Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 23rd Mar 2011 22:55 UTC
Legal "Sony has filed a new document arguing that the legal action against the noted hacker George Hotz should proceed in California. One of the arguments Hotz's legal team made against California's jurisdiction was the lack of a PlayStation Network account, which means he didn't agree to the Terms of Service, but now the company claims to have 'proof' that Hotz did in fact have a PSN account. An interview with a company based in California, and the number of downloads from California, are being used as evidence."
Order by: Score:
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

http://psx-scene.com/forums/f6/geohot-flees-south-america-83925/ should provide more than enough insight to the actual case, like e.g. the claimed "hardware" Hotz didn't provide to Sony was just the HDD controller card, nothing more, and it has been given to them already.

Taken from the link above:

As for Sony's claims that Hotz has a PSN account under the name "Blickmaniac," they should probably take a closer look at the forum post they are using as evidence, since the geotag in the picture posted by the user leads to Cambridge, MA. That's not even close to New Jersey the last time we checked. So, yeah, life's good.


So yeah, that quite ruins that angle, too.

Yet again another example of "reporting things only from one angle and completely ignoring the opposing angle." And way to go Sony, like you haven't ever done anything wrong..

Reply Score: 3

thebluesgnr Member since:
2005-11-14

Geotag on a forum? What?

Let's take a look:

"On January 12, 2011, Hotz submitted a declaration to the Court (Docket No. 19-1) in which he made unequivocal statements on a number of topics. However, when it came to discussing the PSN account, Hotz equivocated, stating: “To the best of my knowledge and belief, I do not have a PlayStation Network account.” Hotz also provided interrogatory responses that he has refused to verify, stating that he has not accessed the PSN. Bricker Decl. ¶4.Hotz identified four PS3 Systems in his possession. Bricker Decl., ¶4, Exh. C. He explained that he had purchased one of these consoles new in February 2010 and provided the serial number for that console. Id. SCEA used that serial number to determine that on February 25, 2010, Hotz purchased the PS3 System at a Gamestop store just miles from his home. Law Decl., ¶6; Bricker Decl., ¶6, Exh. E. SCEA’s records show that the same PS3 System was used on March 10, 2010 to create a PSN account under the user name “blickmanic.” Law Decl., ¶6, Exh. A. The IP address associated with the registration is located in Glen Rock, New Jersey, where Hotz lives."

Seems pretty clear cut to me.

Reply Score: 3

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Yeah, I find it hard to believe that he's never accessed a PSN account. So at some point, he probably agreed to the EULA. The real question is, did he agree to the EULA on the same unit he hacked, and does that even matter?

More to the point, assuming we're not breaking copyright laws, how much longer are we going to allow corporations to dictate when/where/how we are allowed to use the hardware that we bought and paid for? You want to go after pirates and online cheaters? Fine. But if I want to hack my console to run Linux and/or turn it into a toaster, it's none of Sony's goddamn business.

If corporations want to have control over what we're allowed to do with a device even after a sale takes place, we should be allowed to return it for a full refund when they start removing features.

Edited 2011-03-24 03:29 UTC

Reply Score: 7

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

This, and past draconian measures by the company, is exactly why I've stopped buying any and all Sony hardware. I've passed up some great deals; most recently, a Sony HDTV at half the retail price, and I've been saving towards a new TV for a while now. I'm even hesitant to buy a Blu-Ray player, given Sony's deep involvement with the technology.

My anti-Sony sentiment began back when they shut down Lik-Sang -- where I enjoyed being able to get Sega Dreamcast gear and games -- because the company sold PSPs in Hong Kong and parts of Europe against Sony's wishes. The sales were legal, and the merchandise was legit. Sony was making money over the table on every PSP Lik-Sang sold. Everyone should have been happy.

But in Sony's world, only they should be happy, and consumers should be dumb sheep who aren't allowed to actually own the hardware they buy.

Fuck 'em.

Reply Score: 4

Hmmm
by bloodline on Thu 24th Mar 2011 00:46 UTC
bloodline
Member since:
2008-07-28

While Apple and Microsoft have done and do things that we might not like, I don't think they have ever sunk so low as to single out and hunt down one of their own users... After this I can't think of a reason why I would ever buy a Sony product.

Well done Sony, you are now the most contemptable tech company around ;)

Edited 2011-03-24 00:50 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE: Hmmm
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 24th Mar 2011 13:10 UTC in reply to "Hmmm"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Well said... I hate Apple and Microsoft, but you're right... neither one tried to directly harm their own customers as far as I can remember.

I always hated Sony too, so this whole legal situation doesn't change much. It just pisses me off more about them and gives me more reasons to slam them and make fun of them over.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Hmmm
by viton on Thu 24th Mar 2011 18:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmmm"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

LOL. Sony-haters concentration in this post is very high.
Sony does some very nice hardware and it is really stupid
to ignore it just because you hate Sony legal practices.

I don't think Geohot will end up in jail. This is just a sign to others what messing with big corporations business could lead to unpleasant consequencies.

Edited 2011-03-24 18:41 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Hmmm
by WereCatf on Thu 24th Mar 2011 19:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I don't think Geohot will end up in jail.


I don't have much knowledge about the US laws, but the little understand I have is that you can't go to jail in a civil case, only in a criminal case, and this is a civil case.

As for the rest: I doubt this 'blickmanic' is really Hotz, but I suppose it remains to be really confirmed one way or the other. If it is then it might seriously undermine Hotz's defence, and if it isn't then it will again place some mistrust towards Sony's claims and will undermine their credibility.

I just wish this was over with already, it is such an important court case and a whole LOT of US consumer rights hang in the balance. The precedent set will have very far-reaching consequences and given how little faith I have in the US courts I fear the result.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Hmmm
by Morgan on Thu 24th Mar 2011 19:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

They do make some nice hardware, apart from a few models in the Vaio laptop series over the years. In years past I was particularly fond of their consumer stereo equipment.

But how is it stupid to choose not to buy from a company that has proven over and over that they will attack customers who dare exercise full ownership of their hardware?

No, I'd say it's quite smart to avoid buying from such a company, since they are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to go after one man for having the gall to try and restore features they had previously marketed and then removed from the system.

As others have said, companies like Apple, Microsoft and Oracle have done some crappy things, but nothing like Sony is doing by directly targeting their own customers for daring to want their device to work as well as it did at purchase time. It's preposterous and bordering on insane, and hopefully the courts will realize that.

In the meantime, I and others like me will continue to buy products from Sony's competitors, as is our right.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Hmmm
by umccullough on Thu 24th Mar 2011 20:09 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

This is just a sign to others what messing with big corporations business could lead to unpleasant consequencies.


So far, the unpleasant consequences appear to be for Sony.

For the most part, George has been experiencing a huge amount of public support from hackers, copyright reform organizations, and consumer advocates alike.

Sony has gotten little more than "Yeah, go get him!" from a bunch of teenagers whining about PSN cheaters, and negative publicity from tech blogs everywhere.

At least, that's how it seems to me, but maybe that's just my semi-biased experience ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Hmmm
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 24th Mar 2011 21:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Sony does some very nice hardware and it is really stupid
to ignore it just because you hate Sony legal practices.

Blah... for every piece of Sony hardware you would argue is "very nice" there are likely several examples of "truly excellent" hardware in the same class by Sony's competitors. And their competitors have so far demonstrated that they will not sue you for using their products as you see fit after buying it from them and having it in your own possession.

It's not like I have to go out of my way to avoid Sony. Their competitors have *always* left me with better choices in products; even if you took the brand name off of everything to remove all traces of bias against Sony, the choice would be clear.

Edited 2011-03-24 21:31 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Hmmm
by r_a_trip on Fri 25th Mar 2011 10:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

This is just a sign to others what messing with big corporations business could lead to unpleasant consequencies [sic].

And we should be comfortable with this and ignore it, how? Not giving Sony money is the only way we can signal to Sony that we don't like what they are doing right now.

I bought a Playstation 3 Slim, well before this farce began. I knew what I was signing up for, but I wasn't planning on using the machine for anything else than singleplayer gaming and streaming media to it. So I wasn't hit with the OtherOS debacle. (I use a very nice AMD rig for my Linux needs.)

Given the recent crusade Sony has made against hacker Geohot, who just had the mere audacity to expose Sony's dirty laundry in security design, I'll have to consider if I'll be morally able to buy a PS4.

I might just cut my losses and reinvest in a next-gen XBox, when PS3 reaches EOL. As despicable as MS has acted at times, they never fried their own customers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Hmmm - buy one, support the other
by jabbotts on Fri 25th Mar 2011 13:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

"Sony does some very nice hardware and it is really stupid to ignore it just because you hate Sony legal practices."

What do you think funds the legal practices?

Buying Sony products, supports and premotes their legal actions. It's voting with your wallet. "hurray Sony.. go sue your comter base, i'm with you.. here's more of my money to put towards your consumer hostile efforts.

The purpose of a boycot would be to show dis-satisfaction with the company's products and/or policies. In this case, the issue is not a dangerous product being boycotted until the company delivers a safe product but a company's revenue stream being boycotted until they deliver more rational corporate policy and behavior. At minimum, until they recognize and respect valid consumer rights of ownership.

I personally don't like how Apple does business and won't premote how they do business by buying their products. The products are well done and the company policies are indirectly related to the product but buying the product premotes and supports the undesirable policies. I'll vote with my wallet and reward companies who are less consumer hostile (ie. show more respect for owner's property rights).

Edited 2011-03-25 13:33 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Hmmm
by Earl Colby pottinger on Fri 25th Mar 2011 14:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
Earl Colby pottinger Member since:
2005-07-06

What good is quality hardware if I can't use it the way I want?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Hmmm
by Soulbender on Thu 24th Mar 2011 19:16 UTC in reply to "Hmmm"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Well done Sony, you are now the most contemptable tech company around


Oh come on, you have to see their side of the story. This is about important stuff, death-or-life issues like...uhm ...cheating in computer games and...uhm......

Reply Score: 3

Reconsidering
by Drunkula on Thu 24th Mar 2011 13:39 UTC
Drunkula
Member since:
2009-09-03

For many years I had boycotted Sony electronics after being a fan for many years (different story - BAD customer support experience on multiple products). A little more than a year ago I broke down and bought a new Sony stereo because I couldn't refuse the deal. I might have to sell that one. Money has been spent but never again, Sony. O_o

Reply Score: 2

RE: Reconsidering
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 24th Mar 2011 13:59 UTC in reply to "Reconsidering"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

I would pay more money for a Panasonic [insert-electronic-device-here] before I would knowingly send even a penny to Sony to buy their hardware. Hell, there are a lot of electronics companies whose products I would buy with little to no thought, but Sony is the only one I have "blacklisted". The only exception was PS2 and accessories, but that was quite a few years ago, and only because as a gamer there are some games I couldn't resist playing.

Reply Score: 2

Had a horrible thought...
by bloodline on Thu 24th Mar 2011 15:10 UTC
bloodline
Member since:
2008-07-28

Actually most of us are probably unwitting Sony customers... I opened up my dead laptop battery to find Sony made cells inside ;)

Reply Score: 1

No agreement here
by Innominandum on Thu 24th Mar 2011 16:55 UTC
Innominandum
Member since:
2005-11-18

I didn't know you needed to sign a contract to use a PS3? Maybe 11-year-old nephew did that?

Reply Score: 1

It's not only Sony
by wedesoft on Thu 24th Mar 2011 19:30 UTC
wedesoft
Member since:
2011-03-24

It is also that the governments of the US and Europe made DRM circumvention illegal. Protecting the content industry apparently was more important than ensuring individual freedoms (and fair-use rights). Sony would have no basis for harassing their customers without this kind of legislation.

Reply Score: 2

SteveNordquist
Member since:
2007-05-04

Fine, but you shouldn't -have- to feel weird about Sony EULAs, have to keep your PSX in a vault, or be made to answer for a towns' worth of access to networks you don't administer. The judge probably has to develop for a few years on the platform before she can call this one.

Reply Score: 1