Are we saying that the 'burden of proof' i.e one solitary eBay listing would be enought to convict a person? On top of the fact that the machine was stolen/destroyed in the interim... That a judge/jury would 'actually' convict based on this? A listing ANYONE could make at any time? I just don't see it. Remember, they have to PROVE you are lying. They cannot do this - a reasonable excuse like "I panicked and threw it out." How on earth do you prove I didn't? Okay, I 'tampered with evidence' but the console is gone, and this line of defence was admitted from the start (ish). Would either MS or a judge even contemplate taking this case any further and incur an astronomical legal fee? These legal teams are going to be paid a lot more than 10k in salaries... He bought it at a garage sale, perfectly oblivious to what it was... Again, where on earth is the crime committed that would actually see him/her convicted of anything? Sounds to me like a lot of guilty until proven innocent here. Still, a good read and I respect your views regardless of if we appear to differ on some points. Also IANAL (took me a while to figure that one out!)
"selling XDK’s & De Bug kits" I don't know about the rest of you, but that line looks a bit suspicious to me.. That and they have no prof that you actually have the unit in your possession. I would just as soon claim a fraudulent auction and lose my ebay account than allow them to "reclaim" their property. Having said that, I am not the one being threatened with legal action. If the OP is thoroughly convinced that Microsoft can and will target him with further legal action then his willingness to comply is understandable. -ServiceGames-
Actually, yes, it would be very possible and very likely. Again, this would be a civil action, not a Hollywood criminal showdown. They would only have to prove that the OP made an attempt to sell an item which MS believes that he did not have a proper right to. If he actually had the item and was trying to sell it, regardless of whether or not he still has it, then he would be responsible for its value. If he didn't have the item, then he was simply committing fraud and would still be screwed, legally speaking. An extreme example, but if you steal someone's computer and then throw it away, lose it or even resell it, you are still responsible to the person you stole it from. This is a similar position that MS is taking. Recovery of the legal fees would be part of the lawsuit. Don't forget punitive damages too. Those could end up being many times more than the MSRP of the XDK itself. In this case, MS could make a legitimate argument that the XDK is never and has never actually been "sold" to a game developer, merely leased. In other words, they would argue that 100% of the XDK units in existence belong to them and no one has the right to sell or transfer title to a third party. It would then be up to the OP to prove that he has a legal right to keep the XDK by showing that it was obtained in good faith from a legal source. This is where it can get a bit gray, as obtaining something in "good faith" conflicts with the "legal sources" more often than not. Usually a judge will look to make the grieving party "whole" again by specific performance of a contract (not applicable in this case, though the return of the hardware could be thought of as being similar) or through recovery of damages.
Regardless of all the discussion, thanks DeadperfecT for the info. Now my XDKs will stay in the basement for a long time^^
lol its getting to crazy to collect this type of stuff i am glad i got rid of all mine now all i have is a retail xbox 360 and ps3 ^^
I'd follow the line that I was hosting the auction for a person who gave me money in return but had no internet access. The person eventually sold the console to his cousin/friend as he told me and now they're both working oversees. As he was a bloke that I just met because we were chatting one day in a cafe and invited home because of common interests and some homosexual encounters I agreed to post the unit in exchange for money. I wish I could assist you but I have merely been caught in this by ill luck. I m as guilty as google, I was just a one-time middleman. Best of luck on your investigation and I hope you catch the bastard. -- anyway, something along those lines ;P
If they told you you had to send their kit back I bet you would've gotten away with just sending your picture and: "Hi, I'm Barc0de and I'm sexy so I'm keeping the kit. Bye" :lol: But seriously, please let us know what you did, Deadperfect. I'm quite curious if you found a way to keep it or just sent it back.
And here I was going to say Barc0de would probably be the first one to bend over (!) to please M$ Shiggsy
Just a heads up to everyone here but I now work for M$ and those of you with devkits need to be sending them back to me, no excuses. Well... there is one. If you have had homosexual relations with someone you never met before in an internet cafe - who then asked you to sell it for them, I am willing to let it slide (no, not literally). The rest of you get the fedex forms out and start packing peanuts. Yours sincerely, The police. --- On a more serious note: If these folks do send them back, they could get 'some' revenge by simply wrapping some paper round the console with no care or attention to packaging... surely that wouldnt be a crime, would it?
Lol I went gamerfreak and mairsil's advice and just sent it back. I'm out a few hundred bucks but in the grand scheme of things it's all good. Problem solved.
Copyright and trademark laws and the EULA are nothing to do with it, surely? If they want to try and get you for anything I assume it'd be handling stolen goods - and under UK law you are only doing that if it is your belief that the goods have been stolen. Since some devkits were sold outright to developers (obviously, otherwise why does an MSRP exist?) it's perfectly reasonable for you to assume you have good title to the Xbox and unreasonable for them to claim that ANY XDK or XeDK is stolen. I think. Stone
but that's the thing. Development gear isn't usually sold to a developer, they are leased. There are no rights of sale arising out of a lease or a sub-lease for that matter, and I m sure their contracts are solid. Stoned
Microsoft should pay better attention and keep better track of where their kits are going in the first place, and reclaim them at bankruptcy and such.
Yeah, exactly, I was thinking of the Acclaim kits in particular. If the company folds and MS doesn't step in to claim its assets before they're sold by the liquidators to pay their debts, surely everything bought from the liquidation sale has good title? If not Kev might be a little alarmed! Stone
I wouldn't be able to comment on the good title of the development equipment without having seen the original lease contracts - assumptions make poor arguments
