You don't really own your Nintendo Wii

I'd like to tell you a little story. It's historical fiction, as the main character is fictional, but it has happened to many people online.

Before I start, I would like to inform you on normal property law in the USA (not "intellectual" property law a.k.a. the DMCA). Basically, if you bought it, you can do what ever you want with it. You can sell it, you can keep it, you can take it apart, you can modify it, and no one can take away those rights. Yes, modify, as in change it.

Anyway, Joe Haxor had installed the Homebrew channel and several custom tracks for Mario Kart Wii on his Nintendo Wii. He connects to Nintendo WFC so that he can catch up with his friends who had done the same, but he gets an error code.

20102

He tries to reconnect.

20102

He tries a third time.

20102.

He looks up the problem in his Wii's user manual, but it isn't listed. He looks online.

"Error Code: 20102

This error code indicates some type of unauthorized activity has occured in an online feature of a Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection game.

What to do:

Please call 1-800-895-1672 in the USA or Canada for more information."

He calls the number, waits 30 minutes to speak with a person, and when he finally gets someone, he tells them the problem. He is told that they had detected the Homebrew Channel on his system and there is nothing they can do to fix it. Before he is able to ask any more questions, the service operator hangs up on him.

What is wrong with this story? He was banned because he had the Homebrew Channel on his system. Why is it wrong? The ban violates property laws, yet Nintendo got away with it.

It's one thing to be banned for doing something, but being banned due to an "unauthorized" modification? Now I know that it can void warranties, but Wi-Fi privileges have no connections with warranty status, and he never intended to use his modified Wii to cheat on Wi-Fi or to pirate games.

Basically, he modified "his" Nintendo Wii without permission of the real owners: Nintendo.

Is my bottom line that Nintendo still owns that Mac-White or Jet-Black Linux-Powered IBM Power PC, and the $249.99 that you payed for it was just to purchase the rights to have it sit in your TV cabinet? No, my bottom line is that Nintendo is essentially breaking every property law in the book, except the DMCA. If either economic system, capitalist or communist, had the checks and balances to keep whoever is running the show from abusing their power like this (the large scale international corporations and the government, respectively), then that alone would make my day.

Legal Notice: Any demands to take this post down will be fought in court, and an automatic removal will force my hand to the point that the constitution will get involved. Long live the first amendment!

P.s.: Phew... that was a lot. If you are wondering why I am suddenly so politically active, it's because I'd rather get it out now instead of keeping it bottled up, only to release it all on some random forum.

Reggie or Iwata - Who is the real president of Nintendo?

This is a response to some of the comments on "Message to Nintendo" by SilvStreak of YouTube, as well as most videos involving Reggie Fils-Aime.

I have recently been reading several accusations directed towards Reginald "Reggie" Fils-Aime, most of them stating that he was the one responsible for the cancellation of several Nintendo franchises, including F-Zero and Earthbound/Mother, as well as the "murder" of several other franchises to make room for more Mario, Legend of Zelda, and Wii-specific games. However, I doubt he has that kind of power within Nintendo.

From Wikipedia:
"Reginald "Reggie" Fils-Aime (pronounced /ˈfiːzɛmeɪ/) (March 1961) is President and chief operating officer of Nintendo of America, the North American division of the Japan-based video game company Nintendo.^[1][2] Prior to his promotion to President and Chief Operating Officer, Fils-Aime was Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing. He gained celebrity status among gamers following his appearance at Nintendo's May 2004 E3 press conference.<sup>[3]"

Note that it says "President and chief operating officer of Nintendo of America". I don't see how he could have any sort of power over what is going on in Japan, never mind which franchises survive and which ones fall.

I believe it was mentioned in Nintendo Power that Satoru Iwata is the current President of Nintendo, after</sup> Hiroshi Yamauchi, and would obviously have more control over the company than Reggie. Wikipedia can once again back this up:

"Satoru Iwata (岩田 聡, Iwata Satoru^?, born December 6, 1959) is the fourth president and CEO of Nintendo, succeeding the long-standing previous president of the company, Hiroshi Yamauchi in 2002. He was responsible in great part for defining Nintendo's strategy both before and during the release of its Nintendo GameCube video game console in 2001, a vision which helped Nintendo generate a forty-one percent increase in sales at the end of the 2002 fiscal year.^[1]

Barron's Magazine named Iwata one of the world's top CEOs, due mostly to the Wii, Brain Age sales, as well as a soaring stock.^[2]"

I believe quite a few people might need to apologize to poor Reggie. He's been through quite a lot of abuse at your hands.

Sources:

Reggie Fils-Aime: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggie_Fils-Aime

Satoru Iwata: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoru_Iwata