Debuggers "vanish" from Ebay.

Please, check the user auction thread...

I did not find it there, I found it using Ebay search before,
but also noticed the link here at ASSEMbler Forums.

Strange thing is... In the last 2 days, there were up for auction:
- 2x blue PS1 debuggers
- 1x green PS1 debugger
(same seller)
- 1x DTL-H10000S with some beta discs
(different seller)

All from UK. The auctions did not run out and
I had no chance to bid, since the auctions just "vanished"
away from Ebay.

Is it common that collectors put their hands on those
items before they run out by making good offers via
Email?

Just check the auction thread, that DTL-H10000S posted by
ASSEMbler in user auction thread is gone. Finished-Item Search also
does not return any results. Like if it never was there.

 

Yep, I was bidding on the dtl-h10000s and got an email saying blah blah violates ebay policy etc. I'll post the email if you want. They sometimes have purges like this, either prompted by sony (remember debugs etc are "leased" not sold) or just out of ebay policy...

 

It's illegal to sell or own dev kits (at least in the US). It's pretty common for Ebay to shut down such auctions.

 

It is a common misconception that dev/debug hardware is illegal to own in the US without permission of the company who manufactured it. It is not illegal to own the hardware, only to use the SDK software. Just because Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo say you can't legally own the hardware doesn't make it true.

There is a bit of gray area regarding the use of any embedded software (i.e. a debug dashboard) in the development hardware. So far, it would appear that the law has decided that the embedded software, by its very nature, is tied into the hardware and can be considered part of the functionality of the hardware.

I think that some of the confusion over things like this stems from the fact that developers usually sign blanket agreements with the system manufacturers, stating that all development hardware will be returned or destroyed at their request, or in the event that the company folds. A large number of pieces of development hardware managed to get into the public's hands due to bankruptcy auctions and settlements.

Bankruptcy law is very clear in this area. If an external company has "interests" within the company which is going through the bankruptcy proceedings, they have a set amount of time in which they must file a request for their interests to be satisfied. Such interests include fulfilling first creditor agreements (i.e. the bankrupt company agreed to pay off all debts to one company before others), returning items on consignment and returning items which are explicitly owned by another company. It is the last interest which matters here, since developers never actually buy the hardware, they merely rent/lease it.

If the company with an interest fails to properly file their claim with the bankruptcy agent, then they lose it. In the case of physical property, the company actually loses the title of ownership and any claim to it. The bankruptcy agent (clearinghouse) can then treat the hardware as a saleable asset without any restrictions on the sale.

The Acclaim asset auctions, for example, required the clearinghouse to sufficiently notify the public that the company was going into bankruptcy and all assets would be liquidated to pay off the company debts. It would be difficult to believe that Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft were not aware that Acclaim was being liquidated. Even if they were not, the law only requires that the public be notified. Once the claim period had lapsed, all unclaimed assets, including all the development hardware, was free to be sold without restriction.

eBay just chooses to end the development hardware auctions on their own.

Oh, and this is in the wrong forum. :icon_bigg

 

Even in the case of Acclaim, the hardware was only supposed to be transferred to other licensed developers. If it was sold to the general public, lease agreements were broken and therefore the property is technically "stolen." Is anyone going to prosecute for it? Not really. But it is enough to make eBay pull the auctions.

-hl718

 

The purchase agreements on dev equiptment are much closer to leased cars than anything. Ownership is never transfered the developer. Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo retain ownership of the hardware, they even have to file it in their taxes as their own assets. The "public" auctions such as acclaim are one thing. Ownership becomes a bit of a grey area with public auctions (the auctioneers did actually check that the people who were buying the dev hardware from the acclaim auction were in fact liscensed to own such hardware). But you have to remember, not all dev hardware comes from defunct developers.

Many dev kits sold on ebay were flat out stolen from active developers or taken by game reviewers. In this case, ownership is never transfered from MS/Sony/Nintendo. Selling such items is considered fencing, buying such items is considered possession of stolen property.



EDIT: Any of the console manufacturers can take their dev equiptment from you at any time without compensation.

 

Yes, in Acclaim's case the auctions were only open to licensed developers, but that was not a legal requirement and did not have to be done.

This is exactly what I was trying to explain was not true. The lease agreements are the "interests" that I talked about above. In the case of a liquidation bankruptcy, it is the requirement that the lessor file a claim for all the leased property to be returned. The claim must be made by a set date. If the claim is not filed before then, the lease is legally dissolved and the leased property now becomes outright owned by the company in bankruptcy. Such property can now be sold or transferred in order to repay the company's debts as necessary. No restrictions implied or expressed in the original lease agreement can be enforced against the property.

In other words, as long as the clearinghouse followed the proper legal steps involved in a bankruptcy proceeding (and they can be personally held responsible if not), then no property sold at auction can ever be considered stolen. While the clearinghouse does not need to impose restrictions, it is still their right to do so as was done with the Acclaim auctions. However, those restrictions cannot prevent the auction buyers from transferring or selling the purchased items to someone else unless the buyer has other contractual obligations.

If a game developer with no contracts with Nintendo got a GDEV from the auction, they can do what they want with it, including resell it to a non-developer. However, if the buyer did have a contract with Nintendo (i.e. a return all development hardware contract), then the new piece of hardware would fall under the provisions of that contract.

 

The thing you're missing with the acclaim auction is that Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo DID respond to the notice. They didn't really want the dev kits back, what were they going to do with 'em all this late in the consoles cycles? They were the ones who told the auctioneers to sell them to other developers. It's not a matter of "microsoft failed to respond, now they loose all of their rights". Microsoft did respond and agreed to let acclaim auction the dev hardware to other developers. Thus microsoft/sony/nintendo retain all of their original rights. Owning acclaim dev kits is still illegal.

EDIT: If events did happen the way you describe, then yes, the manufacturers would loos their rights to the equipment. Unfortunately for us all, that just wasn't the case. Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo simplly sanctioned the auction with the condition that they would retain ownership of the equipment.

 

Ah, ok. I wasn't aware that they had filed their claims. I am really surprised that the clearinghouse went along with the conditional sale like that, but I guess if they got to keep the money: :dance:

Now, for equipment purchased from a different country... :lol: