SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A class-action lawsuit involving Microsoft's Xbox 360 console has been appealed to the Supreme Court:
The Supreme Court will decide whether Microsoft must face a class-action lawsuit that claims a defect in the media giant's popular Xbox 360 console was prone to scratching game discs, rendering them unplayable.
The lawsuit alleges that vibrations or small movements of the console might cause the optical drive to scratch discs. The suit accuses Microsoft of knowing about the alleged issue before the Xbox 360 launched in 2005. According to the original lawsuit, brought in 2012, there were as many as 55,000 complaints about the scratching issue by as early as 2008.
Compared to individual suits, class action suits are much more costly to fend off and they expose companies to far greater damage awards. The Supreme Court justices did not say when they would hear Microsoft's appeal of a federal appellate court's decision (PDF) allowing the class action to go forward. But in a one-sentence note attached to an order Friday, the Supreme Court said it would focus on whether the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals—the federal appeals court that ordered the class-action to proceed—had the legal authority to review a lower court's decision nullifying the class.
Alternate coverage at Motherboard and Courthouse News Service.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Monday January 18 2016, @05:48PM
I'm not suggesting the case is without merit, in fact I've heard of discs getting scratched without moving the system. I just feel like I need to own up to this one.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 1) by ItsJustAPseudonym on Monday January 18 2016, @06:39PM
Yes, but it's pretty easy to "cause" scratches. I had my X360 vertical, and I bumped it and then grabbed it to stop it from falling over. The disk was gouged quickly and severely.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Monday January 18 2016, @06:45PM
Not a problem, because you are allowed to make back-up copies of you games, Right?
Off-topic: I just uninstalled World of Warships after actually reading the "Terms of Use" and "Privacy Policy" in addition to the EULA (which was only tolerably bad)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Monday January 18 2016, @09:50PM
Heh. This is why I don't own anything from Microsoft or Sony in the gaming industry. The day I can purchase a game, make all the backup copies of the media I want, and then never use it because it's fucking retarded when you have a hard drive and networks, I will be more amenable to giving them my money.
At least when I hacked my PS1 and XBOX, I could play all the backup copies I wanted, which is something I still get to do with most DVDs and CDs.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Tuesday January 19 2016, @06:20AM
the sony stuff is decent once custom firmware is available for it, allowing you to make and play backups. just make sure you buy the system second-hand, because fuck sony.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 18 2016, @06:43PM
I decided to turn my system vertical while the game was running and scrittttttttttttch
lol retard
(Score: 2) by Tork on Monday January 18 2016, @07:08PM
lol retard
What can I say? I learned a lesson and owned up to it. I had friends trying to talk me into taking the game back to the store for a replacement, instead I bought a new copy. If I had listened to them and the store had taken it back, I would have been passing the cost along to the store and its customers, potentially back to even you.
I was dumb when I did it, no hurt feelings there.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 3, Funny) by Tork on Monday January 18 2016, @07:12PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday January 18 2016, @08:04PM
Notably though, the cost of the media is probably only 5% of the cost of the game. It's a shame they can't/don't do a 1 for 1 exchange for a $5 or so.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Monday January 18 2016, @08:09PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday January 18 2016, @10:11PM
That may well be what they think, but a simple requirement that you return the original first would surely prevent that. They could even (gasp) deputize local shops to accept the trade on the spot and let them keep half of the $5 for their trouble.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Whoever on Tuesday January 19 2016, @03:31AM
Here is the *real* answer that they did not give you: "Because we can, so F.... you"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 19 2016, @06:22AM
Its actually, "Because fuck you, that's why".
(Score: 2) by edIII on Monday January 18 2016, @09:46PM
Uhhh, no.
Closer to %0.5, if that. Assuming that would be 25c, that's more than plentiful for a single blank DVD in a mass production environment (retail for a blank is 20c-50c). The rest of your 5% would actually just cover shipping charges. I'm assuming they're not bothering with a retail box and printed manuals, just the reprinted DVD and a single DVD mailer in the mail.
The actual cost of duplicating your copy is well less than $1, and nothing actually prevents the game publishers from effectively selling you insurance on your disk. Or.... this is crazy talk of course.... the publishers could choose to not be evil dickheads about making backup copies of your own games.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday January 18 2016, @10:09PM
Yeah, I picked 5% to be extremely generous. As usual, they want to call it a license when you want to make a copy but claim it is a physical object when you want to replace the media. Whatever gets them more money at the moment.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Monday January 18 2016, @06:56PM
I did exactly the same thing, but with my ex's Xbox. She was not a happy bunny with me.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 18 2016, @07:33PM
Never get between a woman and the smooth operation of her console :)
(Score: 2) by cmn32480 on Monday January 18 2016, @07:39PM
Is that why it's an EX-Box?
"It's a dog eat dog world, and I'm wearing Milkbone underwear" - Norm Peterson
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 18 2016, @09:07PM
Why is it so touchy? I can rotate, hell, probably toss my Wii up in the air and won't have an issue like that. My laptop too. I move my laptop around all the time while using it, including playing music CDs. Are you SURE the fault all lays with you? Is (or was) the XBox precipitously hanging on the edge of stability like an old LP player?
The part where it would involve you (if you wanted) was not whether you think it was your fault or not, but whether it was a known defect that they didn't let you know, and they covered up. In that case it would be their behavior that gets them in trouble. It is like the much misunderstood (favorite example of tort abuse critics) McDonald's hot coffee case. It wasn't that their coffee was too hot. A woman didn't win $11M simply because she spilled hot coffee on herself. It was because they knew their coffee could cause those severe burns and instead of doing anything to mitigate that (clear warnings, better cup design, lowering the coffee temperature, etc.), they made a business decision that it was financially worth taking the risk and not doing anything about it. This Microsoft thing sounds like it has some similarities to that.
In a practical sense, it will probably make no difference if you join in the case and you win. At best you'll end up with a new optical drive (unlikely), but more likely you'll get a refund for $2.99 or $10 credit in the Microsoft online store or something worthless. Microsoft would take a financial penalty, and the lawyers will end up with worthwhile compensation (they'll get something like 1/3 of the monetary damages in cash, and everyone else will get 2/3rds of the penalty in the form of coupons or some other useless crap).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 19 2016, @06:09AM
I think our system is trying to use the wrong stick to deal with this.
What we need are a few of those congressmen who said into the microphone that they would "fight for us" if we elected them to state that in the light of abuses of the DMCA, they are seriously considering amendments to fair-use copy for backup being the companies involved are not respecting the use the product to law-abiding purchasers.
Violation of electronic locks would be considered about as serious as some car dealer locking the hood of one's car so as to enforce it being serviced only by partner dealerships, and some shade tree mechanic ground the lock off so he could get in and fix the battery cable.
But, dream on... I do not think there is a single congressman with the guts to stand up to the MAFIAA. Promises are something a Congressman says to get elected, however breach of a campaign promise is not really an offense. It sure looks to me that many people no longer see disobeying the drivel passed by Congressmen at the whim of a Lobbyist as not really an offense either. Just don't get caught. Its not like you did anything wrong, rather you did something somebody else did not want you to do.