Support NeoGAF

[gatti-man]

Yeah, but cracking a game is an active action; you're deliberately modifying the game files in order to play the game earlier.

Buying a game (of which you may never heard of before) and inserting the game-disc is not the same. Well, maybe in your head but a ToS isn't overruling the law or common sense.

If this is a general acceptance among big gaming companies, well then it's goodbye videogames.

Look, NO.

It would be nothing alike.

Changing your internet connection proxy to be forward in time to unlock it would be comparable. And even then, it's still not alike.

Let's make this pretty clear: Microsoft is banning because they want.

Because they want and no other reason at all. They can have ways of preventing this from happening yet what they want is to ban pirates, even with collateral damage.

Let me tell you two solutions at the top of my head.

1. Game can't be played online (as in, online status) as it has the launch day coded into a small file and will contrast it with the LIVE servers (can be played offline).

2. Only people in the whitelist are allowed online pre-launch.

Do you think MS can't do this? As I stated previously, they use this to get pirates, because they have no actual proper tools of detecting some of the mods unless they do something stupid like modding lobbies or alter avatar colors.


PS: Sticker says DO NOT SELL. I don't see DO NOT BUY anywhere.

You both are still missing the fact he used code he had no license to. Saying he bought the game is not true. At the time he played the code online he had yet to purchase the license. This is stated in the OP and my post you quoted.

I do agree with you the situation is fucked at this point though. Makes zero sense to fuck over your biggest fans.

 

[I'm an expert]

You are still missing the fact he used code he had no license to. Saying he bought the game is not true. At the time he played the code online he had yet to purchase the license. This is stated in the OP and my post you quoted.

I get what you're saying but those kind of semantics won't sway anyone in this thread.

 

[Yagharek]

I've seen plenty of retailers - major chains - in Australia rush to break street date for some pretty big game releases. It's quite common, and many of those games will have the street date stickers on them.

What MS have shown is that even if you're able to buy a game before release they will still nuke your account and maaaaaaybe give you the option to ask questions later.

 

[faceless007]

You both are still missing the fact he used code he had no license to.

The entire principle of needing a license to use a legally-purchased product for entirely personal, private, legal, and non-copyright-infringing means is nothing more than a vile anti-consumer invention by companies to get rid of the first-sale doctrine and should be struck down as the ridiculous and idiotic lie that it is.

 

[vikingvessel]

I get what you're saying but those kind of semantics won't sway anyone in this thread.

Unless someone in this thread is playing coy about their role in policy enforcement over at Microsoft, why should it matter? Just like all the requests for someone at Microsoft to explain what the problem is to them. One person appears to be owed some type of explanation. The swaying of anyone means nothing as far as the outcome.

 

[onlyindreams]

You both are still missing the fact he used code he had no license to. Saying he bought the game is not true. At the time he played the code online he had yet to purchase the license. This is stated in the OP and my post you quoted.

OMG this thread keeps giving

 

[DarkJC]

Wow, I thought this issue was resolved ages ago? The OP is still banned? So Frank basically swung by and did some damage control pre-release by saying he'd "take care of it" and then bailed. Why am I not surprised... Microsoft will never stop pulling scummy shit when they have the chance.

 

[TouchMyBox]

Wow, I thought this issue was resolved ages ago? The OP is still banned? So Frank basically swung by and did some damage control pre-release by saying he'd "take care of it" and then bailed. Why am I not surprised... Microsoft will never stop pulling scummy shit when they have the chance.

Well, there is no reason for them to stop if their victims reward them by buying up more of Microsoft's inventory.

 

[blitzcloud]

You both are still missing the fact he used code he had no license to. Saying he bought the game is not true. At the time he played the code online he had yet to purchase the license. This is stated in the OP and my post you quoted.

I do agree with you the situation is fucked at this point though. Makes zero sense to fuck over your biggest fans.

The license is no longer handled by the publisher/developer as they sell the product to the retailer, who sells the product with the license imbued. Are you saying that if the manager takes a copy home or gifts a client a copy, they do not have license to play it? That's what you seem to imply.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

Why is everyone absolving the store so quickly? They weren't supposed to sell it early, yet they did and look what happened. One could argue that the store is to blame and is liable for the OP getting banned, that's assuming there really was a store transaction involved in the first place.

His game works, his console works. He just got banned from using LIVE's services, which is a subscription based closed service that you have to pay for. It's a privilege not a right and MS can do whatever they want if you break their rules.

The only thing I have a problem with is not allowing him access to his previous bought items, DLC etc, but I have that same problem with Steam and Origin, so hopefully we can get some consumer laws protecting our digital purchases.

 

[Zing]

You shouldn't have bought a new console. What's wrong with you?

Stockholm Syndrome

 

[blitzcloud]

Why is everyone absolving the store so quickly? They weren't supposed to sell it early, yet they did and look what happened. One could argue that the store is to blame and is liable for the OP getting banned, that's assuming there really was a store transaction involved in the first place.

His game works, his console works. He just got banned from using LIVE's services, which is a subscription based closed service that you have to pay for. It's a privilege not a right and MS can do whatever they want if you break their rules.

The only thing I have a problem with is not allowing him access to his previous bought items, DLC etc, but I have that same problem with Steam and Origin, so hopefully we can get some consumer laws protecting our digital purchases.

What rule did he exactly break?

Console is legit.

Account is legit.

Game is legit.

Buying their product from a store so he may look like a pirate that is playing a leaked version? That's a valid reason? If you don't see that this must set a precedent so a company can't fucking dictate bans like that for no actual proper reason, this shit may happen to you some day. Maybe not in the same fashion (aka, not the same reason), but with the same result and no means to retort.

Also, is it my imagination or was it said by someone that this ban appears on MS systems as PIRACY when it's not?

 

[Lothars]

Why is everyone absolving the store so quickly? They weren't supposed to sell it early, yet they did and look what happened. One could argue that the store is to blame and is liable for the OP getting banned, that's assuming there really was a store transaction involved in the first place.

His game works, his console works. He just got banned from using LIVE's services, which is a subscription based closed service that you have to pay for. It's a privilege not a right and MS can do whatever they want if you break their rules.

The only thing I have a problem with is not allowing him access to his previous bought items, DLC etc, but I have that same problem with Steam and Origin, so hopefully we can get some consumer laws protecting our digital purchases.

The store might have some blame selling early but in no way is this his fault for playing the game early, MS is the one who deserves all the blame and should be dragged over the coals until he gets unbanned and his account restored.

MS needs to be take to task for this.

 

[blitzcloud]

this should probably stop being a neogaf thread and make it into "gaming journalism". All bans taken back in few days. Because you can bet skelington isn't the only person under such circumstances. So what about the others? no dice?

Make it big, so MS has no choice but make a 180º on all this.

 

[I'm an expert]

I'd honestly love to know what would have happened if he just called MS when all of this started.. "great customer service from MS!" or "MS won't believe me halp!"..

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Yeah this doesn't' sound standard so it's not worth talking about, I've seen boxes opened on launch with nothing like that in there.

I bought H2 Launch, H3 Launch (before launch actually) and a few other top titles launch day. I have only seen those stickers once, and that was online.

Dudes really stretching.

edit: Actually I saw it once IRL. I tried to buy some game early and it had a sticker that the cashier noticed right before I was about to pay for it.

But even still that sticker means nothing to the consumer, especially when you have the Major telling people they can play their copies early without being banned.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

What rule did he exactly break?

Console is legit.

Account is legit.

Game is legit.

Buying their product from a store so he may look like a pirate that is playing a leaked version? That's a valid reason? If you don't see that this must set a precedent so a company can't fucking dictate bans like that for no actual proper reason, this shit may happen to you some day. Maybe not in the same fashion (aka, not the same reason), but with the same result and no means to retort.

Also, is it my imagination or was it said by someone that this ban appears on MS systems as PIRACY when it's not?

Except he can't prove that his game is legit, and also playing a game before its legal release date is probably against the TOS. He also refused from the beginning to implicate who or where he bought it from that they didn't ring up his credit or give him a receipt. Can't believe GAF buys that story and yet I bet no one defending the OP has ever "bought" a game under those circumstances. Or at least very few, because it's not standard and it's not technically legal.

OP probably bought a copy that fell off a truck is still my opinion and technically that can be classified as piracy because I'd bed he only payed $30 for it.

Buy your games on release day, get a receipt and MS won't ban you. Simple as that.

 

[pompidu]

I bought H2 Launch, H3 Launch (before launch actually) and a few other top titles launch day. I have only seen those stickers once, and that was online.

Dudes really stretching.

edit: Actually I saw it once IRL. I tried to buy some game early and it had a sticker that the cashier noticed right before I was about to pay for it.

But even still that sticker means nothing to the consumer, especially when you have the Major telling people they can play their copies early without being banned.

That sticker is for employees only and is not some legal binding contract with the customer, its with the retailer. Idk how the sticker came up but its completely irrelevant to this situation.

 

[Uno Venova]

Except he can't prove that his game is legit, and also playing a game before its legal release date is probably against the TOS. He also refused from the beginning to implicate who or where he bought it from that they didn't ring up his credit or give him a receipt. Can't believe GAF buys that story and yet I bet no one defending the OP has ever "bought" a game under those circumstances. Or at least very few, because it's not standard and it's not technically legal.

OP probably bought a copy that fell off a truck is still my opinion and technically that can be classified as piracy because I'd bed he only payed $30 for it.

Buy your games on release day, get a receipt and MS won't ban you. Simple as that.

What about the game isn't legit?

Playing a game before a release date is against the TOS, does it say that anywhere? And didn't major say people won't get banned for playing before release?

Why is buying a game for cheap piracy?

 

[dogmaan]

Except he can't prove that his game is legit, and also playing a game before its legal release date is probably against the TOS. He also refused from the beginning to implicate who or where he bought it from that they didn't ring up his credit or give him a receipt. Can't believe GAF buys that story and yet I bet no one defending the OP has ever "bought" a game under those circumstances. Or at least very few, because it's not standard and it's not technically legal.

OP probably bought a copy that fell off a truck is still my opinion and technically that can be classified as piracy because I'd bed he only payed $30 for it.

Buy your games on release day, get a receipt and MS won't ban you. Simple as that.

You know, all the people like you in this thread, make me feel sick..

When did our community become filled with such rampant anti-consumerism, and bizarre cognitive dissonance?

The fact that the op knew the proper release date is irrelevant, the onus is on Microsoft, as the publisher, to prevent retailers from selling titles early, it is not the customers responsibility to ensure that an arbitrary date line has been crossed, before they can enjoy the games they have purchased.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

What about the game isn't legit?

Playing a game before a release date is against the TOS, does it say that anywhere? And didn't major say people won't get banned for playing before release?

Why is buying a game for cheap piracy?

Because MS didn't get their money for it, that's what makes it not legit and he can't prove otherwise. Do you really think it's OK to buy a stolen game from someone knowingly? Not saying OP knew, but there's a very good chance he did.

Piracy doesn't mean the game has to be on a dvdr.

 

[MMaRsu]

Because MS didn't get their money for it, that's what makes it not legit and he can't prove otherwise. Do you really think it's OK to buy a stolen game from someone knowingly? Not saying OP knew, but there's a very good chance he did.

Piracy doesn't mean the game has to be on a dvdr.

Lol why would it be stolen????

When I bought a few big games before release date a few years ago it was because I was friends and old colleagues of people who worked in the store where I used to work at, and I would give them the money and they would ring it up on release date.

Why would I have to be banned for that? LOL

 

[MYeager]

What about the game isn't legit?

Playing a game before a release date is against the TOS, does it say that anywhere? And didn't major say people won't get banned for playing before release?

Why is buying a game for cheap piracy?

Technically, if a store give you a copy and promises to 'ring it out later' then they are giving you the game at that time without selling it to you. At that point the copy isn't considered to be a legit copy of the game since it wasn't purchased legitimately. There's no proof of purchase, and it's hard not to prove that you aren't an employee of a store that just stole it out of the back or purchased from someone who did that (ie 'it fell off of a truck).

That's not to say at all that any theft occured at all. The point would be that Microsoft does not consider an arrangement with a store to ring it out later as a legitimate purchase. I'd think that this is more of the responsibility of the store, if they know there's a problem with ringing it up at the point they give out a game, then they're aware that they shouldn't be selling a game prior. Banning a console seems excessive in my opinion.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Because MS didn't get their money for it, that's what makes it not legit and he can't prove otherwise. Do you really think it's OK to buy a stolen game from someone knowingly? Not saying OP knew, but there's a very good chance he did.

Piracy doesn't mean the game has to be on a dvdr.

It seems like you're making stuff up.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

You know, all the people like you in this thread, make me feel sick..

When did our community become filled with such rampant anti-consumerism, and bizarre cognitive dissonance?

The fact that the op knew the proper release date is irrelevant, the onus is on Microsoft, as the publisher, to prevent retailers from selling titles early, it is not the customers responsibility to ensure that an arbitrary date line has been crossed, before they can enjoy the games they have purchased.

Except all the facts we do know about this case says the game isn't legit, but you and people like you are completely ignoring that. No receipt, no record of a credit or debit transaction, no mysterious mom and pop seller, and early acquisition - all points to shady/stolen/piracy.

Just my opinion. You don't got to like it and I respect yours as well.

 

[Uno Venova]

Because MS didn't get their money for it, that's what makes it not legit and he can't prove otherwise. Do you really think it's OK to buy a stolen game from someone knowingly? Not saying OP knew, but there's a very good chance he did.

Piracy doesn't mean the game has to be on a dvdr.

That doesn't make any sense. What's your definition of a legit game exactly? Only when pubs get money from it?

There is no stolen game in this situation.

 

[robotzombie]

Because MS didn't get their money for it, that's what makes it not legit and he can't prove otherwise. Do you really think it's OK to buy a stolen game from someone knowingly? Not saying OP knew, but there's a very good chance he did.

Piracy doesn't mean the game has to be on a dvdr.

Holy lord dude, this has nothing to do with piracy or stolen goods. It is very easy to go down to a mom and pop video game store in a lot of cities and get a game a few days early. You inventing the fact that this "has to be" stolen merchandise is just nonsense. You look like a fool acting like it is impossible to get a game before the release date.

 

[I'm an expert]

MS doesn't care about any of that.

That far out from release (2 business weeks), they have an invisible trip wire over the online portion of the game. Only reviewers and press are allowed access to the game. If anyone not on the safe list accesses the multiplayer portion, they are flagged alien and banned. This is to protect the flow of information over a very important ip and launch of their's. Yes, they will ban first, ask questions later. It's a business decision, not a PR one.

It was up to the op to go through the right channels to try and right this, not weird shortcuts with "inside" people that couldn't really be held accountable.

 

[robotzombie]

MS doesn't care about any of that.

That far out from release (2 business weeks), they have an invisible trip wire over the online portion of the game. Only reviewers and press are allowed access to the game. If anyone not on the safe list accesses the multiplayer portion, they are flagged alien and banned. This is to protect the flow of information over a very important ip and launch of their's. Yes, they will ban first, ask questions later. It's a business decision, not a PR one.

It was up to the op to go through the right channels to try and right this, not weird shortcuts with "inside" people that couldn't really be held accountable.

No, it is not up to the consumer to have to prove anything involving release dates. It is up to Microsoft to prove the game is indeed pirated and not a legit copy being played early. Nowhere on any video game does it say "do not play this game until x date", if there was, then no problem. But release dates have nothing to do with consumers.

Microsoft has to punish the store for this, not the customer. And holding the customer hostage unless he "tattles" on the store is bullshit as well

 

[Mackenzie 92]

That doesn't make any sense. What's your definition of a legit game exactly? Only when pubs get money from it?

There is no stolen game in this situation.

How does it not make sense? An employee steals a few games when a shipment comes in (happens all the time) this is an act of piracy.

Later that employee sells said game or games to someone else for a steep discount.

MS sees no money, store where employee works sees no money.

Gamer who bought pirated game goes home and plays game 2 weeks early and gets banned, cries to internet about it.

That's how I see it going down, if you wanna believe the OP with no proof, that's fine.

 

[I'm an expert]

No, it is not up to the consumer to have to prove anything involving release dates. It is up to Microsoft to prove the game is indeed pirated and not a legit copy being played early. Nowhere on any video game does it say "do not play this game until x date", if there was, then no problem. But release dates have nothing to do with consumers.

Yeah..you wish it was like that, but it's not. Agreeing to the Live TOS is what you all willingly do when you pay for it. You give them permission to do whatever they see fit with your account and the licenses you borrow from them. As someone said earlier, it's a privilege, not a right.

It was up to the consumer, in this case, to call MS and explain the situation to them. MS sure isn't going to call them and ask "hey, did we screw up here?".

 

[robotzombie]

Yeah..you wish it was like that, but it's not. Agreeing to the Live TOS is what you all willingly do when you pay for it. You give them permission to do whatever they see fit with your account and the licenses you borrow from them. As someone said earlier, it's a privilege, not a right.

It was up to the consumer, in this case, to call MS and explain the situation to them. MS sure isn't going to call them and ask "hey, did we screw up here?".

And the reason they could do whatever you want is because of people like you illogically arguing against your own rights in their favor. Just because they have the power to flip a switch and cut you off, doesn't mean they get to abuse it however they wish unless you just sit there and allow them to without consequence.

 

[Uno Venova]

How does it not make sense? An employee steals a few games when a shipment comes in (happens all the time) this is an act of piracy.

Later that employee sells said game or games to someone else for a steep discount.

MS sees no money, store where employee works sees no money.

Gamer who bought pirated game goes home and plays game 2 weeks early and gets banned, cries to internet about it.

That's how I see it going down, if you wanna believe the OP with no proof, that's fine.

You make it seem unreasonable to believe the OP's story but them bring up a falling off the truck and piracy scenario when nothing alludes to that, again not making much sense.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

You make it seem unreasonable to believe the OP's story but them bring up a falling off the truck and piracy scenario when nothing alludes to that, again not making much sense.

Different points of view. Not uncommon on the internet.

And like I said before, OP has no proof that he bought it legit and refuses to implicate the store. He also went out and bought a new console which suggest he takes at least some responsibility for what happened, if he was truly 100% innocent, I doubt he'd go out and do that. I know I'd be so pissed I'd never buy another MS product in my life.

 

[I'm an expert]

And the reason they could do whatever you want is because of people like you illogically arguing against your own rights in their favor. Just because they have the power to flip a switch and cut you off, doesn't mean they get to abuse it however they wish unless you just sit there and allow them to without consequence.

<- Never owned an MS console. I vote with my wallet. That's the biggest way I defend my rights. For the umpteenth time, I'm not defending them, I'm explaining the realities of the situation. They have that switch, they can flip it on/off/on/off 100x if they want. Who gives them that power? YOU. When you pay for their service and voluntarily use it.

 

[Aaron]

How does it not make sense? An employee steals a few games when a shipment comes in (happens all the time) this is an act of piracy.

Later that employee sells said game or games to someone else for a steep discount.

MS sees no money, store where employee works sees no money.

Gamer who bought pirated game goes home and plays game 2 weeks early and gets banned, cries to internet about it.

That's how I see it going down, if you wanna believe the OP with no proof, that's fine.

Stores get games early. Some arrive up to a month before they're supposed to be sold. This is common with big releases, like Halo 4. Some stores sell it before they're supposed to. There's nothing actually illegal about this, but you risk pissing off the publisher, and losing their support. There's no reason to cry 'piracy,' especially when it doesn't seem like you understand the term.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

How does it not make sense? An employee steals a few games when a shipment comes in (happens all the time) this is an act of piracy.

Later that employee sells said game or games to someone else for a steep discount.

MS sees no money, store where employee works sees no money.

Gamer who bought pirated game goes home and plays game 2 weeks early and gets banned, cries to internet about it.

That's how I see it going down, if you wanna believe the OP with no proof, that's fine.

lol what is going on?

 

[Uno Venova]

Different points of view. Not uncommon on the internet.

And like I said before, OP has no proof that he bought it legit and refuses to implicate the store. He also went out and bought a new console which suggest he takes at least some responsibility for what happened, if he was truly 100% innocent, I doubt he'd go out and do that. I know I'd be so pissed I'd never buy another MS product in my life.

He did tell the store name to Stinkes.
You can say different point of view but truly doesn't make sense to come down on people for believing OP's story and at the same time bring up a completely different scenario with no proof yourself.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

How does it not make sense? An employee steals a few games when a shipment comes in (happens all the time) this is an act of piracy.

Later that employee sells said game or games to someone else for a steep discount.

MS sees no money, store where employee works sees no money.

Gamer who bought pirated game goes home and plays game 2 weeks early and gets banned, cries to internet about it.

That's how I see it going down, if you wanna believe the OP with no proof, that's fine.

lol take it easy there, Jake Gitties.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

Stores get games early. Some arrive up to a month before they're supposed to be sold. This is common with big releases, like Halo 4. Some stores sell it before they're supposed to. There's nothing actually illegal about this, but you risk pissing off the publisher, and losing their support. There's no reason to cry 'piracy,' especially when it doesn't seem like you understand the term.

Wouldn't it fall under unauthorized use?

lol take it easy there, Jake Gitties.

I've just witnessed it happening a lot. Retail stores lose more to theft from their own employees than actual customers.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

lol take it easy there, Jake Gitties.

According to MacKenzie the OP has no proof for his story. Clearly evidence is incredibly important to him as a logical human being if he is to believe any story. Since, the OP has provided insufficient or unreliable proof, what does he do?

Well you make up some crazy story instead of course! And of course there's no proof backing it, it makes little sense, but he tells everyone, "Hey I dont have proof for my crazy story and I have no connection to the OP but thats the way I see it going down! If you want to believe the OPs crazy proof-less story go right ahead you sucker! Meanwhile I'll keep championing my awesome scenario....with no proof."

 

[robotzombie]

Wouldn't it fall under unauthorized use?

Because there are no laws or rules stating consumers need to abide by release dates, nor any information about said dates provided to consumers upon purchase. If a mother goes into a store, asks for Halo for her son, gets the game and the kid plays it before its street date, without either's knowledge, Microsofts iniial reaction should be to ban the account?

 

[Mackenzie 92]

According to MacKenzie the OP has no proof for his story. Clearly evidence is incredibly important to him as a logical human being if he is to believe any story. Since, the OP has provided insufficient or unreliable proof, what does he do?

Well you make up some crazy story instead of course! And of course there's no proof backing it, it makes little sense, but he tells everyone, "Hey I dont have proof for my crazy story and I have no connection to the OP but thats the way I see it going down! If you want to believe the OPs crazy proof-less story go right ahead you sucker! Meanwhile I'll keep championing my awesome scenario....with no proof."

Well, c'mon now I don't think I presented it like that. I just meant to show an alternative.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Well, c'mon now I don't think I presented it like that. I just meant to show an alternative.

Yes, but given the lack of information you've come up with a very specific scenario in which the OP is a pirate.

 

[Lothars]

Well, c'mon now I don't think I presented it like that. I just meant to show an alternative.

Yes you did present it like that, It's insane your on MS side on this.

It's just so stupid that some people will defend this.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

Yes, but given the lack of information you've come up with a very specific scenario in which the OP is a pirate.

I was just trying to show how the game could be considered pirated even though it's not copied on a DVDR, since a lot of people, just think "oh it's a retail copy alright, it must be legit." That's all. And the scenario is actually a pretty common one that happens all the time.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

How does it not make sense? An employee steals a few games when a shipment comes in (happens all the time) this is an act of piracy.

Later that employee sells said game or games to someone else for a steep discount.

MS sees no money, store where employee works sees no money.

Gamer who bought pirated game goes home and plays game 2 weeks early and gets banned, cries to internet about it.

That's how I see it going down, if you wanna believe the OP with no proof, that's fine.

First off, you're completely wrong with your first sentence. That is NOT piracy, that is called theft. Piracy is something different.

Secondly, if your definition of piracy is the company sees no money then would he be banned for buying a used copy? The company still saw no money, seeing money or not is NOT the definition of piracy either. I don't think you know what piracy is.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

First off, you're completely wrong with your first sentence. That is NOT piracy, that is called theft. Piracy is something different.

Secondly, if your definition of piracy is the company sees no money then would he be banned for buying a used copy? The company still saw no money, seeing money or not is NOT the definition of piracy either. I don't think you know what piracy is.

I'll admit I probably used the term wrong, okay, but the theft occurred and then a gamer buys it for a steep discount from the thief, would it not be considered unauthorized use and thus piracy?

And used games were originally sold as new and the publisher got their money for it, so no.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

First off, you're completely wrong with your first sentence. That is NOT piracy, that is called theft. Piracy is something different.

Secondly, if your definition of piracy is the company sees no money then would he be banned for buying a used copy? The company still saw no money, seeing money or not is NOT the definition of piracy either. I don't think you know what piracy is.

Yeah I was going to bring this up but there was just too much in his post...

 

[Ken Masters]

I still can't believe OP rewarded Microsoft banning him for playing a game he legally bought by buying another system, almost disgusting to even think he'd do such a thing