Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 17th Mar 2011 13:19 UTC
Legal And so Sony's crusade against Playstation 3 hacker George "Geohot" Hotz continues. After Sony getting all of Geohot's computers and access to server logs and personal details from many of his websites and social media accounts, Sony has now been given access to Geohot's PayPal account, and all information within it - including of the people he has had financial dealings with.
Order by: Score:
PS2 emulation
by Narishma on Thu 17th Mar 2011 13:43 UTC
Narishma
Member since:
2005-07-06

A bit off topic but I don't think you can enable PS2 emulation on PS3s that don't have it, because it relies on hardware that's not present on those PS3s. The PS2's architecture is quite complex and the PS3 isn't powerful enough to do it fully in software.

Reply Score: 2

RE: PS2 emulation
by m_abs on Thu 17th Mar 2011 22:26 UTC in reply to "PS2 emulation"
m_abs Member since:
2005-07-06

A bit off topic but I don't think you can enable PS2 emulation on PS3s that don't have it, because it relies on hardware that's not present on those PS3s. The PS2's architecture is quite complex and the PS3 isn't powerful enough to do it fully in software.

The original European PS3 had software emulator for PS2. Which was later removed ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: PS2 emulation
by Narishma on Thu 17th Mar 2011 23:37 UTC in reply to "RE: PS2 emulation"
Narishma Member since:
2005-07-06

The original European PS3 had software emulator for PS2. Which was later removed ;)

It was only a partial emulator. It emulated the CPU, but the GPU was present in hardware. And a lot of PS2 games don't work on those PS3s.

Reply Score: 2

Corps
by ARUmar on Thu 17th Mar 2011 13:56 UTC
ARUmar
Member since:
2009-10-08

they own wahtever you buy and this is the eaction when their ottom line is threatened.Its a sad situation where wha you 'buy' be it hardware or software is basically on lease to you.when modders were low key they didnt really mind but with the net and consumers getting what they want from wherever they want.

Reply Score: 2

Its a good sign.
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 17th Mar 2011 14:31 UTC
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

Sony is looking for evidence that people tied to piracy paid him to before or after the hack was published, even though it is not required for DMCA.

Why is it a good thing? Because I think it shows Sony knows the other OS is a legitimate defence. Without additional evidence to show that he published the hack for the purpose of violating copyright, they are up a creek.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Its a good sign.
by WereCatf on Thu 17th Mar 2011 15:04 UTC in reply to "Its a good sign. "
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Sony is actually looking for evidence that Geohot either got paid/donated by people from San Fransisco or by any SCEA employee which they could then try use to argue that they should instead be able to sue Geohot there.

How it all works, I don't really quite understand. Geohot himself says he didn't accept donations before the court case started and even if he did he likely would have gotten such all over the world, not only from San Fransisco denizens. Shouldn't Sony then have to prove that the majority of the donations came from San Fransisco in order to establish the connection?

Well, if Geohot is indeed honest and didn't receive payments or donations before the court case started then Sony has just shot themselves in the foot with this thing: they won't be anymore able to argue for change of jurisdiction and Geohot will have just gotten stronger footing for his case because he can prove his honesty.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Its a good sign.
by UglyKidBill on Thu 17th Mar 2011 17:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Its a good sign. "
UglyKidBill Member since:
2005-07-27

Man, the days when they needed to prove you guilty are long gone, all they need to do is twist the story enough to make the judge┬┤s arguments look sustainable to the public.

Entertainment providers are definitely on a rampage to terrorize people regarding console hacking, file sharing, and the like. And every puppet, I mean government, is in their pockets already.

Reply Score: 4

Comment by FunkyELF
by FunkyELF on Thu 17th Mar 2011 14:43 UTC
FunkyELF
Member since:
2006-07-26

This is what gets me. If someone with a license buys a gun in the US, and then goes on to shoot up his school, is the gun shop liable? If someone buys an axe at the hardware store and goes on a brutal killing spree, is the hardware store liable? If Hotz enables benign features, and someone else runs with his work to enable cheating and piracy, is Hotz liable?


Sony will ask a question like this though...
If someone does 99% of the work required to enable piracy and leaves the 1% to someone else, are they liable?

They will try to downplay the Homebrew and make it look as though he was trying to enable piracy all along. Its hard to differentiate the two since its actually the same work.

Hopefully his past experience with jailbreaking the iPhone will show that his motives actually were homebrew and not piracy.

Reply Score: 4

on a somewhat related note
by molnarcs on Thu 17th Mar 2011 14:58 UTC
molnarcs
Member since:
2005-09-10

Probably those people on Android phones know about Cyanogenmod. Found this on among their tweets. Note that the guy was approached by Sony with a job offer... just like that, out of the blue. Read his response here:
http://yfrog.com/f/h23i3ctj/

I have nothing but admiration for men of principles like him. Respect!

(read the link to see the connection with this news)

Edited 2011-03-17 14:58 UTC

Reply Score: 5

even if it's for piracy
by bob_bipbip on Thu 17th Mar 2011 15:35 UTC
bob_bipbip
Member since:
2009-04-28

even if 'hotz done this for piracy purposes, fuck sony and the judge.

i mean, it's like firearms sellings, they were made to kill, but you can buy them and use them exclusively for training, for hunting animals, or if you are a cop, for chasing burglar.

it's not mandatory to buy them to rob a bank !!!!!

Reply Score: 3

RE: even if it's for piracy
by kop316 on Thu 17th Mar 2011 18:03 UTC in reply to "even if it's for piracy"
kop316 Member since:
2006-07-01

Unfortunately, in regards to the US legal system, it is not like buying a gun.

Since the DMCA says you cannot circumvent copyright protection schemes, Sony is making the claim that this is what he did. The intent behind it does not matter.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: even if it's for piracy
by phoenix on Thu 17th Mar 2011 18:57 UTC in reply to "RE: even if it's for piracy"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

The intent behind it does matter, especially in the case of the DMCA. There are explicity provisions in there for working around interoperability and fair use issues.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: even if it's for piracy
by cb88 on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:19 UTC in reply to "RE: even if it's for piracy"
cb88 Member since:
2009-04-23

I think it ceases to be a copy protection scheme when It ceases to do just that... what geohot cracked wasn't a mere copy protecton scheme I was a means of Sony retaining full control of devices that customers have purchased so that Sony could remove any feature or capability of the device they wanted. The threat of that along ought to be enough grounds for the hack.

Reply Score: 1

Wraking
by zizban on Thu 17th Mar 2011 15:53 UTC
zizban
Member since:
2005-07-06

No wraking here. You can bring the judge's impartiallity (or lack there of) up on appeal, though.

Reply Score: 4

v In Sony's corner
by infekt on Thu 17th Mar 2011 17:27 UTC
RE: In Sony's corner
by WereCatf on Thu 17th Mar 2011 17:52 UTC in reply to "In Sony's corner"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

On the subject of Hotz, trying to enable homebrew only is weak. An intelligent person should weight the pros and cons of his/her actions. And honestly, he was the enabler for the hacks (whether he intended to do so from the beginning or not). There is no question of that.

So as a gamer, I want Hotz to be made an example of.


Gee, that is not only ignorant but also damn selfish. Blame the people who create the cheats and hacks instead. It's like blaming LG for creating DVD-burners because other people then use those to burn pirated DVDs! Or do you go and blame for example the people who create hammers? You do know that some people those to kill others, don't you? Oh, wait, to be more in line with your argument you should actually go ahead and blame IBM for creating Cell and for actually making IBM PC-compatible in the first place!

Argh. I am so annoyed by you selfish little pr*cks who just want to place blame on anyone they can instead of blaming the people who are actually responsible. Cheaters and those who create the cheats are the responsible parties and that's that, but oh no, you rather place it all on a person who himself never encouraged piracy or cheating in the first place.

EDIT: Thought to add that cheating WAS already possible way before even the first CFW appeared. But you choose to ignore that, it's more comfortable for you to have someone to blame. Also, it's apparently not the companies' fault themselves not to sanitize input and just blindly trusting whatever client reports to the servers, right? ANY sane gaming company should always, at all times, sanitize the input, but they just chose to blindly trust anything they get and then you get this kind of a mess. Again, it's just easier to blame it on Hotz than the companies themselves...

Edited 2011-03-17 17:55 UTC

Reply Score: 5

v RE[2]: In Sony's corner
by infekt on Thu 17th Mar 2011 19:05 UTC in reply to "RE: In Sony's corner"
RE[3]: In Sony's corner
by No it isnt on Thu 17th Mar 2011 19:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: In Sony's corner"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Well, in this capitalist society, the capitalist will sell you something, promising certain features, then take those features away after you paid for it. Just like they did with the games you whine about. You're misplacing blame on hackers instead of the people who don't deliver the service they sold you.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: In Sony's corner
by roger_ramjet on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:09 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: In Sony's corner"
roger_ramjet Member since:
2007-04-30

"You're misplacing blame on hackers instead of the people who don't deliver the service they sold you."

I couldn't have put it better myself !

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: In Sony's corner
by atriq on Fri 18th Mar 2011 01:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: In Sony's corner"
atriq Member since:
2007-10-18

Jesus. So much for being civil.
Tone trolling right out of the gate, eh?

But really, if you don't like people on the internet criticizing your position, go complain to the power company; it makes just as much sense as your current position.

Look, this will send out a message to stop stealing bread and butter from developers pockets used to feed families.
By the looks of the situation, you're in a far safer position if you're a pirate than if you're trying to help others reclaim stolen features.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: In Sony's corner
by Morgan on Fri 18th Mar 2011 03:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: In Sony's corner"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

What "bread and butter" did Hotz steal from you and your family? How in the hell is re-enabling OtherOS and homebrew possibly going to affect your paycheck?

Good lord, the Stupid is with you today.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: In Sony's corner
by WereCatf on Fri 18th Mar 2011 11:58 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: In Sony's corner"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

What "bread and butter" did Hotz steal from you and your family? How in the hell is re-enabling OtherOS and homebrew possibly going to affect your paycheck?


This is something I often see people claiming, and I seriously can't fathom WHY it is such a popular "argument." Don't people understand the difference, do they somehow really think that running Linux on your PS3 equates piracy, or what?

I mean, the fact is that homebrew is by very definition software made by people in their spare time, for free, and only for their and/or others' enjoyment, and it takes nothing away from commercial products unless you count it as competition, and even then competition has never been a bad thing. And running Linux? Well, since Sony isn't providing OtherOS functionality anymore then there isn't anyone losing their job anyways with people releasing other ways of running Linux on the PS3.

Good lord, the Stupid is with you today.


I quite like this comment, I feel tempted to take it as my next signature ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: In Sony's corner
by r_a_trip on Fri 18th Mar 2011 14:37 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: In Sony's corner"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

[q]What "bread and butter" did Hotz steal from you and your family? How in the hell is re-enabling OtherOS and homebrew possibly going to affect your paycheck?

This is something I often see people claiming, and I seriously can't fathom WHY it is such a popular "argument." Don't people understand the difference, do they somehow really think that running Linux on your PS3 equates piracy, or what?[q]

It is a rather conformist and unthinking argument. I can piece the reasoning together pretty well, if I severely suppress my inclination to being an individual.

Sony made the PS3 to be used as a gaming device. Therefore its use is predefined and limited to playing games. Games are made by game developers, who earn their living with that. So if you use a PS3 with legal software (e.g. Linux) that isn't in the for pay gaming category, you are robbing game developers of making a living. Also, since Sony sells the PS3 at a loss and recoups the money through various licensing revenue, you are stealing potential revenue from Sony if you use your bought PS3 as something else than a gaming device.

It is a pure lemming way of thinking. In darker times these people always go to the slaughterhouse first.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: In Sony's corner
by WereCatf on Fri 18th Mar 2011 16:03 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: In Sony's corner"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Sony made the PS3 to be used as a gaming device. Therefore its use is predefined and limited to playing games.


Doesn't fly. Sony themselves designed AND advertised PS3 for use with Linux, ergo it is definitely not predefined and limited to playing games.

Games are made by game developers, who earn their living with that. So if you use a PS3 with legal software (e.g. Linux) that isn't in the for pay gaming category, you are robbing game developers of making a living.


This doesn't fly either: there is absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that the people running Linux would buy games if they couldn't run it. Besides, running Linux on it wouldn't prohibit them from also buying games if it weren't for Sony.

Also, since Sony sells the PS3 at a loss


Again, doesn't fly: Sony hasn't been selling PS3 at a loss ever since they brought the slim out. Only the fat one was sold at a loss.

It is a pure lemming way of thinking. In darker times these people always go to the slaughterhouse first.


Actually in the middle-ages the "lemming way of thinking" was not only encouraged, you often got burned down as a witch or heretic if you dared to think for yourself. Luckily nowadays you don't die for it, you only get sued to hell.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: In Sony's corner
by Alfman on Fri 18th Mar 2011 17:31 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: In Sony's corner"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

r_a_trip,

"Sony made the PS3 to be used as a gaming device. Therefore its use is predefined and limited to playing games."

For you maybe, there is nothing inherently immoral or illegal by modifying one's own hardware to do more.

"Games are made by game developers, who earn their living with that. So if you use a PS3 with legal software (e.g. Linux) that isn't in the for pay gaming category, you are robbing game developers of making a living"

Except that sony themselves sold the PS3 with other os. Not to mention that it you sell something under cost, you need to be prepared to handle the consequences of customers buying your goods under cost.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: In Sony's corner
by Morgan on Fri 18th Mar 2011 15:48 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: In Sony's corner"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

"Good lord, the Stupid is with you today.


I quite like this comment, I feel tempted to take it as my next signature ;)
"

Go right ahead, I promise not to sue you for "piracy". ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: In Sony's corner
by zimbatm on Thu 17th Mar 2011 18:22 UTC in reply to "In Sony's corner"
zimbatm Member since:
2005-08-22

You just fell in the trap. Hotz impersonates all the problems for Sony and that is what they want you to believe.

That way, you won't start blaming the game manufacturers that poorly crafted their games and put essential parts on the client-side (things that PC games don't do for ages). You won't blame the persons who easily developed the cheats, because they are too many. You won't blame Sony that doesn't respect you and removes features from a device you own (who knows, maybe next time it will be something you will care of).

Reply Score: 2

RE: In Sony's corner
by nt_jerkface on Thu 17th Mar 2011 20:43 UTC in reply to "In Sony's corner"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

I'd like to remind everyone that

there is no -1 don't like your opinion

Reply Score: 3

RE: In Sony's corner
by roger_ramjet on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:06 UTC in reply to "In Sony's corner"
roger_ramjet Member since:
2007-04-30

Your attitude is disgusting. He was re-enabling features that were ADVERTISED BY SONY when it was released.

I was using it as a COMPUTER in edition to a gaming machine which was part of the marketing. Instead of directing your anger at Sony who took away marketed features that SOME PEOPLE PAID FOR without adequate information to end users that it would be REMOVED (otherOS)you directed it at an individual that was trying to restore my RIGHTS as part of my purchase (OtherOS).

If devices are merely leased and we do not own them then this should be much more obvious when it is purchased. Features should not be implemented,marketed,sold and then REMOVED.

Get a clue you simple gamer.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: In Sony's corner
by nt_jerkface on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:35 UTC in reply to "RE: In Sony's corner"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

He was re-enabling features that were ADVERTISED BY SONY when it was released.


You can still use it as a Linux server, you just can't update it. And he was trying to break out of the hypervisor with Linux before OtherOS was disabled.

Why anyone would think it is a good idea to use a Sony console as a server is beyond me. Sure you might get some good cpu power/price initially but the ram is limited and the parts can't be replaced.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: In Sony's corner
by WereCatf on Fri 18th Mar 2011 02:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: In Sony's corner"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Why anyone would think it is a good idea to use a Sony console as a server is beyond me.


You lack imagination. Even the US Army itself were planning to use PS3 clusters.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: In Sony's corner
by westlake on Fri 18th Mar 2011 05:19 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: In Sony's corner"
westlake Member since:
2010-01-07

You lack imagination. Even the US Army itself were planning to use PS3 clusters.


Each single cluster taking 1,500-2,000 PS3 Fats + spares out of retail distribution channels.

Each console sold at a loss.

With no return to Sony from video game sales, Blu-Ray, or online services.

and cannibalizing the market for any commercial cell-based HPC product.

That is not a "sustainable business model," to quote one of the geek's favorite phrases.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: In Sony's corner
by Neolander on Fri 18th Mar 2011 06:57 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: In Sony's corner"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

In this case, I'd argue that the big problem is selling consoles at loss, having expectations on how much games people will buy, and going amok if it's not the case.

But well, guess this line of thinking hasn't caused enough economic crises yet.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: In Sony's corner
by Moredhas on Fri 18th Mar 2011 10:33 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: In Sony's corner"
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

I want to know how the hell Sony can possibly claim these are sold at a loss still! You pay roughly $450 Australian for a PS3 these days, and that's roughly equal to US$ now. Given the time honoured tradition of taking the US price and doubling it for Australian shores, irrespective of the exchange rate, I'd say Americans play, what, $250 for a PS3? It's still pretty old equipment, and if Sony can't afford to mass produce something this sub-par (relative to today's hardware) for LESS than that, they're doing it wrong.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: In Sony's corner
by WereCatf on Fri 18th Mar 2011 11:26 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: In Sony's corner"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Each console sold at a loss.


It was true at the beginning, but not anymore. Ever since the PS3 slim came about Sony hasn't been selling them at a loss.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: In Sony's corner
by Alfman on Fri 18th Mar 2011 12:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: In Sony's corner"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

"You can still use it as a Linux server, you just can't update it. And he was trying to break out of the hypervisor with Linux before OtherOS was disabled."

This is precisely the problem, the users cannot have ALL the features they paid for. Giving them a choice of which features they want is immaterial.

The underlying reason for sony's change of heart was already mentioned earlier: Sony discovered that it was selling a desirable product below cost. They wanted to phase out the minority of customers who used the feature. However it was clearly a legal mistake to revoke the feature on consoles already sold. Sony have no legs to stand on there, if they weren't the 600 pound guerilla in the room they would already found guilty for breach of fair advertising laws.


"Why anyone would think it is a good idea to use a Sony console as a server is beyond me. Sure you might get some good cpu power/price initially but the ram is limited and the parts can't be replaced."

All this means is that you are not and never were the target demographic for either otheros or homebrew apps. So what? Others may want to push the boundaries of what their hardware can do, more power to them.


"It's only logical in your mind based on your own expectations. For the over 1 million PS3 MW2 owners who had their online experience ruined Hotz is an asshead. If PS3 owners could vote they would have him thrown in jail."

I've installed homebrew on the Wii, does that make me an "asshead"? What about people who root their phones? What about TiVos? Home Routers or NAS devices?

All these products have communities of active users who pool together to make their existing hardware do very interesting things. They may not always have the manufacturer's blessing, but doing this to one's own hardware is neither immoral nor illegal.


Copyright infringement and/or cheaters are valid concerns - but not to the exclusion of other legal rights.

As draconian as the DMCA is, it still expressly permits the type of reverse engineering Hotz did:
"This exception permits circumvention, and the development of technological means for such circumvention, by a person who has lawfully obtained a right to use a copy of a computer program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing elements of the program necessary to achieve interoperability with other programs, to the extent that such acts are permitted under copyright law."

Hotz would probably fit under the following exception as well:
"An exception for encryption research permits circumvention of access control measures, and the development of the technological means to do so, in order to identify flaws and vulnerabilities of encryption technologies."

One last point is that copyright protection in the form of DRM is inherently flawed. Encryption algorithms are designed to keep information hidden from even the most determined advisories by withholding the keys, however DRM implicitly breaks this encryption model due to the fact that the keys are necessarily distributed on the media and/or in the devices which play the media. DRM is fundamentally flawed and has never withstood scrutiny.

This may be beyond the understanding of politicians and CEOs demanding DRM, but what they're seeking is fundamentally impossible.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: In Sony's corner
by WereCatf on Fri 18th Mar 2011 13:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: In Sony's corner"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

One last point is that copyright protection in the form of DRM is inherently flawed. Encryption algorithms are designed to keep information hidden from even the most determined advisories by withholding the keys, however DRM implicitly breaks this encryption model due to the fact that the keys are necessarily distributed on the media and/or in the devices which play the media. DRM is fundamentally flawed and has never withstood scrutiny.


It is indeed flawed and could be in need of revisioning in many cases, but it's not entirely useless either. Even a simple CD-check suffices to stop the most blatant copying attempts whereas it doesn't stop the most determined ones. I personally do understand the need and wish for DRM and I don't object to it, I only object to the way how companies go overboard with it nowadays. Of course people are free to disagree with me, but they way I see it is that no amount of DRM will stop the most determined pirates simply because the game still resides on their computers and thus there is absolutely no way of preventing them from eventually gaining access to them and thus it's better to just implement some crude and basic DRM which only prevents the most blatant attempts, and try to offer something in return to those customers who don't break it. Take for example Steam: in return for not breaking their DRM they take care of your saves, installation files, updates, they also provide cross-game chat, they host your screenshots.. That's plenty of advantages in return for one disadvantage. (Yes, I'm sorry, I just happen to like Steam's approach very much. I haven't seen anything even remotely as good so far. Flame me if you wish.)

On the other hand plenty of companies just see that they should somehow magically prevent EVERY pirate, no matter how skilled and determined, and thus they end up screwing over their legitimate customers in the process, they will never be able to reach their goal, and they'll keep on wasting more money on R&D than is actually reasonable. With less time spent on an unreachable, impossible goal they could actually save some money if they just opted to aim for a reachable "stop only the most futile copying attempts" goal.

PS. Sorry for the rant, it's likely partially incoherent too, but I have been enjoying me some vodka. Hopefully I make my point clear anyways.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: In Sony's corner
by Alfman on Sat 19th Mar 2011 05:46 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: In Sony's corner"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

WereCatf,

"It is indeed flawed and could be in need of revisioning in many cases, but it's not entirely useless either."

I'm not sure what you mean here?

Does the DRM technology needs to be revisioned? Or the notion of control through DRM need to be revisioned?

There will never be any permanent technological fix, which implies a continued (and resource draining) escalation of DRM technologies.

If you meant that the application of DRM needs revision, then I'd agree.

"I personally do understand the need and wish for DRM and I don't object to it, I only object to the way how companies go overboard with it nowadays."

Perhaps, but DRM hurts innocent users, and almost never affects the pirated copies going around P2P networks.

Also, making a copy does not equate to being a "pirate" (at least not in all countries). Therefore we should not categorically state that anyone wishing to make a copy is a pirate.

In the US we do have the right to copy copyrighted media to alternate devices without permission from the copyright holder. For instance, we're within our rights to copy a movie to an SD card in a format playable on a portable device. The copyright holder has no legal basis for objections.

The DMCA introduced many complications: we still have the right to have a copy, but we are striped of the right to the means of circumventing copy protections, which is somewhat contradictory. It was certainly sloppy lawmaking.

Never the less, there are exceptions under the DMCA, and I believe that most DRM today falls under one of the exceptions such that the DRM can not be covered under the DMCA. Of course, the law means nothing if the judge is already bought, as in this case.

Reply Score: 2

Come Lenovo
by fran on Thu 17th Mar 2011 18:16 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

I hope the console Lenovo plan's would bring better game pricing, other OS or dual boot function and shorter hardware update cycle.
Current pricing on console games is just ridiculous in the third world.
But dont say I complained...after all reading some posts it seems we are entitled to f&*k all anyway.
So China gives us a good console and cheaper titles.

Reply Score: 3

Oh well...
by Neolander on Thu 17th Mar 2011 20:11 UTC
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

The console market has died with the appearance of current-gen consoles anyway. Consoles are now just limited PCs, and we're fighting to get to fully use them. The outcome of this case won't change a thing about this, which imo is a big problem.

This may sound like a troll, but think about it : what's the point of a video game console ? You buy it, you play with some wires, you plug it in, and it works. From that moment, you do not depend on the manufacturer in any way. You buy new or used games, put them in the drive, and they'll just work as advertised on the box. No need for internet connections and operating instructions, it's very fast to get into the game. Afterwards, you forget that the console is even there : what happens is something between you and the game.

Now, the Xbox 360 is among home devices the closest thing you'll find to an A380's turbin in terms of noise. One third of the initially shipped consoles failed in hardware in their first few months of service. Even on current-gen hardware, there still are some serious bugs left, like the need to eject and insert some perfectly fine discs several times before they works. On the PS3, you frequently have to suffer lengthy console updates if you want your games to work. On all modern consoles, you never jump straight in the game or movie, but must face beforehand a stupid menu which on previous consoles would only be displayed when the console started with no media inside. On the Xbox 360 and the PS3, it's particularly bad, because you also have to endure some more or less stupid and lengthy player setup process before you can play your game with several gamepads properly. All that to finally play games with endless load times, aliasing, and sometimes low framerates.

Having this in mind, it's logical that Hotz fights for the right to use a PS3 as the PC it is. The problem which Sony should face is that their console is just that : a limited PC with a gamepad attached to it. Not a true video game console anymore.

Edited 2011-03-17 20:15 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: Oh well...
by nt_jerkface on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:14 UTC in reply to "Oh well..."
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

The console market has died with the appearance of current-gen consoles anyway.


And you base this on what? Black Ops is the best selling game of all time.

Consoles are now just limited PCs, and we're fighting to get to fully use them.


Well maybe you should have hooked a pc up to your tv. Most PS3 owners are against Hotz. Maybe the problem is with pc enthusiasts expecting consoles to be built around their whims. I play on both and don't want consoles to become pcs.

Now, the Xbox 360 is among home devices the closest thing you'll find to an A380's turbin in terms of noise.


Oh come on when was the last time you used one? The latest two gens are quiet.

Having this in mind, it's logical that Hotz fights for the right to use a PS3 as the PC it is. The problem which Sony should face is that their console is just that : a limited PC with a gamepad attached to it. Not a true video game console anymore.

It's only logical in your mind based on your own expectations. For the over 1 million PS3 MW2 owners who had their online experience ruined Hotz is an asshead.

If PS3 owners could vote they would have him thrown in jail.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Oh well...
by Soulbender on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Oh well..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

For the over 1 million PS3 MW2 owners who had their online experience ruined Hotz is an asshead.


Right, because God forgive they'd blame Sony for not designing their software properly. PS3 users where vulnerable the moment they plugged in their unit, they just didn't know it.Maybe they would have preferred that Hotz had kept quiet and released the hack underground as a 0day?
If he had actually done that I could have understood why they'd blame him.

If PS3 owners could vote they would have him thrown in jail.


Thankfully the lynch-mob is not the preferred means of justice these days.
Maybe taking gaming less serious might be a good idea too.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Oh well...
by nt_jerkface on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Oh well..."
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Right, because God forgive they'd blame Sony for not designing their software properly.


Sony made a mistake in their encryption but Geo made a conscious decision to release software that he knew would be used for piracy and cheating 99.9% of the time. His decision is not justified by Sony's mistake.

Thankfully the lynch-mob is not the preferred means of justice these days.
Maybe taking gaming less serious might be a good idea too.

For millions of PS3 owners there has been a loss of value as a result of the key release. A civil society does not have lynch mobs but also does not ignore widespread devaluation of property.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Oh well...
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 17th Mar 2011 22:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Oh well..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The online experience was compromised because Sony is incapable of programming decent software. The PSN was already broken and an absolute pain to use even before Hotz came along. Compare the effortlessness and slickness of the Xbox 360/XBLto Sony's mess of a PS3 UI/PSN.

The only people to blame for the cheating are... The cheaters. You're blaming the hardware store for the murders committed by the guy who bought the axe. This shit wouldn't fly in any other industry - why is the software and computer industry ALWAYS held to different standards? It's fcuking infuriating.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Oh well...
by Neolander on Fri 18th Mar 2011 07:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Oh well..."
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

The worst here is that Sony *are* able to program decent software. My Sony compact camera is just wondrous for its price, firmware included. Firmware wasn't my MD recorders' big problem either. No complaints on the overall usability and stability of my parents' Sony TV and HDD recorder's software either.

The problem is that when Sony focus on making money from a product *after* it is sold, terrible things happen. This is when you get SonicStage and Connect Player. Home appliances that will display photos but not videos from an USB pen drive, forcing you to use the low-res chinch connectivity if you want to show your own videos to your parents. And, apparently, the PSN is another victim of this mysterious law of nature.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Oh well...
by Moredhas on Fri 18th Mar 2011 10:46 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Oh well..."
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

I've said it before: some companies have this amazing knack to ruin a perfectly good idea. Sony has this far more than any other company. Movies on memory sticks could have really taken off, but noooo, Sony had to cripple those. UMDs were nice, too. And Minidiscs. Minidiscs and UMDs were what everyone thought floppies would evolve into. Sony killed Betamax, and I am frankly AMAZED they haven't killed Bluray. I think the only reason Bluray has survived is because as poorly managed as it is, HD DVD was even worse off in that regard. A rare example of a company directly competing with Sony and somehow fucking up even worse.

Sony repeatedly miss and squander opportunities, and overwork things people don't care about (if we're LUCKY they're working on something we don't care about, anyway). Imagine if they'd brought the app store downloadable game concept to the PSP earlier. Before the slim came out, for example. Imagine if they'd set up (or if they did, I never heard of it, so perhaps advertised) a PSP music store. Sony, one of the biggest record labels in the world, selling direct to your pocket. I'll be extremely disappointed (not that I'd buy from there anyway) if the NGP and the new lineup of XPerias like the Arc and Play don't have something like this.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Oh well...
by Neolander on Fri 18th Mar 2011 12:53 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Oh well..."
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Even today, the original MD could compete with modern storage media in some areas. It is, to the best of my knowledge, the most reliable cheap high-density storage medium ever attached to a computer, and as such it would be perfectly suitable for archival purposes. The underlying technology is pure physics genius, and I just can't figure out why no one has taken it one step further, save for Sony themselves with Hi-MD. Maybe it was patented ? Guess we'll never know...

How Sony managed to screw this up by inventing DRM and using a pre-alpha release of that technology on MDs remains beyond me.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Oh well...
by m_abs on Thu 17th Mar 2011 22:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Oh well..."
m_abs Member since:
2005-07-06

It's only logical in your mind based on your own expectations. For the over 1 million PS3 MW2 owners who had their online experience ruined Hotz is an asshead.

Wrong, they had their online experience ruined because Sony are assholes.
It's not Hotz' fault that Sony don't have respect for their customers, their actions are their own fault.

Reply Score: 3

Sony are sore losers
by NaX_sa on Thu 17th Mar 2011 20:24 UTC
NaX_sa
Member since:
2011-02-11

I think a lot of this case is just Sony being a bully because their system was so easily hacked.

Whether its wrong or not, well that's simple to me.

If you buy a car and then decided to modify it, maybe replace some major parts and change the look and performance of the car and then show others what you have done and tell them how you did it. Do the motor companies have any legal right to stop you even if it makes them look bad because you used some competitors parts and said their parts were junk.

Does the government have any right to hold you liable if somebody else uses your provided info to the then change their car and break the speed limit.

I don't think so. If this was the case then "Top Gear" would not exists. As far as I am concerned if I bought some hardware I can do what every I want with it, even if that is to smash it into 100 little bits to use in a "I hate Sony poster".

Personally I don't hate Sony but I don't buy any of there products any more and on a side note, I think just as much of Apple inc. and my opinion of the companies has nothing to do with the products these companies produce.[i][/i]

Reply Score: 2

Don't like Sony or Hotz
by nt_jerkface on Thu 17th Mar 2011 20:57 UTC
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

I don't believe for one second that Hotz is against piracy.

That would be like saying you are against drugs even though you operate a head shop.

Sure there is the 1/1000 guy that will go in for a tobacco pipe but you know damn well what the vast majority are doing with your products. It's childish and intellectually dishonest to pretend otherwise.

So while Hotz had a major hand in enabling wide-scale piracy I don't think Sony should bother going after him. They should just copy MS and charge for online access and scan any console that wants to connect. But I think they should take it a step further and brick any console that has pirated games. Provide a drive snapshot for any ahole who tries lying about being unfairly targeted.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Don't like Sony or Hotz
by Soulbender on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:04 UTC in reply to "Don't like Sony or Hotz"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I don't believe for one second that Hotz is against piracy.


It's not illegal to be for piracy though and whether he's for or against it is immaterial.

They should just copy MS and charge for online access and scan any console that wants to connect.


Or they could just hire programmers who at least understand the fundamentals of cryptography and they wouldn't have had this problem in the first place.

But I think they should take it a step further and brick any console that has pirated games


That would be illegal for them to do though since the console is not their property anymore.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Don't like Sony or Hotz
by nt_jerkface on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Don't like Sony or Hotz"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

It's not illegal to be for piracy though and whether he's for or against it is immaterial.


Not to me when he claims he isn't and his fans believe him based on his word.

That would be illegal for them to do though since the console is not their property anymore.


Not if the user accepts a service agreement. It's akin to losing your equipment if you are caught cheating in a sports event. Anyone who doesn't want their console bricked can stay offline.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Don't like Sony or Hotz
by Soulbender on Thu 17th Mar 2011 21:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Don't like Sony or Hotz"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Not to me when he claims he isn't and his fans believe him based on his word.


I meant for the case.

Not if the user accepts a service agreement


Unless there's consumer laws prohibiting that, which is the case in many (maybe even most) countries.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by viton
by viton on Thu 17th Mar 2011 23:51 UTC
viton
Member since:
2005-08-09

"when Sony removed OtherOS, he wanted to reimplement that feature. He never enabled others to cheat, he never enabled piracy."

Cool story, but far from reality.
It was Hotz who released the vital information/tools and enabled piracy just to earn some more fame. He did nothing to "reimplement OtherOS". Obviously, master key to decrypt and re-sign hacked executables is intended for piracy, but not "OtherOS" feature.

Thom, please stop painting him as innocent sheep.
He knew that Sony may take appropriate steps because of his actions. And that didn't stop him.
Big boys should be responsible for their actions.

You are free to perform as much PS3/Sony bashing as you wish, but don't be surprised that there are people on the other side.

Edited 2011-03-17 23:54 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by viton
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 18th Mar 2011 00:05 UTC in reply to "Comment by viton"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

t was Hotz who released the vital information/tools and enabled piracy just to earn some more fame.


Proof?

He did nothing to "reimplement OtherOS".


He released modified firmware that re-enabled OtherOS. In other words, you are lying.

Obviously, master key to decrypt and re-sign hacked executables is intended for piracy, but not "OtherOS" feature.


You are lying again. Those keys were needed to sign executables. FOR HOMEBREW. OTHER people used this information to enable piracy. You would be okay with suing the hardware store becuase the sold an axe that would later be used to murder someone.

Thom, please stop painting him as innocent sheep.


If you give me proof instead of lies, I might.

He knew that Sony may take appropriate steps because of his actions. And that didn't stop him.


Wouldn't stop me either:

erk: C0 CE FE 84 C2 27 F7 5B D0 7A 7E B8 46 50 9F 93 B2 38 E7 70 DA CB 9F F4 A3 88 F8 12 48 2B E2 1B
riv: 47 EE 74 54 E4 77 4C C9 B8 96 0C 7B 59 F4 C1 4D
pub: C2 D4 AA F3 19 35 50 19 AF 99 D4 4E 2B 58 CA 29 25 2C 89 12 3D 11 D6 21 8F 40 B1 38 CA B2 9B 71 01 F3 AE B7 2A 97 50 19
R: 80 6E 07 8F A1 52 97 90 CE 1A AE 02 BA DD 6F AA A6 AF 74 17
n: E1 3A 7E BC 3A CC EB 1C B5 6C C8 60 FC AB DB 6A 04 8C 55 E1
K: BA 90 55 91 68 61 B9 77 ED CB ED 92 00 50 92 F6 6C 7A 3D 8D
Da: C5 B2 BF A1 A4 13 DD 16 F2 6D 31 C0 F2 ED 47 20 DC FB 06 70

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by viton
by danielcavanagh on Fri 18th Mar 2011 03:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by viton"
danielcavanagh Member since:
2010-12-08

haha. why oh why can't i upvote your posts, thom?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by viton
by viton on Mon 21st Mar 2011 11:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by viton"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

Proof?
Tools and published keys are not enough?

He released modified firmware that re-enabled OtherOS.
Ok. He could stay at this point. But that doesn't bring enough fame.

Those keys were needed to sign executables. FOR HOMEBREW.
There is no difference between "homebrew" exe or unsigned game exe.

You would be okay with suing the hardware store becuase the sold an axe that would later be used to murder someone.
Even if this "axe" was prohibited to distribute?

If you give me proof instead of lies, I might.
The proof was attached to your post =)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by viton
by Alfman on Mon 21st Mar 2011 22:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by viton"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

"You would be okay with suing the hardware store becuase the sold an axe that would later be used to murder someone."

"Even if this 'axe' was prohibited to distribute?"

Terrible metaphor, but which law was broken?
As mentioned above, the DMCA has exceptions for what he's done.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by viton
by WereCatf on Fri 18th Mar 2011 02:48 UTC in reply to "Comment by viton"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

It was Hotz who released the vital information/tools and enabled piracy just to earn some more fame.


Incorrect. His CFW did not enable /ps3_home/ nor did it have LV2 loader or anything, AND in addition to that it didn't even enable installation of unsigned packages either, only ones compiled with his own key.

It was others who modified his CFW further to enable playing backups and pirated copies.

Research and get your facts straight.

He did nothing to "reimplement OtherOS". Obviously, master key to decrypt and re-sign hacked executables is intended for piracy, but not "OtherOS" feature.


Oh, really? And exactly how else would you get OtherOS or similar feature on the PS3 without being able to sign your own executables, hmm? Oh, that's right, you don't. Ergo your point is false again.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by viton
by viton on Mon 21st Mar 2011 11:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by viton"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

And exactly how else would you get OtherOS or similar feature on the PS3 without being able to sign your own executables, hmm?

OtherOS is a possibility to install alternative OS to GameOS to different hdd partition.
Linux does not require signed executables.

Reply Score: 2

Reality check
by mrhasbean on Fri 18th Mar 2011 00:47 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

While I don't think Sony should be going after this twit as hard as they are, and I certainly don't believe they should have been given access to the info they have, are there honestly people trying to make out that this guy had no intention or prior inkling that his work would be used for piracy? Honestly? Get real people.

With relation to to the car analogy. The problem with that little comparison is that anyone who decides to drop a big block chev donk into their Kia, or even throw some massive blower on it's standard 1300cc plant, understands there will be consequences. And certainly wouldn't expect to be able to go to Kia for parts, or if the front suspension / drive train collapsed under the load.

Conversely, many PS3's will be modded, unbeknownst to the "owner", by the 14 year old son's - who will not consider the consequences of their actions AT ALL - of those who actually paid for them. So if / when things stop working as expected, or the console won't update or play online (it's front suspension collapses under the load), and the 14 year old says "well I didn't do anything to it", the purchaser will expect to go back to Sony to have the problem rectified, and I guarantee they won't expect to pay for it. Of course we all know Sony wouldn't cover it anyway, but they still have to deal with these people, and handle the bad press they get from these people who then complain that Sony has done them wrong.

THIS is the problem Sony, and other companies like them, face. If he hacked the thing for his own personal use, and maybe shared the info with some hacker friends who kept it to themselves, I doubt Sony would have bothered. But he decided to play with fire, and now he's getting burned...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Reality check
by WereCatf on Fri 18th Mar 2011 02:41 UTC in reply to "Reality check"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

While I don't think Sony should be going after this twit as hard as they are, and I certainly don't believe they should have been given access to the info they have, are there honestly people trying to make out that this guy had no intention or prior inkling that his work would be used for piracy? Honestly? Get real people.


And? Should people also stop developing for example operating systems because they know there will be people using those for wrong/illegal/unauthorized stuff?

he console won't update or play online (it's front suspension collapses under the load), and the 14 year old says "well I didn't do anything to it", the purchaser will expect to go back to Sony to have the problem rectified, and I guarantee they won't expect to pay for it.


Again, what's the issue? If your son goes and does unathorized/illegal modifications to your car you can't expect the car manufacturer to rectify the situation either. So why is this situation then held to a different degree?

Reply Score: 3

Comment by marblesbot
by marblesbot on Fri 18th Mar 2011 02:30 UTC
marblesbot
Member since:
2009-12-25

Forgetting what the PS3 is and can do or can't do, or what GeoHot intentions were and the way Sony treats their loyal customers, is it really legal for them to have access to his bank accounts over this? Is he being accused of terrorism? How can you prove that he received donations for the use of hacking his PS3? If he even received donations at all, which is strictly between him and the donor. And, of course, his bank, who I thought had some kind of guarantee of privacy for it's customers. It sounds like if Sony had a case, they wouldn't need to go through such lengths. If you need to request access to something that has nothing to do with what you're trying to prove just to see if you have a chance at doing something here instead of there, you don't have a leg to stand on. This judge is an idiot!

Reply Score: 2

Which is more evil?
by Alfman on Fri 18th Mar 2011 04:12 UTC
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

As much as Sony should be hated for its part in this fiasco, it may be even more disturbing that the judicial system has judges willing to allow themselves to be turned into puppets under corporate control.

The party who's infringing people's rights is the one suing the victims. This perversion of the courts is a sign of just how corrupt the system has gotten.

The US used to really stand for freedom for the oppressed and justice for all. These days we've kept the moto, but ditched all remnants of freedom and justice.

Reply Score: 3

Why California instead of New Jersey?
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 18th Mar 2011 21:08 UTC
UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

The one thing I still don't understand is why Sony is so hell-bent on suing GeoHot in California instead of NJ. I mean, seriously--would it even matter if the case was transferred to some totally non-related state like Texas or Louisiana or something? And his sites are on the Internet--chances are he got visitors form those two states as well, plus probably almost every other state in the US and many countries around the world, so now what? Sue him in every state? I'm pretty sure Slashdot also linked to his sites a couple times, making far more people aware.

So what is Sony afraid of? Losing? Saving tax money by suing in their own state? Making it even harder for GeoHot to win by causing him to have to pay even more in legal fees? Keeping this lunatic for a judge they've got licking their balls? Something else? Or some/all of the above?

Seriously, I'm just hoping GeoHot wins, but Sony hasn't even got to the whole f***ing point of their lawsuit yet, and it's getting annoying. It looks like they're trying to drain him of money. And they've got a dickheaded judge siding with them every step of the way.

Go GeoHot--F*** Off Sony. Never owned a PS3, never will. This whole thing makes me glad I've been anti-Sony and avoid their products whenever I can since I was around 15.

Reply Score: 2

marblesbot Member since:
2009-12-25

"The one thing I still don't understand is why Sony is so hell-bent on suing GeoHot in California instead of NJ. I mean, seriously--would it even matter if the case was transferred to some totally non-related state like Texas or Louisiana or something?"

"Keeping this lunatic for a judge they've got licking their balls?"

You knew the answer the whole time.

Reply Score: 1