Judge Awards Sony With Visitor IDs of PS3 Hacker's Website

[WanderingFool]

For some reason, I can only laugh at this...

 

[mavkiel]

All im hearing is a bunch of innocent till proven guilty people. Bitching about wanting to stay innocent. Therefore, if said innocent person is innocent, YOU HAVE NOTHING TO ***** ABOUT. The only people who should be worried about getting majorly sued is Geohot, and those who have actually done something wrong. And thats if the "evidence" that sony has been given doesnt get revoked due to being "un-constitutional"

Yes, I agree with you. After-all companies have never dragged people to court just to send a message to others or cost them cash or time. On another note, did I mention I have land in Florida to sell?

 

[LastDarkness]

Cant a class action lawsuit be filed against sony for invasion of privacy on behalf of all the people who are now on Sonys blacklist because of this?

 

[VanityGirl]

Actually, I think people are missing the point.

The problem with tracking people before and after this case is that the people who went to the site before the jailbreaking incident are innocent. The people who came after may not be.
Unfortunately, this case has been very publicized and now that people know about it, they might google GeoHot out of sheer curiosity.
Heck, I wouldn't have bothered with the guy if he hadn't been so talked about. Even on Google News there's a story about the PS3 hacking and that is bad ju-ju!

The reality is that it is dumb to check everyone now. If they wanted to track IP addresses, it should have been done before this was a MAJOR story, because now you have a bunch of curious sheep to search through to try to find the wolf in sheep's clothing.

 

[Illyasviel]

He did it because he wanted to play mario on his PS3 and use it as a computer. He then released the directions to jailbreak because he could! If he wanted to be a douche about his success he would have sold it.

Wait until Sony flips its lid completely and removes more stuff. Lets see you whistle another tune when more functions get removed.

This is not even an argument. Can you prove he had ulterior intentions? You can't. So we go on what we know. Releasing a security key enables piracy. That's a fact.

A lot of people like to use a ( really, really stupid ) gun metaphor for this. If you manufacture guns and a gun you manufactured is involved in a murder, are you, the manufacturer of the gun, guilty of the crime? Similarly, if GeoHot manufactures a crack, is he responsible for what people do with the crack?

The answer is maybe. If the gun manufacturer is not the point of sale to the murderer, than they are not responsible. If the gun manufacturer was also the distributor and point of sale, than they were. The point of sale has the responsibility to run a background check and make sure a gun is not getting into the hands of a criminal. In this case, GeoHot distributed the crack when he published it. He is the "point of sale" and is therefore guilty. Technically, this is regardless of intent.

A better analogy would be this: You leave a loaded gun in the middle of a busy playground, knowing anybody could pick it up and start a massacre. Exactly that happens and three children are killed. Are you guilty? Yes.

Oh, and Sony is a business. This is something you learn in Business 101. You want to get more customers than you lose. Do you think one random dude called the Sony gaming division president one morning and said "we gotta take out OtherOS!" Uhh... hell no. That's what you make it sound like though. They ran the cost vs. gain through a board of people and came to an end decision.

Fact #1: YOU HAVE ALTERNATIVES.
Fact #2: SONY KNOWS YOU HAVE ALTERNATIVES.
Fact #3: SONY DOESN'T WANT YOU TO USE THE ALTERNATIVES.
Fact #4: IF SONY UPSETS THEIR CONSUMER BASE IN A MAJOR WAY, MANY WILL SWITCH TO THE ALTERNATIVES.
Conclusion: Sony won't nerf their own products to be less competitive than the alternatives.

Taking out OtherOS does not nerf the PS3 or upset more than say 5% of consumers ( I know the majority of you who are whining don't know the first thing about Linux and are just grasping for any straw man argument to validate yourselves ), but at this point, taking more out might. So they won't. Simple as that.

Don't be overly dramatic and think this through like a rational person.

But thats the thing: can't somone in another country got to the site?

Yes and no. Almost all of the global Internet infrastructure at some point passes through the United States. In other words, the United States is a hub and nearly all the fattest pipes that turn into smaller pipes going to different countries passes through the United States.

If a packet from your computer ever passes through an American server, and chances are pretty good it has, that information is a valid target for subpeona.

Persecution is an entirely different matter. Sony cannot prosecute non-nationals through a Californian court of law.

crap, the U.S is area 51. the judge is bob page, and Sony is versalife.

this does not bode well...

You honestly don't have much to worry about it, unless you are part of the criminal organizations being discussed.

Here's something you learn when you run a business. I can't guarantee what I will tell you will apply to Sony, but from my end, this is how we go about the day to day: Avoid criminal court cases like the motherfucking plague. No matter how just you are, they make you look really, really bad. Extremists, who normally should never be given any attention because they're full of poppycock, will suddenly start making sense to people incensed by your attempts at prosecution. It is bad publicity that is difficult to recover from.

So how does this play in? Well, whenever possible, Sony will try to avoid a criminal case. The fact that they went after GeoHot means they are either running out of or have run out of alternatives. And Sony isn't going to target individuals for a criminal case. The gain ( stopped one pirate ) just isn't worth the cost ( bad PR ). Maybe civil because civil cases rarely make headlines, but a criminal case is always a gamble because people are fickle and extremely short sighted creatures.

 

[Regiment]

Pardon my anti-alarmistness, but they seem to be collecting this data to prove that Hotz was distributing stuff. They're not implying that they're going to go after everyone that visited his site; they want a list to prove that this guy's actions were widely viewed by the populace, meaning that anything he did that could illegally hurt Sony could have been spread to many people that could then illegally hurt the company. Even if the courts did go after other people, if they are collecting as much data as the article says, they'll be able to tell the difference between the guy that passes through and the guy that downloads something. There's also no implication that anyone's going to do that.

I understand the slippery slope fear that's going around, but that's not what's happening right here, right now.

And, to be brutally frank, if Hotz distributed information that allows piracy, he has technically committed a criminal act, and Sony, Google, and the courts are technically acting well within their rights.

Personally? I'm not going to comment on my own opinions (betrayed by my essay as they may be). Let's just not go any more overboard here.

 

[Illyasviel]

Those guys are borderline anarchists and extremists. You should always take what those types of people say with a grain of salt. If a person were to automatic obey such people, well guess what that makes said person?

A sheep.

Those guys are completely incapable of thinking past their own wants, failing to realize compromise nearly often always brings the best results. The reason why they fail to consider compromise? Because compromise requires both parties to give up some of their rights, something extremists and anarchists find unacceptable. Just look at that poster. There isn't a single provision for any type of compromise whatsoever. Its all overthrow this, overthrow that. Utterly ridiculous.

Just look at the junk on that thing. Continually remove features? I guess removing one feature now constitutes as "continually." OtherOS was a selling point? Really?

Don't let sensationalism undermine your ability of sound reasoning.

 

[Illyasviel]

So since you only quoted my pic i assume you only saw the image, zeroed in on it, and dive bombed into it expecting to win the argument.

I didn't say you were a sheep, I only said that if you were to automatically believe whatever those guys told you, then you would be a sheep. You haven't said anything to make me believe you unconditionally obey those guys, so you're okay.

Its conditional. If you mistook what I meant, than I apologize, I should have been more clear.

With regards to everything else, I had already typed up multiple explanations to that before. But just for you, I'll type it again.

Sony did not overreact. Sony is a business, and as a business, has a duty to protect its shareholders, partners and consumers. GeoHot is a threat to Sony's shareholders, partners and consumers. Sony reacted through due process. Completely, 100% legal. As wholesome as apple pie.

Let me remind you that there was once a time when disputes like this were settled with murder.

 

[Roxor]

I'm sick of Sony, and I don't even use their stuff. Somebody fine the company a ten-digit figure for being arseholes.

Someone really needs to get round to defining international internet information laws. To have the California court hand over records of everyone breaks laws in other countries (e.g data protection act).

We should turn the Internet into a new nation.

 

[TimeLord]

Awwww I wanted Sony to attempt to sue everyone on the
planet to see if they could get away with it!

 

[Treaos Serrare]

okay the judge who approved this is either taking bribe money or so massively fucking stupid it amazes me he/she remembers to breath eat or shit with any regularity

 

[Tiger Sora]

Let sony sue everyone, they won't get a dime from the people and than no one will but their crap.
Legal jabber makes me angry.

 

[shadow skill]

You know parts of the subpoenas may well be illegal as per U.S. law. There is alot more involved here than people realize. If Sony retains the data during this legal process and it gets compromised what then? They don't even need all of this data to prove their argument that the case should be heard in that part of the country. People should read the letter from the EFF lawyer. Why should people who did not agree to sony's TOS have their information exposed when that information is really not required to prove this argument? Why are they asking for records of who downloaded things from his blog beyond the jailbreak file? Your browser downloads an entire page every time you go somewhere. Asking for a record of all the downloads is stupid when you only need to look at jailbreak downloads if at all. Why do they need the text of comments posted to his private video? Remember this is a civil lawsuit not a criminal proceeding. The request for the text of comments may be forbidden under current U.S. law as it is.

 

[Illyasviel]

Not 100% sure on how he is a threat to shareholders. When he jail-broke the PS3 he was breaking their arbitrary rules but did nothing wrong. Releasing it could have cost the shareholders some cash but unless it can actually make pirating 100% easier he did nothing directly harmful to them aside from lowering the control Sony had on customers.

Lets not forget Sony tried to railroad Geo by sending as many lawyers as they could to rail road him. Still legal but its a dick thing to do and shows they wanted to use the heavy weaponry(larger legal defense) to steam roll him in court because he cannot defend himself. They mounted such a large offensive because they knew he did not have the capital to defend himself. That is why he asked for donations to pay for legal defense so he did not lose by default.

Yes he broke their rules but because Sony removed functions of a product that they had advertised. If i were to make a screw driver that could automatically adjust to proper head and advertised Phillips head as a function then removed it i would be in the wrong.

Please tell me exactly how Sony's control on the PlayStation 3 has damaged your experience using the PlayStation 3 or has been either intrusive, domineering or detrimental to the way you live your life. I will admit their updates are rather frequent and annoying. The OtherOS argument is invalid due to the extremely insignificant number of people who actually used it. Let's also not forget that Sony didn't exactly sneak that update in. They sent a very detailed notification explaining exactly what changes were being made and how you could avoid them ( simply decline the update; I think they even detailed how you could use multiple hard disks, one for OtherOS use and the other for PSN use ).

Hey, here's an arbitrary rule: "you shall not murder."

You want to talk about dick moves? How about GeoHot revealing trade secret security keys publicly. Now that's a dick move. Posting a sex tape of your ex? Hahaha, that's not even close to the same level as GeoHot's utter dickery. GeoHot brought it upon himself.

Poor analogy. Everybody uses the Phillips head. The teeniest, tiniest minority uses OtherOS. And OtherOS wasn't even really advertised. Right now, I just pulled out my original PlayStation 3 box, the Metal Gear Solid 4 bundle, and nowhere on the side can I find any mention of OtherOS. A more proper analogy would be... oh, I don't know, removing the light that used to be in your car's glove box.

I however, did just fully read the EULA that came with Gran Turismo 5 and right in the beginning it said, "if you do not agree with these terms of agreement, you will not receive a refund for the online portion of the game, but you will receive a refund for the physical copy." As in, don't like it? Than play a different game.

In fact, everybody, if you still have your original PlayStation 3 packaging, please carefully look for a mention of OtherOS. If you find it, please post a high definition picture with enough of the box to facilitate recognition and the text that talks about OtherOS. Let's find out if OtherOS really was an advertised feature.

 

[GideonB]

I personally find what SONY is doing wrong and what they have recently started doing as wrong on another level.

Totally agree with this. They remove features that people liked using. Hell the guys themselves said if you didn't remove the Other OS feature in the PS3, then none of this would have happened. *sigh*

 

[shadow skill]

Not 100% sure on how he is a threat to shareholders. When he jail-broke the PS3 he was breaking their arbitrary rules but did nothing wrong. Releasing it could have cost the shareholders some cash but unless it can actually make pirating 100% easier he did nothing directly harmful to them aside from lowering the control Sony had on customers.

Lets not forget Sony tried to railroad Geo by sending as many lawyers as they could to rail road him. Still legal but its a dick thing to do and shows they wanted to use the heavy weaponry(larger legal defense) to steam roll him in court because he cannot defend himself. They mounted such a large offensive because they knew he did not have the capital to defend himself. That is why he asked for donations to pay for legal defense so he did not lose by default.

Yes he broke their rules but because Sony removed functions of a product that they had advertised. If i were to make a screw driver that could automatically adjust to proper head and advertised Phillips head as a function then removed it i would be in the wrong.

Please tell me exactly how Sony's control on the PlayStation 3 has damaged your experience using the PlayStation 3 or has been either intrusive, domineering or detrimental to the way you live your life. I will admit their updates are rather frequent and annoying. The OtherOS argument is invalid due to the extremely insignificant number of people who actually used it. Let's also not forget that Sony didn't exactly sneak that update in. They sent a very detailed notification explaining exactly what changes were being made and how you could avoid them ( simply decline the update; I think they even detailed how you could use multiple hard disks, one for OtherOS use and the other for PSN use ).

Hey, here's an arbitrary rule: "you shall not murder."

You want to talk about dick moves? How about GeoHot revealing trade secret security keys publicly. Now that's a dick move. Posting a sex tape of your ex? Hahaha, that's not even close to the same level as GeoHot's utter dickery.

Poor analogy. Everybody uses the Phillips head. The teeniest, tiniest minority uses OtherOS. And OtherOS wasn't even really advertised. Right now, I just pulled out my original PlayStation 3 box, the Metal Gear Solid 4 bundle, and nowhere on the side can I find any mention of OtherOS. A more proper analogy would be... oh, I don't know, removing the light that used to be in your car's glove box.

I however, did just fully read the EULA that came with Gran Turismo 5 and right in the beginning it said, "if you do not agree with these terms of agreement, you will not receive a refund for the online portion of the game, but you will receive a refund for the physical copy." As in, don't like it? Than play a different game.

No a more proper analogy would be Microsoft removing the nic drivers from their operating systems in the name of security. Oh and saying otheros was never really advertised is the same as saying it was advertised. Which one is it? People obviously knew about the feature and it wasn't a secret. Yellow Dog did talk about using it on the PS3 openly. It was "advertised" under their open platform initiative. In fact the page still exists and tells people that it is no longer available for the PS3. Oh and here is a nice article talking about Terra Soft's announcement back then:http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2006/10/linux-20061018.ars