Wii U Prototype set

[Kissarmy82]

Can anyone give me some on a complete -Software Wii U prototype set. Thanks

[CPUWIZ]

Not a prototype.

[Video]

Looks like a standard production run for store demos or something.

[Rick Dangerous]

Or even a factory refurb.

[Kissarmy82]

It is a developement kit , green in the back property of Nintendo

[Punisher5.0]

Those pics.......

[OldSchoolRetroGamer]

[CPUWIZ]

It is a developement kit , green in the back property of Nintendo

 

Which is why I said, "Not a prototype!". Yet, you used it to describe it.

[Kissarmy82]

Mistake

[cybercylon]

Please post better pictures with some documenation to show how it differs from a retail unit or store demo

[Rick Dangerous]

This is probably worth about one billion dollars. Best to list this rare gem on eBay with a similar asking price immediately before you are tempted to donate it to a classic gaming museum in a fit of good will and philanthropy.

[CPUWIZ]

Not really, it is actually illegal to be in possession of it, if you are not a signed developer.

[pacman000]

How can it be illegal to have? I can understand that the developer would've violated their contract with Nintendo, but is there something else? :0

[CPUWIZ]

How can it be illegal to have? I can understand that the developer would've violated their contract with Nintendo, but is there something else? :0

 

It is property of Nintendo, hence stolen, how "you" obtained it, is irrelevant.

[pacman000]

That makes sense, tho I wonder how far a court would take it if worse came to worse.

[Bill Loguidice]

Someone is using a prototype smartphone to take pictures.

[pacman000]

Are you sure this would be different than a promotional record? It's not necessarily illegal to sell those.

 

 

UMG's case hinged on proving that it still owned the promo CDs. John T. Mitchell, an attorney practicing in Washington, D.C., who is outside general counsel for the National Association of Recording Merchandisers, the trade association that advocates for the interests of brick-and-mortar and online music retailers and wholesalers, says the court rejected Universal's argument that, " 'These CDs are not to be sold because we still own them, even though we've not really done anything to suggest ownership. We're not giving you a self-addressed, stamped envelope to return it to us when you're done. We're not reflecting them on our books as part of our personal property. We're not treating it in any way as our property, we're just calling it our property.' "

Mitchell goes on to say, "It was very clear that UMG had no interest in getting the CDs back. In fact in those cases where it did, the court noted that it was to destroy them, not to get any ownership value out of them."

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2011/01/07/132744291/for-promotional-use-only-not-for-resale-oh-yes-it-is

 

(Not trying to argue. This just got my mind going. )

[jhd]

It is property of Nintendo, hence stolen, how "you" obtained it, is irrelevant.

 

I am not familiar with the terms of the license agreement between the developer and Nintendo, but there is a long-standing common law legal principle that someone who acquires an item for value and without notice can indeed receive good title. So, make sure that you have a receipt or other documentation from whom you purchased this hardware to prove your bona fides.

 

For example, if I purchase a used car from a dealership at market price, I am not obliged to review the chain of title to make sure that the dealership is not reselling stolen property.

 

On the other hand, if I buy that same used car from a nervous-looking individual whom I only just met for $500, then I have reasonable notice that it may be stolen property, and I would be obliged to inquire further about the ownership.

 

Note that I am not an Attorney, and this is not legal advice. The law in your jurisdiction may vary.

[pacman000]

It may be different for computer software. From the same story I linked to earlier:

 

 

One final note. The Ninth Circuit ruled in September that similar implied licenses on software — so-called end user license agreements, or EULAs, that software is licensed for the customer's personal use subject to certain conditions, not sold — do prohibit resale. But that's another story.

I really wish they'd written that other story.

 

All this IP law stuff gets confusing. (Isn't a CD technically computer software, since it's digital code ran by a computer to reproduce music? But all this is getting us off topic...) Finding a Wii U developer kit is interesting, but probably not that valuable. The Wii U's being superseded by the Switch, so there's little worth to developers; as a collectible it's cool, but if you tired to sell it Nintendo could sue; they're really protective. Even if the courts decided that it was OK to resell you'd spend a lot on legal fees, too much for the system to be worth much.

 

As for technical specs... I dunno. Probably the same as the Wii U without regional lockout. Might have a port to connect it to a PC. Don't know if it could play retail games. Just going by features other developer units have; I have no internal info on the system.

 

As for the unit's history, you'd probably know more than I do. Where'd you find it?

Edited November 8, 2017 by pacman000

[jhd]

if you tired to sell it Nintendo could sue; they're really protective. Even if the courts decided that it was OK to resell you'd spend a lot on legal fees, too much for the system to be worth much.

 

Correct. A lot depends on the original owner/creator.

 

I occasionally see cable modems and, once, a Sega Channel decoder device, at thrift shops. Technically, these devices are always owned by the original cable company, and then just leased to the end-user. Indeed, some of these items bore stickers proclaiming them the property of a now long-defunct local cable TV company. And so, technically, the successor company could sue the thrift shop (or a subsequent purchaser) for the devices return, were they aware of its existence. In reality, nobody cares as this is obsolete technology with no market value.

 

For another example, I recently sold a house. We had an old ADSL modem that belonged to the local Telco. It was permanently mounted into the basement ceiling, and wired into electrical and telephone lines. When we moved, I contacted the Telco about retrieving it -- it is legally their property, after all. They did not care to have it back; it is now obsolete and not worth the effort of removing it from the mounting. Did ownership thus pass to me (and then the purchasers of the house)? This is unclear, but also unimportant as the item is of no use or value.

 

I am, of course, speaking just about the hardware. Software licensing is another topic -- and one where I do not know enough to comment.

[Tanooki]

 

On the other hand, if I buy that same used car from a nervous-looking individual whom I only just met for $500, then I have reasonable notice that it may be stolen property, and I would be obliged to inquire further about the ownership.

 

I'm not a lawyer either, but I do know at least what you could call a local pawn shop law around these parts. When they take in a good, they have to hold onto it for a period of 7 business days. In that period if the police or a potential original owner can notify them of a stolen item, if they can prove lock solid tangible evidence of real ownership the shop that took in the second hand good loses the item. They don't ask when you come in to resell/pawn something where you got it, they just assume the risk and put out some money in trade. At that point it is up to the loser (shop) to then deal with the original person they got the item from legally if possible to hopefully recoup losses.

 

In the case of this item, if it so happened to say come into this guys hands because he got it from a resell shop, you're right it's not his job to know where they got it, but it is his job as the owner of stolen goods to hand it over and if he can't legally go after the next one back down the food chain to get their cash back they're basically screwed.

[cybercylon]

You can't tell much from those crappy pictures (unless someone with better eyes can really tell).

 

Anyway, I suspect we are not going to hear much from the individual who started the thread. I am not sure what this person was even asking (price or additional information could be implied I guess).