Notice of Account Ban measures

[Argon]

My point is that if modification of the programming of video game software for personal use was illegal under copyright law (and Nintendo certainly argued fiercely that it was under the "creation of derivative works" clause in 1990), there wouldn't have been (several) products sold on the open market for 20 years that did exactly that.

Thanks for explaining 👍. By your measure I can only deduce that in your view murder is also legal because it happens....an interesting perspective!

 

[seanneedscar]

 

[LeadFootLiam]

Agreed 100%. I was initially reluctant to hack any cars, however after I made my first few, I realised it's the most fun I've had in GT5 for well over a year.

GT5 offline is boring and too small with pointless AI
GT5 Seasonals got boring after a few months with the chase the rabbit races
GT5 online is flawed with poor coding, lag, idiots and noobs and the same cars dominating PP races.

With hacked cars, it was something new to enjoy. You could create a truly unique car. Realistic hybrids added greater variety to races and allowed replicas of real cars to be made.

'GT5 The Real Driving Simulator'
Part swaps are part of a real driving experience. A part that until recently Gran Turismo was missing.

And if someone say that hybrids are not real so shouldn't be part of GT5:
Red Bull X2010/2011- Not Real
FGT- Not Real
Polyphony Go Karts- Not real
GT Super Touring Cars- Not Real
RM Cars - Not Real
TC Cars - Not Real

PD needs to read this post. Couldn't agree more.

 

[Exorcet]

Thanks for explaining 👍. By your measure I can only deduce that in your view murder is also legal because it happens....an interesting perspective!

You would be wrong, quite clearly. Sony, etc were powerless to stop devices like gameshark because those devices were completely legal.

 

[Tornado]

Thanks for explaining 👍. By your measure I can only deduce that in your view murder is also legal because it happens....an interesting perspective!

Sure, why not. I'll just stick to the legal precedent that states that modification of game code doesn't automatically run afoul of copyright law as you are stating. Specifically the:

Having paid Nintendo a fair return, the consumer may experiment with the product and create new variations of play, for personal enjoyment, without creating a derivative work.

Part of the ruling.

 

[NFSCARBON1]

Thanks for explaining 👍. By your measure I can only deduce that in your view murder is also legal because it happens....an interesting perspective!

The difference is you could walk into any game shop, supermarket or go on Amazon and buy a cheat disk legally.

You cannot legally buy a hitmans services.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Dude you're going to be so disappointed next week...lol...

 

[C_Raccoon23]

Not sure if I've been banned but I don't care if I do. I'm not concerned about not be allowed to play a game that was stale and boring before the hybriding began. No skin off my nose if they do get me.

 

[Lock2Lock]

Dude you're going to be so disappointed next week...lol...

Yep next week when they are still there he is going to be like...

 

[CodeRedR51]

Not sure if I've been banned but I don't care if I do. I'm not concerned about not be allowed to play a game that was stale and boring before the hybriding began. No skin off my nose if they do get me.

This too.

 

[SirAlanClive]

My point is that if modification of the programming of video game software for personal use was illegal under copyright law (and Nintendo certainly argued fiercely that it was under the "creation of derivative works" clause in 1990), there wouldn't have been (several) products sold on the open market for 20 years that did exactly that.

Game Shark Cheat codes are codes embedded in the software for development and testing purposes. One usually accesses them by typing a tilde (~) on a PC or by using some button combo on a PSX and then writing them into the console which opens. They have nothing to do with game modification. The game developers keep them secret for as long as possible but they usually get found by some smart guy (who doubtless hacks the game in order to see them). Using them is not illegal. Changing the code is.

 

[seanneedscar]

The picture I posted was just a little bit of levity. I'm well aware this is just a scare tactic from PD and they still have no way of policing hybrids

On top of that. All I do online is 600-650pp nurburgring races. And I never run into hybrids there. And when I do its some stupid skyline with 1000 horsepower that always finishes last because it handles like arse. No problem there 👍

However I must be honest I stopped drag racing entirely because of Hybrids, would be nice to have that option open to me again. And that's that, as they say.

 

[MiuraSV777]

Yep next week when they are still there he is going to be like...

I 'd at that picture.

 

[Tornado]

Game Shark Cheat codes are codes embedded in the software for development and testing purposes. One usually accesses them by typing a tilde (~) and then writing them into the console which opens. They have nothing to do with game modification. The game developers keep them secret for as long as possible but they usually get found by some smart guy (who doubtless hacks the game in order to see them). Using them is not illegal. Changing the code is.

Not always they weren't. Cheat software directly modified the programming the game in many cases, and with the exception of GT3 and GT5 was even how people hybrided cars.


Plus the bit from the Nintendo vs. Galoob ruling from above.

 

[SirAlanClive]

Not always they weren't. Cheat software directly modified the programming the game in many cases, and with the exception of GT3 and GT5 was even how people hybrided cars.


Plus the bit from the Nintendo vs. Galoob ruling from above.

I was wrong. Gameshark does indeed modify the gaming experience. I just read this (Nintendo v Galoob). But it doesn't create a 'derivative', something a hybrid certainly does.

 

[Argon]

You would be wrong, quite clearly. Sony, etc were powerless to stop devices like gameshark because those devices were completely legal.

I think actually you'll find that YOU sir are completely WRONG and if you would care to do a little research you would find out why.

Sure, why not. I'll just stick to the legal precedent that states that modification of game code doesn't automatically run afoul of copyright law as you are stating. Specifically the:

Part of the ruling.

Thanks for raising a completely irrelevant and meaningless case that has absolutely no bearing on this. Perhaps if you had taken the time to even read the ruling you would have noticed that the reason GameShark was not deemed in violation was simply because it made NO PERMANENT changes to the game code. The GameShark device only had any operational effect whilst plugged in. The end user was completely innocent as they had legitimately purchased a commercially available product and so the action was ultimately between Galoob (the producer of GameShark) and Nintendo but it was thrown out because of the way in which the device worked.

The difference is you could walk into any game shop, supermarket or go on Amazon and buy a cheat disk legally.

You cannot legally buy a hitmans services.

Hmmmm!

 

[SirAlanClive]

This seems to be what Nintendo vs. Galoob ended up with:

manufacturer of product that allowed users to alter codes transmitted between video gaming console and game cartridge did not infringe console manufacturer’s exclusive right, under federal copyright law, to create derivative works

Which is irrelevant here, as a hybrid car is most certainly a derivative work.

Case closed

 

[Lucas]

IMO, bans should not be applied retroactively. If you cheated in the past, you should not be banned unless you continue to cheat.

 

[Tornado]

I think actually you'll find that YOU sir are completely WRONG and if you would care to do a little research you would find out why.

You just got served, Exorcet.

Thanks for raising a completely irrelevant and meaningless case that has absolutely no bearing on this. Perhaps if you had taken the time to even read the ruling you would have noticed that the reason GameShark was not deemed in violation was simply because it made NO PERMANENT changes to the game code.

As opposed to hybriding in GT5, which actually makes no changes to the game code at all (edit: in the context used here) and in fact just changes a file that the game code spits out.

The GameShark device only had any operational effect whilst plugged in.

Unless you saved your game...


You know, like if you used your Gameshark/Action Replay to hybrid in GT1/GT2/GT3/GT4/GTPSP.

The end user was completely innocent as they had legitimately purchased a commercially available product and so the action was ultimately between Galoob (the producer of GameShark) and Nintendo but it was thrown out because of the way in which the device worked.

The end user was completely innocent because, again:

Having paid Nintendo a fair return, the consumer may experiment with the product and create new variations of play, for personal enjoyment, without creating a derivative work.

 

[Argon]

*....snip...*Case closed

Oh I wish that were true Alan but this seems a little like pushing water uphill with your nose

Edit: @ Tornado....I'm really sorry but you are incorrect in your assumptions, I know you beleive that you are correct but you are not. That Nintendo case is not even close to what is going on here and the save data IS considered part of the intellectual property of PD.

I apologise to you and Exorcet if I have offended you but I'm done here and have no more inclination or patience to keep stating the same thing over and over.

 

[Starciller]

How would they even know you we're hacking anyway? You would have to have been in the TT's and the video being there for them to know you had a hacked car. I'm really going to feel bad for those people that moded the cars realistically and them getting banned.

 

[hitek9]

Not sure if I've been banned but I don't care if I do. I'm not concerned about not be allowed to play a game that was stale and boring before the hybriding began. No skin off my nose if they do get me.

This. I havent played gt5 ina few weeks, this has brought me back. If they would have included this in the game like forza, maybe i'd still be playing. Note: i only own a ps3

 

[Ills1999]

The wording is simply the ID's.. however...

I don't see any reason for them to be completely honest with people when they're treating this as a breach of their online usage agreement.

This is interesting. I expect full honesty and transparency and proof when accusing someone of breaching an agreement.

 

[christara321]

And the save data IS considered part of the intellectual property of PD.

Am so happy its not me having to argue the facts about copyright laws. Its infringments of software and programing.
Been there and done that. Openly in thread somewhere, plus privately in PMs and coming to an happy conclusion with the person involved in that..
But I guess its deja vu for me reading all whats going on here.

Good thread and a fantastic read, its great seeing everyones view on the subject. 👍
Chat soon bye for now.

 

[Ills1999]

If it's a complete ban from PSN however - that's going to seriously suck for anyone who has purchased items from the PS store..

If Sony thinks they can take away purchases made, no matter what their agreement says, I think they'll find themselves in court.

 

[arora]

Excluding the 'I play a lawyer on the internet' the protection of game save data now has to do with dlc and such. Prior to that invention we could always have/copy/trade/share, etc our saves.

 

[NFSCARBON1]

How would they even know you we're hacking anyway? You would have to have been in the TT's and the video being there for them to know you had a hacked car. I'm really going to feel bad for those people that moded the cars realistically and them getting banned.

I suppose they probably have a way of checking the coding of individual cars in your garage against a predefined list. Any anomalies would quickly be found. However this wouldn't pick up DLC cars that have been modded into the game, provided the cars themselves haven't been hybrided.

I'm thinking that it's the hacking of paid DLC that has brought the banning about? All DLC files are hidden in everyone's game code somewhere (otherwise they wouldn't appear during online races against people who haven't purchased the DLC). If people are gaining access to paid DLC wouldn't that technically be theft?

 

[Ills1999]

How can't they? It's pretty clear to me that tampering with or modding a games hardware is violating some sorts or rights and agreements that you said you would NOT do...

People aren't allowed to jailbreak iphones or ipods, but by your logic if they don't connect it to wifi or a 4g connection it's apparently okay to do?

What do you mean "people aren't allowed to jailbreak iphones"?]

When you buy a game and a console, you own it. You absolutely have the right to modify it, if you damage the system, it's your own fault. Sony and PD, as providers of online content, are only allowed to police that service as they see fit, unless some judge somewhere rules that online service was offered as part of the package, which I doubt will happen.

 

[Lock2Lock]

I suppose they probably have a way of checking the coding of individual cars in your garage against a predefined list. Any anomalies would quickly be found. However this wouldn't pick up DLC cars that have been modded into the game, provided the cars themselves haven't been hybrided.

I'm thinking that it's the hacking of paid DLC that has brought the banning about? All DLC files are hidden in everyone's game code somewhere (otherwise they wouldn't appear during online races against people who haven't purchased the DLC). If people are gaining access to paid DLC wouldn't that technically be theft?

I think we are pretty much certain that this "banning" about was people cheating the online ranked seasonal events

 

[Slash]

I have a feeling that this may all but kill off GT5. While in the short term there will be fewer stupid HP cars roaming around causing problems, if over 50% of the online community get banned, then I can't see it surviving. Also where will the line be drawn? Most hacked cars are traded using borrow glitching. So will everyone who borrow glitched get banned too? What about people who 'farm' tickets? Or those who used multiple BDay ticket glitches way back when GT5 was released?

This could mean around 80-90% (guess) of GT5's users being banned.

GT5 was already dead.