profit = no right to protest

from slashdot:

"The Federal Court has ordered an Australian distributor to pay Nintendo over half a million dollars for selling the R4 mod chip, which allows users to circumvent technology protection measures in Nintendo's DS consoles. The distributor, RSJ IT Solutions, has been ordered to cease selling the chip through its site and any other sites it controls, as well as paying Nintendo $520,000 in damages."

[this device allows a person to store well over 300 DS games on one chip, which limits the need to even sell the games via cartridges. which could dramatically limit the cost of distribution, both financially and environmentally. R4 like devices also allow a person to create or use open source software to do things that the DS manufacturers did not intend, like run linux or ebook reader software.]

Click here to see the original Slashdot post.

my response to the slashdot post:

i think, the issue is quite clear.... so long as the original developer and distributor 'of anything' makes a profit off their work they have no room to argue that someone else has infringed on their rights. basically, if they can stay in business, they ought to just shut up!

the whole idea of copyrights wasn't to give an industry ultimate control over their own ability to maximize profits, especially not indefinitely. and anyone who whines cause they think they 'should' be making more money, after making millions, should be taken out and put down.

seriously, how petty must the corporate world get before things change? does Nintendo make games to make a profit, or does it make games so that people can enjoy them? if the earlier is true their right to do business should be revoked! making money may be required to stay in business, but making that the goal sets up a business to eventually act excessively selfish, greedy, or downright irresponsible--at the cost of actual human beings.

case and point: they sued a smaller, nobody, company because the technology they produced was used for piracy--or could be, but they still refuse to provide adequate means for people to do the awesome things that device legally allowed a user to do.

in fact, i've copied and given away ALL of my DVDs, CDs, and video games/systems. i believe wholeheartedly that maintaining a large collection of disks, cartridges, and entertainment systems is beyond irresponsible in a time where the construction and shipment of those items consumes so many better used non-renewable resources. the tonnage of plastic used to make those things, and now sitting on a shelf unused or in a land fill somewhere, is beyond unbelievable. let's not even consider the environmental cost of the energy needed to make them or the transportation fuel needed to get them to my home. i now have one hard drive, and one back up drive, where all my media is stored--though i do often copy some files to other portable devices; like my phone which functions as an MP3 player, eBook reader, handheld gaming device, etc. and my computer can emulate just about any gaming system.

furthermore, if the government had any sense at all, it would not only throw out any case brought against a company that allowed for the mass digital storage of otherwise individually sold items, but it would also sue the pants off the original developers for refusing to provide the same service. or simple provide the technology to the public itself via the development of a non-governmental non-profit organization, simply in the hopes of limiting the future distribution of waste to their already overfilling landfills. they could even use the money from the lawsuit to pay for the development of the non-profit manufacturer.

No comments:

Post a Comment