Supreme Court says you own your devices

Big Phoenix said:

What is the catch?

Click to expand...

The catch is they can still sue you under contract but not under patent law.

This really only affects 3rd party companies so like repair shops and companies that refurbish/refinish/sell upgraded components - the company can simply sue the individual for breaching contract. This has little implication in the world of say, consoles, if Xbox can detect intrusion without an agent - for instance they can say EULA is only Microsoft repairs and there's a chip that if you don't input a code it prevents all access to MS services forever. So they can both detect and enforce the contract component, but they can't sue the repair shop now under patent infringement.

I don't see this having a big impact in a lot of the major items people use, just due to the fact that the software component is still there. Printer cartridges are the perfect example because they are literally just 'Da Beers Printers' controlling the flow of spice.

Good thing EFI fuel systems weren't putting gas into a vehicle through a cartridge that could only be refilled by the respective corporation using Exxon or Mobil fuel.

Lendarios said:

This case clears the way also to the import of items from another country and undercut the US prices.

For example if ms sells Xbox in India at a fraction of the price, you can buy those from there and import it to the USA.

Click to expand...

Not really because they can still region lock them. It just means the importing company can't be sued for it under patent infringement. That's the trick, it only really works for non electronic or non networked devices. I don't even know what would qualify? Like you can't even import most plug-in electronics from Europe because of the plugs.

Mario Speedwagon said:

I admittedly read almost nothing about this, but that doesn't seem to have anything to do with this case.

Click to expand...

It did but only tangentially. There are two issues- 1) whether a contractual agreement domestically that is broken by a consumer causing the cartridge to be procured by the remanu company meant that patent law was not extinguished by the contractually forbidden but not illegal sale of the cartridge and thus creating infringement liability for the remanu company and 2) whether the theory of patent law (and thus extinguished rights) applied to imported cartridges that were sold overseas or of jurisdiction of those laws.

Basically it's a two part ruling, part one is fuck you, printer companies, and part two is fuck you, printer companies, you didn't effectively withhold patent rights to the imported cartridges properly under foreign laws so too bad. I just read it quickly so it's a little unclear but it seems that companies could change their distribution contracts to prevent importation of regional goods to the US and somehow then have a claim on their US patent in the future, but they didn't.

Lanx said:

So what happens when YOU(the owner) puts a modchip in your new Xbox/PS, and you use THIER network, that detects your modchip and Bricks your machine.

Whom can sue whom?

Click to expand...

Probably going to cause a shift to permanently blocking your device from the network, but not bricking it. However, as more games that have no reason to require online connectivity, you end up in the same place, in that you can't access the network. Hopefully that will lead to returned games and cause losses to the developers who mandate that shit.

tyen said:

what does that mean for farm machinery?

Click to expand...

Nothing. Unfortunately that's copyright law, this is patent law. It's retarded that software can even be copyrighted--it should be kept to patents, but that's where we are. The copyright office though has issued a ton of exceptions lately on farm equipment and cars, they, as far as I know.

Lendarios said:

My job is at a patent analysis lawfirm. We track and analyse cases like this.

If anyone has any specific question, I can ask one of our patent lawyers. They love to talk about this stuff.

Click to expand...

Why don't you just focus on sweeping the floor and leave them alone

Lanx said:

what if you bought your Xbox second-hand, from one of these refurb shops, and they either
1. didn't know about the modchip or
2. put it in deliberately for obvious purposes

I mean wouldn't this be like putting a rice racer spoiler on a honda civic, and then honda dealer denys service cuz your honda civic makes honda look bad?

Click to expand...

No difference. Your property rights do not extend to Sony/MS' network. If your hardware isn't in compliance, then return it to seller or you have a case against them in small claims court. The only change likely to come out of this is no more bricking, because you would have a case against Sony/MS for damage to your equipment.

Lendarios said:

My job is at a patent analysis lawfirm. We track and analyse cases like this.

If anyone has any specific question, I can ask one of our patent lawyers. They love to talk about this stuff.

Click to expand...

You work for @Cad??

Lendarios said:

I provide my Cad's with all the data they need to make their decision.

Click to expand...

So no decision is ever made? Sounds like a not so good business plan. You have to go back.