Australian court says chipping Playstations OK

[Tim]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/29/1027818507207.html

Apparently they say the ability to play imports and the hypothetical "legitimate backup" supercede the copy protection aspects.

[Sean Tudor]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/29/1027818507207.html

Apparently they say the ability to play imports and the hypothetical "legitimate backup" supercede the copy protection aspects.

It's a landmark case. It also opens the way to legalise region free DVD players in this country. I still do not condone piracy but I do believe in a free market. If I can buy my DVD's cheaper elsewhere then more power to me.

The only people jumping up and down are the Australian distributors who's cash cow is slowly evaporating before their eyes.

[Brad Grenz]

Australia has laws? Whoodathunkit.

[milo]

VIZZINI: Because Iocaine comes from Australia. As everyone knows, Australia is entirely peopled with criminals. And criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me. So, I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.

MAN IN BLACK: Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

VIZZINI: Wait 'till I get going!! ...where was I?

[Rob de los Reyes]

Apparently they say the ability to play imports and the hypothetical "legitimate backup" supercede the copy protection aspects.

I don't think that's quite what the ruling said. I think there was no assignment of relative value of one virtue against another. What the judge decided was that Sony's "copy protection" wasn't really "copy protection" within the meaning of the applicable law since it didn't stop copying. All it did was stop you from playing pirated copies; it didn't stop the copying itself. The net effect is the same for the moment, but it's actually important to note that no new grand principle has been established here.