Anonymous Says It's Not Finished With Sony

[Sikratua]

Define "irony."

In this case, I would say "a group of people who believe information should be freely accessable by all people getting pissy because information was made accessable to someone."

And, for the love of all things sacred and holy, PLEASE, let some of these people show up to these "big protests" in Guy Fawkes "V for Vendetta" masks.

NY CLS Penal § 240.35
A person is guilty of loitering when he being masked or in any manner disguised by unusual or unnatural attire or facial alteration, loiters, remains or congregates in a public place with other persons so masked or disguised, or knowingly permits or aids persons so masked or disguised to congregate in a public place

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-12.10
No person or persons at least 16 years of age shall while wearing a mask, hood or device whereby the person, face or voice is disguised so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, hold any manner of meeting, or make any demonstration upon the private property of another unless such person or persons shall first obtain from the owner or occupier of the property his or her written permission to do so, which said written permission shall be recorded in the office of the register of deeds of the county in which said property is located before the beginning of such meeting or demonstration.

Fourteen states have laws of this nature. And, the fun thing is, while a store is considered a public place, it is still private property. Sony stores are owned or rented by Sony, who, through a long chain of command, give managers and employees the authority to refuse to allow people into the establishment.

See, if these people show up at a Sony store, and the manager of said store says "leave my store," those protesters, by law, are NOT able to say "no." They are also not allowed, by law, to interupt anyone who wishes to enter or exit said Sony store.

So, worst case scenario for Anonymous is that one of their members, while wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, tries to harrass a Sony store employee or customer. Well, even worse if that victim is black, because..... Well, those laws were created to protect people from another group of masked dipshits. But, if they're actually stupid enough to do this, they deserve what they get.

But, yeah. I think this has the potential to be really funny.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

" to protest against the corporation's efforts to invade people's privacy and stifle the free flow of information."

Here's where Anonymous just lost me. They love invading people's privacy and revealing passwords and personal information. In their perfect world, wouldn't everybody know everything about everyone else? I thought that was the goal. Now they're mad that Sony tried to do what they do every day? It's like when they argued they wouldn't attack WBC because of freedom of speech, and then they did because they talked bad about them in public.

EDIT: Should have read the other comments. You've already said it far more eloquently than I.

 

[Canned Spam]

I love how they say corporations are evil and use a Microsoft text-to-speech program to say it.

 

[beema]

According to Anonymous, not only was it unacceptable that Sony had "forced" sites like YouTube and PayPal to give up personal information about people who had watched GeoHot's videos or donated money to him, it was also unacceptable that Sony was permitted to request such information in the first place.

I think this is more of a problem with our judicial system that they would allow this than a problem with Sony for requesting it, no?

Glad they are not giving up, although I kind of doubt many people will actually take part in the protest.

As far as getting up in arms about things, gamers talk a big...game (dammit!) but they usually don't actually act on their words. I feel like gamers as a whole are the biggest pushovers in the universe. Everyone knows that they will just bend over and accept whatever the industry wants to do within a few months after it starts. Not buying stuff!?! We could never do that!

I mean seriously, how many times have you seen gamers on the internet become furious about something, only to see months later that whatever it was is now an industry-wide standard that everyone accepts?

ieststan bur

 

[Vanbael]

Make-it-stop-make-it-stop-make-it-stop-make-it-stop-make-it-stop.
They are starting to become more of just overall annoyances then ever. Maybe that's what they want. But for the most part, people don't have problems with the EULA thing. Hell, for most people they are kind of "I Agree, GAME TIME!" And isn't that what gaming is all about, for the idea of playing a video game and having fun. I don't see how it gets in the way of people's life or how it is selling out their souls to Sony.

"Its just my opinion, there's no need to go spreading it around."

 

[JDKJ]

Define "irony."

In this case, I would say "a group of people who believe information should be freely accessable by all people getting pissy because information was made accessable to someone."

And, for the love of all things sacred and holy, PLEASE, let some of these people show up to these "big protests" in Guy Fawkes "V for Vendetta" masks.

NY CLS Penal § 240.35
A person is guilty of loitering when he being masked or in any manner disguised by unusual or unnatural attire or facial alteration, loiters, remains or congregates in a public place with other persons so masked or disguised, or knowingly permits or aids persons so masked or disguised to congregate in a public place

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-12.10
No person or persons at least 16 years of age shall while wearing a mask, hood or device whereby the person, face or voice is disguised so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, hold any manner of meeting, or make any demonstration upon the private property of another unless such person or persons shall first obtain from the owner or occupier of the property his or her written permission to do so, which said written permission shall be recorded in the office of the register of deeds of the county in which said property is located before the beginning of such meeting or demonstration.

Fourteen states have laws of this nature. And, the fun thing is, while a store is considered a public place, it is still private property. Sony stores are owned or rented by Sony, who, through a long chain of command, give managers and employees the authority to refuse to allow people into the establishment.

See, if these people show up at a Sony store, and the manager of said store says "leave my store," those protesters, by law, are NOT able to say "no." They are also not allowed, by law, to interupt anyone who wishes to enter or exit said Sony store.

So, worst case scenario for Anonymous is that one of their members, while wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, tries to harrass a Sony store employee or customer. Well, even worse if that victim is black, because..... Well, those laws were created to protect people from another group of masked dipshits. But, if they're actually stupid enough to do this, they deserve what they get.

But, yeah. I think this has the potential to be really funny.

And the states with the anti-mask statutes tend to be the states where I would most want to protest if I was seeking to maximize my media exposure. Like New York and California. And 14 is the count of state statutes. I believe that if you start counting local county and city anti-mask ordinances in states that don't have a state-wide statute, it's a lot more.

 

[mireko]

Holy crap a DDoS attack, that will show those corporate bastards that we can take down their website!

/facepalm

Amusingly, it doesn't seem like they can do that either. I can't help but notice that when they stopped because they didn't want to affect the users, it very closely coincided with Sony hiring Prolexic to protect the sites.

The DDoS is over, so this is probably just Anon pretending they didn't lose.

 

[Uber Waddles]

Seriously, stop reporting on Anon.

The ones that actually do things are nothing more than cyber criminals who are hurting their cause more than helping it. You reporting on anon is just giving them the attention they want.

Also, isnt anon a collection of annonymous people? How the hell could they have a press release: its just one guy here or there who says "heys, lets protest" or "hey, lets DDoS some website".

Seriously. If I were part of PETA, and said "videogames condone animal violence", despite hearing nothing else from PETA confirming or denying that statement, would you report on it? Or would you just call me a lunatic.

 

[loremazd]

Honestly scedualing it so quickly is gonna be bad for them. You dont organise a protest in one week. That's barely enough time for people to hear about it and make plans.

 

[mireko]

Seriously. If I were part of PETA, and said "videogames condone animal violence", despite hearing nothing else from PETA confirming or denying that statement, would you report on it? Or would you just call me a lunatic.

Or we could have an excuse to post the best LP ever:

 

[theriddlen]

I already got rid of my Sony products, and won't buy any. Anon, i support.

I would participate in demonstrations, if there were any in my country

 

[Iglock]

I can't help feeling that they over-dramatised it a tad.

I don't see how they expect people to take them seriously when that video played out like it advertising a blockbuster movie.

"THIS SUMMER...
Prepare for the biggest attack you have ever witnessed... ANONYMOUS STYLE!"

 

[Jyggalag]

This entire thing seems a bit immature at best. If you don't like how a company does things, don't be a customer. Recently Zelda games are on the decline so I stopped purchasing them. I was considering buying a ps3 but it seems that I could do everything a ps3 has to offer on my computer. Consoles are restricted to the companies demands, therefore are inferior to a personal computer where you can do what you want, how you want, with your product that you legally purchased.

 

[Wolfram23]

This is going to fail. I mean the 16th thing.

I do think Sony has overstepped the boundaries of consumer "rights" (assuming people actually even have rights), but protesting won't do much.

As for not buying Sony products, I think the only one I own is my PS3 so I guess I'm good there. Oh wait I did buy my girlfriend a Sony camera just over a year ago for her bday. Ok so that's 2. But I swear that's all! =P

 

[Slinker07]

I kinda liked them more when they focused on Scientologoly... And y'know... "bigger issues".

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

You know, I liked Alan Moore's story and all but I am getting a little tired of seeing that damn mask.

Not trying to be a dick, but Alan Moore isn't the one who came up with that mask, its a Guy Fawkes' mask... from, well, Guy Fawkes... just go look it up.

Who cares?

You, apparently.

I'm intrigued to see how this whole thing turns out, Anonymous' influence is pretty damn strong.

a bunch of kids and teens supporting e terrorist actions stalling the use of products for their "rebellion" against sony was really immature. EX the PSN. They have no real support and the ones that due support are mindless idiots who probably think communism works.

I hope that wasn't a hint, considering I don't support or condone their actions.

Rather, I see it as a refreshing reminder of what can be done when people band together for a common cause.
There's a little something that can be taken from anything.

 

[st0pnsw0p]

According to Anonymous, not only was it unacceptable that Sony had "forced" sites like YouTube and PayPal to give up personal information about people who had watched GeoHot's videos or donated money to him, it was also unacceptable that Sony was permitted to request such information in the first place.

GeoHot's belief was in the freedom of information dissemination. We will stand with him.

So they believe in freedom of information but they also claim that Sony aquiring information from Youtube and Paypal is wrong.
They can't have it both ways. If information is, as they claim, free, then they can't have a problem with Sony aquiring it, and if information is NOT free, that means that Sony's lawsuit against Geohotz is perfectly justifiable, and since their entire attack against Sony is based on the grounds that said lawsuit is wrong, they no longer have any (non-hypocritic) reason to stay mad at Sony.