They can go out with a whimper or do some far reached last-chance-for-the-founders-to-possibly-get-a-check thing about how it's evil that Microsoft dominates the Microsoft Console market.
I don't know if you are aware of the fact but similar situation has gone unresolved in Olympus digital camera. Try and use any other brand and the camera will not recognise it. Format an Olympus memory card in any other system and you lose its use on Olympus camera. Olympus branded SD and micro SD cards cost anywhere from 2 - 3 x of any other competitive brand.
I am not into gaming at all but if Datel manufactured an electrically and physically compatible memory device - without being sued by M$ you can be pretty sure that M$ does not hold a patent on it like Sony does on its memory stick. Till recently none other than Sony branded ones were available. In this situation Datel are absolutely justified in their case ans M$ should be taken to the cleaners.
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
28. November 2009 @ 11:10 |
Link to this message
|
Thats probably why I haven't seen many Olympus cameras being sold or with consumers.
|
|
IguanaC64
Member
|
30. November 2009 @ 11:58 |
Link to this message
|
Just one more reason I won't own a Microsoft console. I keep seeing prices come down, but then I keep reading stories like these that remind me why I don't want to support companies that do this kind of crap.
|
Senior Member
|
30. November 2009 @ 12:04 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by IguanaC64:
Just one more reason I won't own a Microsoft console. I keep seeing prices come down, but then I keep reading stories like these that remind me why I don't want to support companies that do this kind of crap.
Sounds like you don't own much technology then do you. All companies that make a proprietary or patented device have such terms like this. If a company wants to make a controller, memory unit, game, or any other accessory for a game console be it Microsoft, Nintendo, or Sony they need approval and proper licensing and the manufacturer can deny them because it is their console and they own the patents on how the controllers, games, or accessories communicate with the system.
When it comes to the software either on the console or computer itself or the software/games you buy you do not own them either. What you pay for is a license to use it. The only way you own a piece of software is if you wrote it yourself and making any kind of MOD to a console like that is changing the software so you violated the license agreement.
|
|
Zaurett
Newbie
|
19. January 2010 @ 17:02 |
Link to this message
|
I think Datel may have a case here. Although Microsoft own the 360 console etc etc, they can't control whether or not a competitors product works on it and still maintain a fair market with adequate consumer choice. Thinking about it in other terms if Microsoft win the case, and set a precedence, then they could legally prevent 3rd party developed games to work on their consoles as well. Why let Activision make shed-loads of money off of their console when they can just put Halo and other MS Game Studios content out there? Sure, there are people who wouldn't buy those games, but for those of us who can only afford the 1 console, we'd be stuck with our lack of choice.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. January 2010 @ 19:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Zaurett:
I think Datel may have a case here. Although Microsoft own the 360 console etc etc, they can't control whether or not a competitors product works on it and still maintain a fair market with adequate consumer choice. Thinking about it in other terms if Microsoft win the case, and set a precedence, then they could legally prevent 3rd party developed games to work on their consoles as well. Why let Activision make shed-loads of money off of their console when they can just put Halo and other MS Game Studios content out there? Sure, there are people who wouldn't buy those games, but for those of us who can only afford the 1 console, we'd be stuck with our lack of choice.
errr... 3rd party devs pay licensing fees you know....
Hardware devs do as well but MS has the system so screwy its a mess....
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. January 2010 @ 19:09
|
