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

[Illyasviel]

They most certainly have a right to subpoena those who they believe may be in possession of information that helps them prove their case. And they're not entitled to "any" information they want. They're only entitled to information relevant to the case. And if the Googles and YouTubes and Twitters upon which they serve their subpoenas believe Sony is not entitled to the information within their possession, then they can -- and probably -- will file a motion to quash the subpoena. And the Court will determine what information they can and can't obtain.

Why are all these people getting up in arms and rushing the castle with their torches and pitchforks as if this kinda stuff doesn't happen everyday in countless courthouses across the United States. It's called "discovery" and there's hardly a civil lawsuit that doesn't involve some discovery. Usually, if you can't discover information you need to win your case, then you might as well not bring your case.

Exactly right.

Seriously, reading some of the replies in this thread is making me worry very deeply about the future of society. Are we really that clueless on how the judicial system works? Are we completely unaware of what happens in court rooms around the country every single day? Have we really forgotten that the judicial system is "designed" to protect us? Back in the day, shit like this would be settled with a duel at high noon. Are we really so greedy that almost everybody has forgotten about the principle of "compromise" and "moderation?"

Hello children. Welcome to the Internet and the judicial system.

For more information, please consult this helpful wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_process.

 

[JDKJ]

geez people this only being used as EVIDENCE. Their not even doing anything about the people they have info on (yet). And even if they did, they would be in the right, its their service and they should do the best to protect it from thieves and people ruining games due to hacks.

Oh and it has already hurt sony, ala the killzone 3 leak. So yeah kinda an issue they should deal with.

The playstation 3 is not a service. It is property owned by the person who bought it, and that person has the right to do whatever the Hell they want with it.

This is absolutely retarded.

So that online thing they run, you know MULTIPLAYER, they don't have any responsiblity to keep it cheat free? ok you run along and tell sony that.

The case is about Geohot fighting for the right to do what he wants with his property, i.e HIS playstation 3.

Playstation Network is a private service; this ruling will have no effect on the ability to ban cheaters or not.

Is it? I'm more inclined to think that this case is about Hotz doing something quite juvenile for the purpose of stroking his own ego at Sony's expense.

"Look at me, everybody!! I cracked the PS3!! Aren't I smart?!! Don't believe I did it? Well then lemme just post the key to the internet as proof that I did! Ha-ha!"

If ya wanna be stupid, ya gotta be tough. And Hotz had his time to be stupid. It's now his time to be tough.

 

[RadiusXd]

They most certainly have a right to subpoena those who they believe may be in possession of information that helps them prove their case. And they're not entitled to "any" information they want. They're only entitled to information relevant to the case. And if the Googles and YouTubes and Twitters upon which they serve their subpoenas believe Sony is not entitled to the information within their possession, then they can -- and probably -- will file a motion to quash the subpoena. And the Court will determine what information they can and can't obtain.

Why are all these people getting up in arms and rushing the castle with their torches and pitchforks as if this kinda stuff doesn't happen everyday in countless courthouses across the United States. It's called "discovery" and there's hardly a civil lawsuit that doesn't involve some discovery. Usually, if you can't discover information you need to win your case, then you might as well not bring your case.

so just because google collects my personal information makes it okay for state courts in another country to subpeona it? even though little notification is being given that my information is being collected?

 

[Harbinger_]

I think that the reason that they aren't actively trying to sue everyone who visited and/or commented is because A: They would have to prove that those people used said jailbreaking material. B: Weren't just on the website to see what all the fuss was about. C: Sony while being a very rich company could not afford all the paperwork and headache that such a thing would cause.

 

[DanDeFool]

Further, Sony was awarded with a Google subpoena to acquire the logs of Hotz's blog, one for Hotz's YouTube account that demands the information of everyone that watched and commented on his PS3 jailbreak video, and a Twitter subpoena related to Hotz's tweets and any associated "names, addresses, and telephone numbers." Sony currently plans to use this information only for the previously stated purpose, and not to sue everyone on the planet.

You know, there must be a fucking TON of piracy on the PS3 since Geohot and his team got hold of the system's key.

If not, I wonder what Sony expects to gain from proving that they're willing to abuse the legal system to get hold of all of our personal information for COMMENTING ON A YOUTUBE VIDEO.

The legal precedent this suit is setting is staggeringly offensive. Not only is it making it official that we have no control over the devices we buy, but if we're even remotely associated with individuals who are trying to regain that control for us, our personal information can be subpoenaed, and we could be dragged in front of a court of law.

This is bullshit.

 

[Xannieros]

I think this is the fall of Sony's PS3. Fighting against their own customers over the rights of their console. I know for sure I won't be buying one. They are on a suing rage. Next they will sue someone for people trading games in? Or the businesses that buy them?

Also they had a fight with LG, and sales of PS3 in Europe banned.
http://www.strategyinformer.com/news/11215/playstation-3-banned-in-europe

 

[Illyasviel]

so just because google collects my personal information makes it okay for state courts in another country to subpeona it? even though little notification is being given that my information is being collected?

You asked the wrong question. It is not because Google collects your personal information that makes Sony's subpeona request "okay," it is because information exists and can be used as evidence during legal proceedings that makes it okay.

This is the legal process. Normally, Sony asks Google to turnover the information. Google can decline, turnover incomplete or even false information. All of these actions constitute varying degrees of obstruction of justice. By requesting a subpeona, Sony can force Google to turnover the information. Furthermore, Google is bound to turn over the information as requested, and not turn over incomplete or false information. If Google does decide to game Sony, well, Sony doesn't have to sweat anything because the government will deal with their flagrant disregard for the judicial system and knowing acts of perjury.

In this case, it just so happens that Google is the one who has the information and Sony is the one who wants it.

Everything done so far has been perfectly legal. Let me again remind you of the alternative: pistols at high noon is Sony is feeling honourable, or a planned hit if Sony isn't.

If you really think this whole thing is wrong, what you should be doing is demanding Google not collect your personal information ( and store it forever ).

 

[jp201]

geez people this only being used as EVIDENCE. Their not even doing anything about the people they have info on (yet). And even if they did, they would be in the right, its their service and they should do the best to protect it from thieves and people ruining games due to hacks.

Oh and it has already hurt sony, ala the killzone 3 leak. So yeah kinda an issue they should deal with.

The playstation 3 is not a service. It is property owned by the person who bought it, and that person has the right to do whatever the Hell they want with it.

This is absolutely retarded.

So that online thing they run, you know MULTIPLAYER, they don't have any responsiblity to keep it cheat free? ok you run along and tell sony that.

Keeping thier system cheat free does not entitle them to personal info of anyone who happened to visit this site.

Sorry that that one guy in resistance is flyhacking or whatever, there are more adult issues being discussed here.

More adult then them trying to maintain their service? More important than them doing what they promised they would provide on the box
OH LOOK CIRCULAR LOGIC

You might want to count to ten, take a deep breath or something.

considering everyone got in a hissy about the linux being removed (despite the fact that it was a very small minority who actually used the damn feature) you would think they would equally get in a hissy about people ruining honest customers online experiences (especially with that premium online they were planning on setting up), So yes finding the people responsible for repeated breaks is kind of important to them. And if they have to get information (which most people give out all the time without realising it anyway) to get it, than so be it.

Yhea, because someone hacking your online shooters is more important than the fact that they have no right to any of this information. Maintaining their service does not mean they get access to any personal info they want.

But whatever, your just gonna degrade into hyperbole and all-caps again right?

They most certainly have a right to subpoena those who they believe may be in possession of information that helps them prove their case. And they're not entitled to "any" information they want. They're only entitled to information relevant to the case. And if the Googles and YouTubes and Twitters upon which they serve their subpoenas believe Sony is not entitled to the information within their possession, then they can -- and probably -- will file a motion to quash the subpoena. And the Court will determine what information they can and can't obtain.

Why are all these people getting up in arms and rushing the castle with their torches and pitchforks as if this kinda stuff doesn't happen everyday in countless courthouses across the United States. It's called "discovery" and there's hardly a civil lawsuit that doesn't involve some discovery. Usually, if you can't discover information you need to win your case, then you might as well not bring your case.

Thank you.

If you honestly think for a second that the information acquired will be used for anything outside the need for this case, then i suggest putting on your tinfoil hats to hide from sony mind reading satellite dishes, omg its to late they got you!(kidding, or not).

Also if your going to complain about the ruling in the first place, don't blame sony but blame the judge for allowing it, sony is just using what it can to best prove and win its case.

I don't blame anyone actually and its completely fair in the judicial system.

 

[JDKJ]

They most certainly have a right to subpoena those who they believe may be in possession of information that helps them prove their case. And they're not entitled to "any" information they want. They're only entitled to information relevant to the case. And if the Googles and YouTubes and Twitters upon which they serve their subpoenas believe Sony is not entitled to the information within their possession, then they can -- and probably -- will file a motion to quash the subpoena. And the Court will determine what information they can and can't obtain.

Why are all these people getting up in arms and rushing the castle with their torches and pitchforks as if this kinda stuff doesn't happen everyday in countless courthouses across the United States. It's called "discovery" and there's hardly a civil lawsuit that doesn't involve some discovery. Usually, if you can't discover information you need to win your case, then you might as well not bring your case.

so just because google collects my personal information makes it okay for state courts in another country to subpeona it? even though little notification is being given that my information is being collected?

According to Google themselves:

"Google Inc. generally requires formal legal process issued from a U.S. jurisdiction and served in accordance with U.S. law before it can disclose information related to any Google Inc. users. Google Inc. can disclose certain user information in the absence of U.S. legal process, however, if you can provide valid legal process for such disclosure under the laws of your jurisdiction and if such disclosure can be made in compliance with U.S. law. We may accept an Order signed by a judge or magistrate in your jurisdiction served to Google Inc. ? Attn: Legal Department via registered mail (not fax or email).

Upon receipt of appropriate U.S. legal process, Google Inc. will notify the subscriber so that the subscriber has an opportunity to object. If the subscriber does not indicate that he or she will challenge the legal process and the legal process is otherwise unobjectionable to Google Inc., Google Inc. will produce the data requested.

Specifically, Google Inc. may be able to disclose subscriber registration information and/or currently available IP activity to the extent these IP addresses resolve to your jurisdiction. If you are able to secure the appropriate legal process within your jurisdiction for this information, please send such process addressed to Google Inc. ? Attn: Legal Department, via registered mail to the address provided above for evaluation."

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

Isn't that out of any one judge's jurisdiction?

No, it's not. Not if the information sought is contained within the United States of America. Any judge, in any court in the U.S., can give you a subpoena to go digging for information anywhere in the U.S.

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

 

[lordlillen]

if i make a gun its my gun if i make ten guns and sell those guns its my fault those people have guns.

 

[Illyasviel]

if i make a gun its my gun if i make ten guns and sell those guns its my fault those people have guns.

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.php

Maybe the gunmaker isn't, but the point of sale is. In this example, GeoHot would be both manufacturer and distributor ( point of sale ).

Let me provide a more adequate analogy. You leave a loaded gun next to a slide in the middle of a busy playground, fully aware that anybody can come along, pick up the gun and begin a massacre. A person picks up the gun and kills three children. Were you not an accessory and accomplice in this crime? Are you not guilty?

Please don't ever bring up that stupid analogy again.

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.

 

[JDKJ]

Isn't that out of any one judge's jurisdiction?

No, it's not. Not if the information sought is contained within the United States of America. Any judge, in any court in the U.S., can give you a subpoena to go digging for information anywhere in the U.S.

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

Sure. But in a virtual sense, if the server upon which the site's information is stored is located in the United Sates, then they left their country and came to the United States when they visited the site. If you come to the U.S., you're subjecting yourself to the laws of the U.S. Doesn't matter whether you drove over the U.S.-Canada border or you typed in a URL. You came to the U.S.

 

[Death916]

I shall pause a moment to laugh here. If Laws were built on finding Truth, then they wouldn't still require you to swear on a book that 50% of the world believe is fiction.

actually its not required. you can choose not to swear on the bible or say so help me God.

 

[JDKJ]

I think this is the fall of Sony's PS3. Fighting against their own customers over the rights of their console. I know for sure I won't be buying one. They are on a suing rage. Next they will sue someone for people trading games in? Or the businesses that buy them?

Also they had a fight with LG, and sales of PS3 in Europe banned.
http://www.strategyinformer.com/news/11215/playstation-3-banned-in-europe

So what's their alternative? Sit on their ass and allow the Hotzes of the world to undermine their ability to make a profit? A console is not unlike one of those Mach 4 shaving systems. The profit's not in selling the handles. The profit's in selling all those blades you stick on the handle. The profit to Sony's not really in the console. It's in all those games they license for play on their console. If they do not aggressively protect themselves against pirated games, they'll quickly end up like the recorded music business: outta business. I'm not gonna hate on anyone, Big Corporation or not, that's trying to turn a profit. That's the American Way.

 

[major28]

what if we let everyone who paticipated in this whole hack and all previous ones walk away free but we make all future hacks or mods of a trademarked system to do something outside its original purpose or for pesonal gain illegal

 

[Baresark]

The judge has also only allowed Sony to cull this information for use against Geohotz. This doesn't mean that Geohotz has lost, it doesn't mean he is found guilty of anything. I'm not worried about any of this, and you shouldn't be either. They judge has issued subpoenas and that is it. That is like being worried that just because you were called as a witness to a murder trial, you could go to jail for murder, which, you can't.


They can have all the information they want, they can even have all the data saying who downloaded it. As it turns out, it's not illegal to download free software. They may determine it was illegal to use, but that doesn't mean you're still not allowed to have it. It's also not illegal to have been to the website. And they can't just say since you have been to the site, you have done something illegal. If they attempted any of this, they would just get sued by a huge class action lawsuit. And, it's in California, big surprise. Really, the only that would have to happen is the judge in another state could deny the same actions. They could rule it unconstitutional and deny Sony that same thing. It would be reminiscent of Arizona and the illegal immigration laws they uphold.

This is all fascinating, we can at least see how far gone our legal system is.

 

[JDKJ]

what if we let everyone who paticipated in this whole hack and all previous ones walk away free but we make all future hacks or mods of a trademarked system to do something outside its original purpose or for pesonal gain illegal

What is that?! Calling for a "do over?" C'mon, man.

 

[Thyunda]

Exactly what do they need 'associated names, addresses and telephone numbers' for? Also...I don't quite understand why they need the IP addresses of everybody who watched or commented on his YouTube video. That seems a bit excessive.


Also, my CAPTCHA reads '(w1 etsan'

What.

 

[major28]

what if we let everyone who paticipated in this whole hack and all previous ones walk away free but we make all future hacks or mods of a trademarked system to do something outside its original purpose or for pesonal gain illegal

What is that?! Calling for a "do over?" C'mon, man.

yes thats exactly what it is but more importantly itll stop people from making another geohost v sony thread