Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Sep 2010 21:52 UTC
Games I've often harped on Apple for its policy regarding jailbreaking, but of course, Apple isn't the only company engaging in such practices. We already talked about Motorola, and now, we have Sony - already a company with a checkered past when it comes to consumer rights. As it turns out, Sony don't want you jailbreaking your their Playstation 3.
Thread beginning with comment 439869
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: hypocrisy
by darknexus on Wed 8th Sep 2010 13:34 UTC in reply to "hypocrisy"
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

Actually, when you buy a device you don't agree to anything. Are there terms presented to you before you pay for the device? Of course not. Therefore you couldn't have agreed to what wasn't shown. Now, subscribing to a *service* is different and there are most certainly terms of service (notice the name there) to which you must agree. Sony do have every right to force people to update to use PSN, that's their service and they can do whatever the hell they want with it. What they don't have a right to do is to limit what you do with your device *outside* of their service. If they believe they have such a right, then they need to make the PS3 a rental as some other posters have said, and not a purchase. Once I buy something, it's mine. Sony have every right to prevent hacked devices from getting on their network, but they don't have a right to prevent me from hacking the device to get more functionality out of it. They don't have to make it easy, nor do they have to honor my warranty or allow me on to their network, but they have no right to prevent the hacking so long as it's for my own use.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: hypocrisy
by trenchsol on Wed 8th Sep 2010 20:58 in reply to "RE: hypocrisy"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

If you haven't agreed to anything, how can they prevent you from modifying the device. Probably, they can't.

The article states that they prevented distribution of third party addition. So, they do not target the owners who bought the device, and there is no reason to complain about it.

The article is incomplete, because there is no explanation what was the legal basis for preventing the distribution of third party addition.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: hypocrisy
by SteveNordquist on Thu 9th Sep 2010 05:26 in reply to "RE: hypocrisy"
SteveNordquist Member since:
2007-05-04

Really, you do expect it to play PS3 (PS2, PSX) games and at least some BD, I should think? Within that there are some reciprocal expectations.

Intel CPUs don't come with the Intel Math Libraries.

You don't get to remix games without actually licensing the IP (AI engine, pathfinding, tessellation, 3d sound, character art...) involved or guessing really well that it's gray or otherwise deprecated from honest markets.

Food Replicators will either clear this up or set up the new foodies for nine kinds of food poisoning (three from the garde-chef.) Both?

Reply Parent Score: 1