It is not clearly stated it is insinuated. It is more clearly stated concerniong business practices and the like.
Let me explain in further detail.
1.Terms of Use. It dictates how the hardware should be used. Hence because they are telling you how it should be used this insinuated that you are only using it you do not own it. Otherwise they have no right at all as to declare what you can or cannot use it.
2. To provide an example let us say I buy a Dell Laptop. It says as long s you do not use Internet explorer the warranty lasts forever and covers A,B,C and D. hence they are saying what are the limits of how you should be using it. Similar to how if I gave you a dollar and said, only use this for chocolate if you use it for otherwise I will cut your balls off.
3.
NOw let us say I am building a laptop. I buy all the hardware, the processor, motherboard etc etc. Now I have built my laptop from the pieces I bought. This means that I own it because I created it, I can choose how or how not to use it (unless federal law says otherwise). It is my property.
The difference between 2 and 3 is that in 2, you are getting it from a company. That company is giving you the hardware but only for certain uses. So you are restricted to those uses otherwise the warranty is voided, and they will not do anything if you break it.
If you did actually own the hardware, Nintendo would NOT be allowed to brick it if you were to mod it.
So lets go back to my handmade laptop. If Microsoft bricks the laptop, I am within my rights to sue them for bricking the laptop.
This is why if your wii gets bricked by Nintendo, you cannot do a **** thing because its THEIR wii. you only by the usage.
Again this is how the Datel v. NIntendo ruling came into play concerning the AR.
Yeah you can use 3rd party software to mess with their stuff, but once you do so they can brick it because it is THEIR hardware.
Am I clearer now?
On another note, I am very strongly against adding L-canceling. As much as it might make some characters better, it isn't really a good mechanic to begin with. If a move is too laggy to be successfully used during game play, that is a design flaw. Lag is a good way to limit the power of specific moves and ensure that more of a character's moveset sees use. Despite the fact that L-canceling only reduces lag, it increases the usefulness of some moves more than others.
Except that if L canceling brings balance to the game that does not exist. If there was no L canceling in melee, Bowser, ganondorf and other characters would be completely unusuable.
The fact that it contributes to competitive play by making all the characters viabl e is good. Especially since its universal.
Adding technical skill isn't going to improve Brawl all that much, despite how much many people think it will. The real talent of the Super Smash Bros. games comes in the ability to react, adapt, and THINK in new situations. I don't remember who said it, (sorry) but I feel the need to share this comment. Technical skill is just a ceiling that good players are expected to reach. The thing that makes a professional player truly special is their thinking ability in match situations.
Technical skill isn't what made melee either. Technical skill only added to what was already there.
IC's are arguably the most technical character to use in melee.
Eddie is the most technical character in GG. Simply because alot of tech skill is involved doesn't mean the gmae it sbetter, it is how it is put to use.
