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."
Thread beginning with comment 467611
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

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 Parent Score: 3

WorknMan Member since:

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 Parent Score: 7

Morgan Member since:

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 Parent Score: 4