<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: UK Appeals Court Overturns Mr. Mod Chips Conviction</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lawsofplay.com/articles/uk-appeals-court-overturns-mr-mod-chips-conviction/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lawsofplay.com/articles/uk-appeals-court-overturns-mr-mod-chips-conviction/</link>
	<description>Your Source for Video Game Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 01:52:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: GusTavToo</title>
		<link>http://www.lawsofplay.com/articles/uk-appeals-court-overturns-mr-mod-chips-conviction/comment-page-1/#comment-189</link>
		<dc:creator>GusTavToo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 08:24:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawsofplay.com/?p=164#comment-189</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m afraid that after the full judgment in R v Higgs was handed down on the 25th June it is pretty clear that the UK has not legalised modchips. The conviction was overturned by the Court of Appeal as the argument which the prosecution ran at the original trial was flawed. They argued that the fitting of modchips encouraged piracy by facilitating a trade in infringing material. The CoA found that to be too tenuous a link between the copyright infringement and the circumvention device. 
They did, however, suggest that if the prosecution had argued that the modchip allowed an infringing copy to be made in RAM through the fitting of a modchip they would have dismissed the appeal and allowed the conviction to stand. I therefore appears that it is now clear what a prosecution will have to prove in order to make a successful case against a modchip supplier. They are certainly not lawful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m afraid that after the full judgment in R v Higgs was handed down on the 25th June it is pretty clear that the UK has not legalised modchips. The conviction was overturned by the Court of Appeal as the argument which the prosecution ran at the original trial was flawed. They argued that the fitting of modchips encouraged piracy by facilitating a trade in infringing material. The CoA found that to be too tenuous a link between the copyright infringement and the circumvention device.<br />
They did, however, suggest that if the prosecution had argued that the modchip allowed an infringing copy to be made in RAM through the fitting of a modchip they would have dismissed the appeal and allowed the conviction to stand. I therefore appears that it is now clear what a prosecution will have to prove in order to make a successful case against a modchip supplier. They are certainly not lawful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

