3DS license and DRM nonsense

[Inazuma]

Maybe I missed something but from my understanding, the article was complaining about how Nintendo could brick your 3DS if they found you to be playing pirated games on it. That's nothing new. Isn't that the case with every other online capable device out there?

If you want to pirate games on your 3DS, you just need to disable the online functionality. Piracy and netplay don't usually mix. People know that.

We should be happy that Nintendo 3DS games come on cartridges we actually own them.

[CFFJR]

Is that something you're REALLY concerned about? Honestly? How about all the pictures up in your Facebook (or whatever the devil it is the kids use these days). You don't think those aren't blasted around for everyone to see? Is it just the general ooginess of the loosening of barriers that's taking place thanks to the internet?

Not personally, no. Did you read the example in the link discussing the camera company? That's the concern. It doesn't relate to me directly, but is something to consider. This, to be specific:

users "grant to Nintendo a worldwide, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display your User Content in whole or in part and to incorporate your User Content in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed, including for promotional or marketing purposes

Which comes out to: we'll use your likeness and property in any we please, and we don't have to pay you for it.

Is that likely to happen? Not really. Is it bullshit that its allowed? Yes.

Frankly it bothers me that license agreements are getting more and more invasive. There's also the whole "You don't own this, you paid us to let you borrow it" thing.

If you think its a non issue, then ok, I get it. I'm not going to try to change your mind about it.

[MrPopo]

Frankly it bothers me that license agreements are getting more and more invasive.

Fair enough. I certainly come in on the side of "honestly, I don't care" because of how information dissemination is going these days. The horse is already out of the barn.

There's also the whole "You don't own this, you paid us to let you borrow it" thing.

Which is a whole different kettle of fish. I got into a big discussion with Niode about it in one of the PS3 threads. The concept of software and hardware working in concert is a relatively new thing. In the old days everything was hardware (and I'm extending this to things like cars and steak knives). You were free to do whatever you wanted to it, but at the same time many companies had disclaimers on their warranties that disallowed it if you wanted to get official support. So you were free to decide if you want to do that repair job yourself or not (or put on that really nifty racing stripe).

Now we have this more intangible world of services. This game won't run on firmware older than X. You have to be updated to connect to the official network. You still have the same freedom of choice that you always did, but now there's more you stand to lose from exercising it. And many of these services are things that are going to go away in 5-10 years. As we saw with the original Xbox the online services will be shut off sometime in the next generation. That's why I don't get up in arms about this. The companies aren't saying you can't use your hardware the way you want. What they are saying is that if you want to connect to their services you have to obey certain rules. That seems very fair to me. We've been dealing with something similar for the past 100 years; they're called traffic laws. You can do pretty much whatever you want on your own personal plot of land; let your 3 year old drive the Miata around if you like. It's only when you want to use the city-owned roads that you have to follow their rules.

[wip3outguy7]

I thought Nintendo was above what Apple does.

I hope that's sarcasm.

[env963]

What Nintendo is the devil...

Screw that, i dont have any plans on a 3DS, $250?

[CFFJR]

Fair enough. I certainly come in on the side of "honestly, I don't care" because of how information dissemination is going these days. The horse is already out of the barn.

That's true.

I try not to care most times, but sometimes things get particularly invasive (like this nintendo thing) and it strikes me all over again. I admit however, that I occasionally get caught up in "slippery slope" thinking on this subject. I genuinely worry about how far its going to go.

As for the licensing thing, it certainly is a different argument. I just kinda mentioned it offhand. I agree with your stance really, primarily because its not going away. Its something one must either accept or be left behind on.

It just falls to the consumer to decide what things are worth the cost.

[AznKhmerBoi]

i dont really mind about bricking the syst because of tempering with it, but i do mind about them being able to collect data like photos. Thats not cool Nintendo

[wootcube]

The photo thing creeps me out. But I've also never known of anybody taking pictures off themselves with their DS's...

When I first heard about their bricking thing I thought it was a pretty cool idea. If you buy their games you get a cool little log of what you played, when you played it, and for how long. If you decided to use a flash cart your system might get messed up with the updates. So the DRM actually does something useful (and something I'm interested in - I always like checking to see how long I've played something if the option is available) instead of making playing games inconvenient.

Either way, I doubt I'll get one before the 3ds2 or whatever comes out.

[irixith]

If only this were the most poignant issue the 3DS faces.

::Off topic::

Are you always so pessimistic about EVERYTHING?

Only on my good days.

[MrPopo]

The photo thing creeps me out. But I've also never known of anybody taking pictures off themselves with their DS's...

You've never seen Face Raiders.