Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Oni no Ted]

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/01/sony-v-hotz-sony-sends-dangerous-message

tl;dr  Sony is using a legal Sledgehammer to go after users of their own products


BTW,
Anyone want to buy a PSP?

[Blake Johnson]

http://blog.us.playstation.com/2011/02/16/official-statement-regarding-ps3-circumvention-devices-and-pirated-software/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=official_statement_021611



lol, they are asking for people who have the devices to please stop using them.... free will cant be stopped

[Fox McCloud]

Quit whining.  Sony can do what they want with their products.  Don't like it?  Don't buy it.  You can go and buy an Xbox or something.  Cause we all know how open the Xbox is.

[wcshoe]

I think the point that they were trying to make was that once you buy it, it is now YOUR product, not Sony's...

[Dragontologist]

More importantly, they changed the rules on how you were allowed to use it AFTER people made purchases, and refused to refund any money.  If people knew how it would change, they may not have purchased them at the time, and now they have no choice.

Also - I completely disagree with the concept of a product being owned, in any way, by the company after you've purchased it.  No one can tell me how I'm allowed to use a stuffed animal or a light bulb or a printed book once I purchase it, and just because this item is more expensive and electronic doesn't mean I own it any less for that.

[Fox McCloud]

They do give you the choice not to move to that update.

[Dragontologist]

But then you can't play the most recent games.

[Oni no Ted]

Quit whining.  Sony can do what they want with their products. 

So, according to your line of thought...

If you own a Ford Truck, it's okay for Ford to say you can't drive over 15mph?
... or you can't install a certain brand of radio?
   ... or tires?
or get a custom paint job?
or can only use BP brand gas?

No, it's not. Once you give money to a company FOR A PRODUCT, it belongs to you. If Sony (or any company for that matter) wants to control their product after the point of purchase, I can have my money back thank you.

Sony has pulled this crap at least twice before (Securom and rootkits anyone?)

[Fox McCloud]

EULA mah dude.  They have the right.  And you agreed to those terms.  For what reason do you want to crack the Playstation 3?  Cause it's such an awesome Linux box?  Or the real reason for doing this, cause people steal shit.  Honestly I am not happy with the measures Sony is using.  But when you start distributing the means to break the system and steal.  You bring it on yourself.  Honestly the PC market has been desecrated by piracy.  Do you really want developers to be even LESS inclined to put out products for the PS3?  If you want to break the system in the privacy of your own home and then keep it to yourself...That is fine.  They probably won't come after you for that.  But this is like giving someone the keys to get into somebody's house.  You made it public that's where they went wrong.

[Dragontologist]

We're not denying that piracy is wrong, that hacking the PS3 is wrong, and that it probably should not have been distributed out on the internet.  But a major thing about the PS3 when it came out was that it was honestly a really cheap computer and they encouraged people to put Linux on it at the time.  Putting Linux on the PS3, btw, is NOT hacking it, and Sony supported it at the time.  It did not make it possible to steal games, since Linux is just an operating system like Windows or Mac's OSX. 

The major thing PS3's with Linux were used for was to make super-computers.  They linked up a bunch of PS3's and blam, they had a supercomputer.  For example, check out this article about the AIR FORCE connecting 1,760 PS3's to make the Department of Defense's fastest supercomputer.  http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html

Sony's NEW EULA does not allow this, while their old one did.  In fact, by owning these supercomputers, the Air Force is now in violation of Sony's EULA - and they were NOT in violation of it when it was built!  And it's not like the Air Force had an option as to whether they accepted the terms; Sony changed them AFTER the Air Force bought them, and is trying to enforce them as if they were agreed to retroactively. 

My issue is that they changed the EULA after they were purchased, and then claimed that everyone who had violated the new EULA was breaking the law.  There's actually a law term for this when it happens in court - Ex Post Facto (translation, "After the fact").  It would be like the US proclaiming that abortions were illegal and then prosecuting every person who has had a legal abortion in the past 10 years, even though it was legal when they did so. 

(As a side note, I also do agree with Ted, although my issue is more that they changed the EULA and didn't let anyone have refunds, than the rights of people to break their own stuff if they want)

[Oni no Ted]

EULA mah dude.  They have the right.  And you agreed to those terms.

I notice that the eula is electronic, requiring the end user to:

Purchase the system in question
set it up
and then you can read all the fun eula details

Good luck returning an open system due to eula reasons

And courts have ruled that eula's are neither contractual documents, nor are they legally enforceable
[via EFF]

For what reason do you want to crack the Playstation 3?  Cause it's such an awesome Linux box?

Doesn't matter why. I own it, I'll do what I want with it.

[Oni no Ted]

My issue is that they changed the EULA after they were purchased, and then claimed that everyone who had violated the new EULA was breaking the law.  There's actually a law term for this when it happens in court - Ex Post Facto (translation, "After the fact").  It would be like the US proclaiming that abortions were illegal and then prosecuting every person who has had a legal abortion in the past 10 years, even though it was legal when they did so. 

The Constitution covers this clearly:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
   -US Constitution, Article 1 Section 9