"Other OS" Lawsuits Combine Into Single Mega-Suit
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
I have only one thing to say to this: Hahahahahahahaha!!! In your face Sony. I used to love them but now I realize, as a company, they really piss me off.
i remember people complaining and lawsuits getting thrown at microsoft last year over them removing support from the xbox 360 for most third party memory cards.Pendragon9 said:
but your missing the point of the suit, very few people care about other OS as it wasnt that popular a feature. it's the fact that sony removed a feature that some people (even if it was only a few) bought the system to use.
it's like if sony decided to stop backward compatibility on the older units through an update*, sure that wouldn't affect everyone but those it did (like me) would be pissed and would sue with good reason. i bought my ps3 for its BC, and people wouldn't be too happy to be forced to buy a ps2 again because of a simple update. im sure people weren't happy to buy official overpriced memory cards for their xbox 360s either.
*[sub]even with hardware based BC, im sure an update could disable it[/sub]
Not every single PS3 owner, just the ones with the old fat models. The slim models never had Other OS to begin with, but at the time Sony said that all models that did have it would keep it.Rainforce said:
Loving the Phoenix Wright art. That's clearly Sony stuck in that cell down in the corner.
If Sony did that I'd join you in that lawsuit. I use my 60GB's BC as well, in fact I'm working on a PS2 game right now. If they tried to remove that feature, Sony would easily lose any and all business from me in the future along with me joining in with the nice big lawsuit.culade said:
I think Erik Estavillo is behind this all. "Waaaaaaaah. They took away the "OTHER OS" option on my PS3 which let me make sure people on the outside world know I was a hermit with no life. Ima sue! And celebritiy x will help for stupid reason y."The_root_of_all_evil said:
Makes sense, right?
The thing is when the ps3 released it was a 600 dollar console. No game station is worth that... for that kind of money you can build a gaming PC. I did consider the purchase since the ps3 could also stand in for a PC. I'm glad I skipped it. I would be a member of this suite otherwise. This is not some insignificant feature. If you purcahsed a device that you were comfortable paying X-dollars for because it would serve your desire for a utility/work PC, as well as a gaming console ripping half that equation out of the box is most uncool. Sony said outright that the ps3 was more than a game system. They we're looking to get in on the PC action(by the way mac users in case you think I've forgotten you I havent, Macs ARE PCs theyre just a certain brand name). Unfortunatly the open form of a PC brings with it the ease of piracy, and sony is now in the downward spiral of fighting piracy at the expense of it's customers.
On the other hand if sony is ordered to return support for other OS and it makes it's way onto the slim as well(I know, not happening) I might look to obtain one.
On the other hand if sony is ordered to return support for other OS and it makes it's way onto the slim as well(I know, not happening) I might look to obtain one.
The way these class actions usually work is that everybody who bought the ps3 between the time they advertised the feature and the time the feature was removed will receive a share of the settlement proceeds. The damages will be the value of the PS3 with the feature in question minus its value without the feature. The ps3 owners who originally instigated the case may see some extra money as an incentive. The lawyers will get a fairly large percentage. There may be some extra money in there if there is statutory law allowing for penalties or punitive damages of some sort.
Bottom line, I bet everyone affected gets like $10.00 and the lawyers all make a killing -- and hopefully Sony and their ilk is deterred from similar bad conduct in the future.
If a serious settlement is in the works, all known PS3 owners should be getting a letter informing them of their rights to the settlement proceeds. If you don't get a letter, feel you are in the class of affected people and have heard a settlement is going down, be sure to contact the court so you can get the contact info of the claims administrator.
To the fellow who thought this was an example of a silly US Court system: nope, this is what makes our court system great. Companies held accountable for their misdeeds.
Bottom line, I bet everyone affected gets like $10.00 and the lawyers all make a killing -- and hopefully Sony and their ilk is deterred from similar bad conduct in the future.
If a serious settlement is in the works, all known PS3 owners should be getting a letter informing them of their rights to the settlement proceeds. If you don't get a letter, feel you are in the class of affected people and have heard a settlement is going down, be sure to contact the court so you can get the contact info of the claims administrator.
To the fellow who thought this was an example of a silly US Court system: nope, this is what makes our court system great. Companies held accountable for their misdeeds.
It's sad that it has to come down to court. It'd be nice if companies started supplying features users wanted, avoided artificial limitations, and stopped treating the ability to be a criminal as equal to being one.
On the topic of BitTorrent; I today watched a film legally distributed via Torrents by it's creators, and have gotten games and films through a similar method from it's creators before.
Many people would argue BitTorrent is bad for games and films as an industry, but I argue it is amazing for games and films as a culture.
On the topic of BitTorrent; I today watched a film legally distributed via Torrents by it's creators, and have gotten games and films through a similar method from it's creators before.
Many people would argue BitTorrent is bad for games and films as an industry, but I argue it is amazing for games and films as a culture.