Support NeoGAF

[liquidtmd]

Target and the buyer both knew that this product may not function before the launch date

Not necessarily true in either case

Shipping a product that does not work until the implicitly agreed date shifts the risk of loss to the buyer, which is not acceptable and therefore Target has to accept the product back and make a proper performance.

If it 'shifts the risk of loss to the buyer', why should Target have to accept the product back? The product 'did' work. MS intervened and now it doesn't. Which again implies its the buyers fault.

Which again is fucked up

 

[hwy_61]

I'm assuming the video has been banned on the grounds of transmitting an artistic work. The artistic work in this case being the packaging material where copyright subsists, namely the logos, or possibly literary works in terms of any manuals he may have shown.

If you try to go to the video's page, it says something about copyright.

 

[PirateKing]

Right, and he isn't being punished if he has remedies available, which he does. Target and the buyer both knew that this product may not function before the launch date and therefore the goods are non-conforming and performance has not been fulfilled. Shipping a product that does not work until the implicitly agreed date shifts the risk of loss to the buyer, which is not acceptable and therefore Target has to accept the product back and make a proper performance.

Why are you making assumptions that buyers are fully aware of what they legitimately paid for? And why does that matter? He was not warned nor is it written on TOS (as far as I know, I could be wrong) about what he can and can't do with his console. It's pure bullshit. Pure and simple.

 

[BigDug13]

You were sold a product that is tied to a service that can reasonably be expected to begin at the date of launch and the date of promised delivery. There is a mandatory date 1 patch even.

Except his day 1 patch was available and he downloaded it. So Microsoft provided the services for his console on the day he used it. Microsoft allowed the console to be used early through their own actions.

 

[LabouredSubterfuge]

No they just made a bullshit copyright claim. It's too easy to do that on Youtube and people abuse it. See the recent incident with Totalbiscuit where a company made a copyright claim because they didn't like how he talked about their game.

I see, well I'm unfamiliar with their takedown process, I'm just saying they may have grounds to do a takedown, even though the actual damage incurred to MS is almost non-existent. Thank the DMCA I guess.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

No they just made a bullshit copyright claim. It's too easy to do that on Youtube and people abuse it. See the recent incident with Totalbiscuit where a company made a copyright claim because they didn't like how he talked about their game.

It is also a 2-3 minute process to file a counter claim, which is perhaps even more abuse-able assuming you can convince some random person at youtube that you have a legitimate fair use claim. At that point the copyright "claimer" has to file a lawsuit or the infringement is automatically removed.

 

[Zephyrus]

It's official. The Anti-Microsoft crowd is better at wielding a pitchfork than the Anti-Apple crowd.

Thankfully Microsoft has plenty of pro-microsoft's ready to cushion those pitchforks with their faces.

In other news I discovered that microsoft fans are masochists.

 

[Massa]

The Microsoft I know would have paid people to hype their shit early on the internet. Who are these hacks that were put in charge of Xbox?

 

[USC-fan]

No, I just love all games and manufacturers. I'm not going to sit here spitting on MS like you guys because I'm on some anti MS quest.

The guy used a product weeks early knowing he shouldn't be, and even used it for self promotion. Then he gets punished and is upset about it enough to cry about it to the world.

I find it justified and completely within reason.

so shoot me for not bearing a Sony emblazoned lightsaber.

Wow fanboy warrior much? On a "anti Ms quest."

It was a shitty move by Ms. Guy used a product he paid for in a lawful matter. He did nothing wrong and was doing good pr for the xbone.

 

[Yagharek]

No, I just love all games and manufacturers. I'm not going to sit here spitting on MS like you guys because I'm on some anti MS quest.

The guy used a product weeks early knowing he shouldn't be, and even used it for self promotion. Then he gets punished and is upset about it enough to cry about it to the world.

I find it justified and completely within reason.

so shoot me for not bearing a Sony emblazoned lightsaber.

Projection much?

This isnt a crusade against a company, its an argument as to why they shouldnt be using the nuclear option on the consoles/accounts of people who paid $500 for a product.

If you dont like it, go find $500 of your own money, burn it, and then try and empathise with the guy who was on the receiving end of microsoft fraud.

 

[syllogism]

Not necessarily true in either case



If it 'shifts the risk of loss to the buyer', why should Target have to accept the product back? The product 'did' work. MS intervened and now it doesn't. Which again implies its the buyers fault.

Which again is fucked up

It only shifts the risk for issues that weren't already present at the time of performance. Target definitely knew or should have known that the product would likely not function properly until the agreed date of delivery. Regardless, getting (temporarily) banned is effectively the same as Microsoft for instance not offering the mandatory day 1 patch until the actual launch date.

 

[Derpcrawler]

I'm assuming the video has been banned on the grounds of transmitting an artistic work. The artistic work in this case being the packaging material where copyright subsists, namely the logos, or possibly literary works in terms of any manuals he may have shown.

It doesn't apply to this case, since it falls under fair use and reviews, he was reviewing the hardware/package/whatever. Those don't fall under copyright law... anywhere.

 

[Paganmoon]

You were sold a product that is tied to a service that can reasonably be expected to begin at the date of launch and the date of promised delivery. There is a mandatory date 1 patch even.

Which was available to him. He did install said patch...

 

[Y2Kev]

That's really a shame to me. Not sure why they should have to do this.

 

[XenoRaven]

I was actually starting to warm up to the idea of an Xbone down the road. Instead, I'm cancelling my Gold subscription today. It's amazing to me that there are enough people that don't care about stuff like this that companies like Microsoft can continue to treat their costumers like shit.

 

[hwy_61]

I can't defend Microsoft here. I mean, if it were me that got my console early, I probably wouldn't have gone on YouTube and twitter showing pictures and shit. But that's because I'm paranoid as hell. Someone who didn't know how crazy Microsoft was probably would go on YouTube and twitter, because they're fucking super excited. They wanna show the world this shit. It's not they're fault, and they shouldn't be punished for it.

 

[syllogism]

Except his day 1 patch was available and he downloaded it. So Microsoft provided the services for his console on the day he used it. Microsoft allowed the console to be used early through their own actions.

If it is up to Microsoft to decide whether the product can be used early, they can also stop the performance of the service at any time. What's more, automatically offering the patch does not mean that the early usage was allowed on their part. The point of mentioning the patch was that buyers or at least Target knew that the product may not function before the agreed date.

 

[CambriaRising]

Says who? When did he agree to this? At what point was this an agreed upon term? Where's the fine print that says he's not allowed to use an Xbone until the street date?

The apologists for this type of shit are absolutely insane. You saw them in the halo 4 ban threads for legit copies as well.

 

[Pie and Beans]

Love how hyped the guy was and the mostly positive stuff he was saying, and now thats all going to belt into banned bitterness.

Congrats MS and your PR, you have absolutely no fucking idea what you're doing. You'd think the sheer gulf in pre-orders would have stripped that hubris away, but nope. Here we are again. Penello doubling down on DRM Online future and this shitshow of banning because they can.

 

[Petrae]

Right, and he isn't being punished if he has remedies available, which he does. Target and the buyer both knew that this product may not function before the launch date and therefore the goods are non-conforming and performance has not been fulfilled. Shipping a product that does not work until the implicitly agreed date shifts the risk of loss to the buyer, which is not acceptable and therefore Target has to accept the product back and make a proper performance.

Target might have known, but do consumers? "Hey, I got my console early! Let's fire this baby up!" is what 90% of customers would do. Unless, of course, there is explicit "DO NOT USE BEFORE 11/22" on the packaging.

 

[BishopLamont]

Why would they turn good news into bad news? Hell they didn't even do it the right way. Oh Microsoft..

 

[C Jones]

And why would they ban the unboxing video? From what I saw he didn't give any info that Major didn't cover in his own unboxing video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbrmAsxJPv4

 

[Mugatu]

It only shifts the risk for issues that weren't already present at the time of performance. Target definitely knew or should have known that the product would likely not function properly until the agreed date of delivery. Regardless, getting (temporarily) banned is effectively the same as Microsoft for instance not offering the mandatory day 1 patch until the actual launch date.

Except that Microsoft has told others that they are free to ya their early consoles in the verge article so what you're saying is proven false.mhe wasn't banned because of early release he was banned for making a YouTube video. And console bans have not been temporary before, granted maybe that's changed but there is no evidence for that.

 

[CaptainTiptop]

Microsoft are allergic to good PR.

This guy wasn't playing a pirated game early on the 360. He hasn't broken any rules. How very shitty of MS.

And I don't even understand how they can copyright claim an unboxing video.

 

[test_account]

serious case of Stockholm syndrome in this thread.

Stockholm Syndrome

I'm not sure that it is Stockholm Syndrome. Stockholm Syndrome was when a group of hostages started sympathizing for the hostage takers. I think the guy(s) who got banned would have to feel that it was wrong of Microsoft to do it, but still they would sorry for Microsoft in this case for it to be Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[CrisKre]

Right, and he isn't being punished if he has remedies available, which he does. Target and the buyer both knew that this product may not function before the launch date and therefore the goods are non-conforming and performance has not been fulfilled. Shipping a product that does not work until the implicitly agreed date shifts the risk of loss to the buyer, which is not acceptable and therefore Target has to accept the product back and make a proper performance.

You are not getting the point. The buyer received a product he paid for in the mail. If it doesn't work as it should someone should be made responsible.
Furthermore, m$ issued a copyright infringement on his youtube channel. This is not just about keeping him out of live. Its about controlling the message. And its gross.

 

[WAR recon zero]

sony does not do this.

stop buying ms consoles.

 

[syllogism]

Target might have known, but do consumers? "Hey, I got my console early! Let's fire this baby up!" is what 90% of customers would do. Unless, of course, there is explicit "DO NOT USE BEFORE 11/22" on the packaging.

Because Target knew or should have known, they have to take the product back and compensate the buyer

You are not getting the point. The buyer received a product he paid for in the mail. If it doesn't work as it should someone should be made responsible.
Furthermore, m$ issued a copyright infringement on his youtube channel. This is not just about keeping him out of live. Its about controlling the message. And its gross.

I've consistently asserted that Target is responsible.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

The people defending these anti consumer bannings are making me really fucking see how toxic of a place NeoGAF is. Jesus christ what is wrong with you people

What's really wrong is people like you who seem to never have anything good to say, at least when it's about the XBox.

The future of Gears of War thread and your response,

pretty sure this is code for "the last game sold like shit so we're done with it"

XBox One and how quickly it boots and your reply is this,

Until it RRODs from being on 24/7

I honestly think some of you guys need to step back because you're getting way too worked up trying to antagonize anyone who doesn't share the same hatred as you. So if anyone is toxic it appears to be you.

That's really a shame to me. Not sure why they should have to do this.

Same. Hopefully the ban will be lifted when the release date arrives. They don't need any more bad press.

 

[Vizzeh]

Love how hyped the guy was and the mostly positive stuff he was saying, and now thats all going to belt into banned bitterness.

Congrats MS and your PR, you have absolutely no fucking idea what you're doing. You'd think the sheer gulf in pre-orders would have stripped that hubris away, but nope. Here we are again. Penello doubling down on DRM Online future and this shitshow of banning because they can.

This just hammers the nail in on their "business, corporate, read from the rule book response" they treat us like robots and customers and not human beings/gamers.

 

[spookyfish]

In this episode of FanBoys: Defenders of the Indefensible ...

 

[Mistwalker]

Jesus, so many comments here go way beyond Stockholm Syndrome. Forget being an apologist for Microsoft, some of you must have a raging hatred for your fellow consumers and their rights. I can't think of any other reason for the frothing defense of a company that this year has shown itself to be so anti-consumer, including its actions here.

Absolutely disgusting.

 

[Salex_]

It amazes me how far some people will go to defend Microsoft. It's as if they get paid to do so. Reminds me of around E3 when we found out of all the anti consumer shit Microsoft was doing amd people were eating it up and saying it was "just like Steam".

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

Do you figure that MS broke the day 1 patch up into multiple pieces? Maybe they said "Okay, most of this isn't needed on day 1." and just decided to go live with the bare minimum needed in the patch to get things up and running. There very well might be new features that will come out shortly after launch that were once a part of the rumored mega patch.

 

[ebullientprism]

This thread is moving fast so forgive me if its already been answered but what did he get banned for? Specifically what TOS did he violate?

Embargoes are for the press so this guy isnt beholden to them. Is it under the TOS that they can ban you for just putting up videos of the machine before a specific date? Or did MS use the blanket "We can pull services whenever we want without ever giving a valid reason" bit from the TOS??

Its serious BS that a brand new 500$ console is now worthless to him.

 

[SnakeEyez]

INCORRECT.

Microsoft bans for 2 reasons

1) pirated games

2) modified consoles

pirated games they do based on the street date of a game. I have had to give Microsoft my gamertag numerous times when i've had early software for previews etc.

Forza Horizon. I had the game a week before general release and my gamertag was listed as 'green' hence i wasn't banned for playing it online early. This is very common for people.

The same would be with Xbox One right now with media and staff. All gamertags would be green listed.

so yes, its automated

So you're telling me that if I were to get a Xbox one game about a week before release I'd get banned?? That's terrible especially since stores around my way are constantly breaking street dates by a good amount of time.

 

[hwy_61]

In this episode of FanBoys: Defenders of the Indefensible ...

Ahhh damn it, its another rerun!!!

 

[TheJLC]

No, I just love all games and manufacturers. I'm not going to sit here spitting on MS like you guys because I'm on some anti MS quest.

The guy used a product weeks early knowing he shouldn't be, and even used it for self promotion. Then he gets punished and is upset about it enough to cry about it to the world.

I find it justified and completely within reason.

so shoot me for not bearing a Sony emblazoned lightsaber.

I hope you're not serious.... Many people outraged over this are not outraged because it's Microsoft, but because their actions are completely unjustified towards a consumer. Banning someone over the mistake of another company is ridiculous and especially when this user was a fan trying to show the cool features this new console has.

 

[twobear]

Leave it to MS to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I hope his console gets unbanned.

 

[rjcc]

Don't think so, that might require Journalism.

No MS comment yet.

it happened at 3AM ET on saturday morning. I'm not sure what you think journalism is or is not, but the number of people reachable then is about 0. I've contacted the microsoft reps I know, if there's any response it will be posted

also, the tweet from the other guy who said microsoft told him he's "free to do with as I please"

https://twitter.com/connorJcosgrove/status/399053271467167744

his previous tweet saying he's selling it on ebay:
https://twitter.com/connorJcosgrove/status/399047038731423744

he's apparently been offered $2k for it already.

I didn't publish, because it may have only applied to whether or not he could sell it, and / or could have come from a phone rep which means almost nothing.

 

[Paganmoon]

sony does not do this.

stop buying ms consoles.

As far as we know, we haven't seen PS4:s in the wild to actually say Sony wouldn't do the same. But I'd see it as unlikely yes.

Because Target knew or should have known, they have to take the product back and compensate the buyer

I've consistently asserted that Target is responsible.

But it's not Target that got "punished" it's the consumer. Consumer having to take the product back is still punishing the consumer for what Target did.

 

[H_Prestige]

Says who? When did he agree to this? At what point was this an agreed upon term? Where's the fine print that says he's not allowed to use an Xbone until the street date?

Don't expect him to answer this question.

 

[The Boat]

One has to wonder what the folks at MS responsible for this were thinking. Haven't they been getting badvenough press?

 

[Mugatu]

This thread is moving fast so forgive me if its already been answered but what did he get banned for? Specifically what TOS did he violate?

Embargoes are for the press so this guy isnt beholden to them. Is it under the TOS that they can ban you for just putting up videos of the machine before a specific date? Or did MS use the blanket "We can pull services whenever we want without ever giving a valid reason" bit from the TOS??

Its serious BS that a brand new 500$ console is now worthless to him.

I don't think he was given a reason. It was a console ban not an account ban and I don't think they give reasons for that, your console just won't connect to Live again and will say that it is banned.

Most of us assume it was for the YouTube unboxing video because other people who got their xbox ones early weren't banned and at least one called up MS and was told that he is free to use it.

 

[Chittagong]

This is ridiculous. Unless the product ships with a big sticker seal saying "do not or show before 22 Nov or be banned" it is entirely unfair to ban him. It can not be the responsibility of the consumer to keep track of marketing calendars of corporations.

How hard would it have been to have a mandatory day one patch not available before 22 Nov and avoid this mess altogether?

 

[BigDug13]

If it is up to Microsoft to decide whether the product can be used early, they can also stop the performance of the service at any time. What's more, automatically offering the patch does not mean that the early usage was allowed on their part. The point of mentioning the patch was that buyers or at least Target knew that the product may not function before the agreed date.

But it did function before the agreed date. Therefore the BUYER did nothing wrong.

 

[Lunzio]

I think the problem is that MS wants to hype up the console on their terms. The way that they probably see it is a) not close enough to the PS4 launch (yes, only a few days left, but they want that stuff hitting as close as possible) to steal too much thunder, b) not close enough to their own launch.

I wouldn't have told too many people if I got the console early though. The ban was a risk and we all knew it.

 

[Allforce]

What a crazy turn of events, I went to bed at 2 AM actually pretty sold on the Xbone and thinking "hey they turned it around, this looks awesome". Now I find out they were total dicks to this guy.

Did they ban the console or just his Live ID?

 

[TeaFan]

Its not as if he was slagging it off either. He probably did more for xbone pr in those few hours than their clusterfuck of an organisation has done all year

 

[syllogism]

But it did function before the agreed date. Therefore the BUYER did nothing wrong.

I've at no point suggested that the buyer did something wrong, which is why he can return the product and get his money and expenses back, if he opts to do that.