PS3 Hacker Raised All the Legal Funds Needed to Beat Sony in a Weekend

[2up]

People seem to be confusing the meaning of "hacking" within the modification community with the pop-culture perception of it. The modification community still uses the term "hacking" as it was originally conceived- that is, the modification of a device or software to provide different functionality that its original construction. Pop-culture uses "hacking" to mean malicious activity using computers, such as outright hostile activities like DOS attacks; or in the case of games- cheating.

To understand what "hacking" in it's most simple, benign sense, look at a book like Sneaky Uses for Everyday Things. Any time you use something for a purpose other than the one it was intended for, you could consider that "hacking".

I'd like to be able to play [FFX/FFXII] while traveling, so being able to play them on a laptop or whatever is rather awesome. It's not hacking, it's not "doing something that the console normally wouldn't do". It's proper PS2 emulation, using the actual Emotion Engine, which is basically run from a computer. Hence "Sony PlayStation Computer Entertainment System". I'm not modifying anything or changing how the game is intended to be played.

Actually, you are. Emulators are hacks. They are a modification to the computer system that allows it to read the game's software and play it on a computer that was not designed to read and play those games. Final Fantasy X and XII were not intended to be played on laptops. There's nothing wrong with, or malicious, or illegal, about your ability to change your laptop to be capable of playing those games, but it's still considered a "hack".

It also seems that several people are missing the legal argument here. Nobody is disputing that Sony owns the copyright to the PS3 name, software or hardware. All those things have to do with protecting Sony from market competition. Those are the things in place that prevent another company from selling PS3s. Microsoft, for example, could not buy a PS3, reverse engineer it, and sell a Microsoft brand PS3. But that has nothing to do with the use of the console after it has been purchased.

Sony does not own my PS3 console because I purchased it from them and in their selling the product to me a legal transfer of ownership occurred. They are not legally permitted to come to my house and take it from me. They are not legally permitted to tell me when I can or can not play it, or what I can play or watch on it, because it is my machine. In this same vein, I am legally allowed to make any modification to it I want because it is no longer Sony's property. If I open the case and start fiddling with the hardware, then of course I'm voiding Sony's warranty. But that means they stop providing me warranty service because it's no longer the "device they sold me", it's an altered device and they may or may not know how to fix once I have tampered with it.

Sony provides a service- by way of the PlayStation Network- that continually updates software and firmware on the PS3. When I log on for the latest update, I give my consent for Sony to update that software/firmware, but I still retain absolute authority over my console. So if I don't want to let my software/firmware be updated by Sony, then I wouldn't have to. If their update would do something that I didn't like, such as removing otherOS support, then I wouldn't have to download that update. I have the legal right to opt-out of (violate) any ToS and EULA as long as I no longer wish to have access to those services.

Likewise, Sony also has the legal right to opt-out. If I were to do something with my PS3 that breached the ToS or EULA that Sony set forth, such as what GeoHotz did with the rootkey, then Sony has every right to stop supporting the device; ban me from PSN; stop providing whatever service whose Term of Service I violated.

Sony, however, does not have the legal authority to restrict my ability to do whatever the hell I want with my PS3. That's GeoHotz's argument. He doesn't mind being denied access to Sony's PSN because a) it seems he doesn't use it and b) he would rather expand the capabilities of his system further than Sony's endorsed support allows. Sony is perfectly within their rights to deny him access to whichever of their services they want, but they have no legal standing to prevent the modification of GeoHotz's personal PS3 console or anyone else's.

The legal argument that an owner of a piece of property should be allowed to modify that piece of property is entirely sound. You can argue about whether or not it's a "good idea" for GeoHotz to be providing the hack to the public and the possible consequences thereof. But it's not illegal. If the modification is used to cause a crime, then it is the fault of the person committing the crime, not the creator of the modification. This is not Minority Report: crimes are only crimes if they're actually committed. The potential ability to commit a crime is not a crime. If someone pirates a game using this modification, then the crime is the piracy, not the ability to commit piracy.

Excellent, and best post in the entire thread so far. You pretty much summed up how I feel about this issue.

 

[DJROC]

The problem Sony has is not that he messing with his PS3, it's that he's messing with his PS3 and then sending it to the internet. The online aspect of the game still belongs to Sony and they're responsible for what happens there. If this guy were to disable the internet capabilities then it wouldn't be a problem.

If Sony wishes to prevent his access to their online service, it is their responsibility to prevent or penalize that access.

So why doesn't he need to follow the EULA again? Regardless of opinion, it DOES form a legal, binding contract between the owner of the hardware and the company. If the EULA has terms which are unacceptable, that I understand, but that's a very different story.

Perhaps, but the violation of that contract does not revoke the ownership of the product.

Let's take a look at the PS3's EULA:

7. TERMINATION

If SCE determines that you have violated the terms of this Agreement, SCE may take all actions to protect its interests, including denial of any services such as warranty services and repair services provided for your PS3? system and termination of your access to PlayStation®Network, implementation of upgrades or devices intended to discontinue unauthorized use, or reliance on any other remedial efforts as reasonably necessary to prevent the use of a modified PS3? system, or any pirated material or equipment. SCE and its licensors reserve the right to bring legal action in the event of a violation of this Agreement. SCE reserves the right to participate in any government or private legal action or investigation relating to your conduct.

So they say they can: stop updating your PS3 using the network; refuse to provide a warranty to the device; refuse to repair the device; deny you access to the PSN. And I agree with that, because those are the assests and the services that they control and provide. If the End-User wants to use them, then they need to abide by the End-User License Agreement.

What they also claim, however, and what the court case is disputing, is that it is legal for them to prevent the use of the modified PS3 system. This I disagree with because it's not their system anymore, it's the user's.

 

[SIXVI06-M]

Facts aren't strawmen...

THIS: is you trying to straw-man dragontiers:

So to summarise your argument is based on unfounded beliefs. Right...
-snip-
If you really think that you have no responsibility to act in a responsible manner, you must be the kind of guy that hands his friends their car keys even when they are drunk. Your not in the car so who cares right? -.-

You fail to understand what a 'straw-man' is: it is the attacking of the credibility of someone's argument by ridiculing/mocking their opinion - tell me where in there you didn't do that? Oh - another low tactic you used was that you attacked the PERSON and not his argument.

These tactics are used by people who try to indoctrinate others and hardly logical as you keep asserting that everything you say is sensible and anyone who goes against it is making 'nonsensical assumptions' (another low tactic called 'self-fulfillment' ). This was more the crux of my argument than about the modding issue itself - read my post again.

Fact is that before GeoHotz came along, the only loop hole in the PS3 security system was fixed. You can't argue this unless you have evidence showing otherwise.

I was actually also making an argument based on the fact that modders have been doing this before GeoHot did- in addition to arguing on behalf of fair and rational discussion - which is not what you are demonstrating. If you are being so logical and sensible - then I want you to prove that GeoHot is the ONLY person to ever hack the PS3 so you can prove: 'if not for GeoHot - this would have never happened'. GeoHot publicises his findings yes - but that doesn't mean that other modders don't exist (they just keep its use and distribution private).

Also: "On January 6, 2011, he shows a demo of running homebrew applications on PS3 firmware 3.55 without using any jailbreak usb dongles, based on the discovery of the security exploit by the fail0verflow team." oh wait, "before GeoHot came along" what? are you SURE this is ALL about GeoHot? my point stands.

Sony are fighting back because GeoHotz made pirating on the console a hell of a lot easier. How in your right mind can you say that is acceptable? Unless you somehow think game devs will make the same calibre of games they do at the moment for free...

It seems you are pinning all of this on GeoHot because Sony is doing exactly that - what if there are other parties involved? there are no facts stating this in their case. Considering the reference I made earlier about the fail0verflow team - it wasn't actually GeoHot that made pirating on the console a hell of a lot easier - he just disseminated his continuation of what already existed (which is still my original argument).

If the mod didn't make pirating possible do you really think Sony would give a shit? They aren't some evil organisation that gets its kicks by taking people to court, they work on the idea of profit. This is an act of "don't break are software that prevents pirating".

You're doing it again with the poor debating/discussion techniques with: "They aren't some organisation that gets its kicks by taking people to court" - note that YOU are saying this, not me (just so we're clear). I said that Sony is suing because he is more prominent and has some renown amongst the community, Sony wouldn't sue a modder that isn't more publically known because it wouldn't make as big a statement and would actually HURT their reputation. There is a LOT of PR and political maneuvering involved in this, it is NOT just about copyright protection as I was stating earlier. This is a lot more about WHO they are attacking than WHAT they are trying to defend. Have you ever considered that Sony could possibly take a far more constructive approach than 'sue anyone who has found a clever way to play with our products'?

Please get your facts straight and don't have an argument based on nonsensical assumptions.

You need to stop saying that to anyone that disagrees with you or has a different opinion- it's making it harder for people to believe you have a valid point. On that note- I want you to quote EVERY instance of my 'nonsensical assumptions', and I will provide a response to you about it.

I am arguing on the basis that there is a moral issue at hand - and that morality is relative and not absolute; and that I am arguing that relative morality is how humanity progresses, because when rules are redundant - we will find ways to break them (in the form of progress and ideological advancement), as rules and expectations are meant to be. Then new rules will be made in light of of progress. This is called ethics. I am also saying that Sony would benefit by embracing this and finding a positive approach to this than just suing the pants off anybody that barely resembles a threat to their sales.

Please try and not miss the point in your next reply. (and use less personal attacks and insults if you want to mount a valid argument).

 

[Thyunda]

People abused their privileges, and for that such things are taken away.

I agree with the rest of your argument, but not this part. What's this about 'privileges'? When you pay for something, you get what you paid for. There are no 'privileges'. A privilege is when somebody buys you a bagel when you get to work early. They have no obligation to do it, they just do it because they think you deserve it. You take the piss, they take it away.

But if you buy a product AND a service, there's not such thing as privileges. There's what you paid for.


As for my take on the whole argument - guy's got a point. You sell your console, it's not yours anymore. The only thing I'd suggest is to perhaps have the console automatically disconnect from any online services the moment it's 'illegally' tampered with. I say illegally in the sense that it's not supposed to happen. Means he can do whatever he wants with his PS3 and it won't affect anything else.

And as for emulators and such - running Mario on the PS3? Oh, how evil of him. All those PS3 edition copies of Mario will go unsold because of him. Yeah. That's how ridiculous you sound when you say it's wrong to make your legally owned game run on a different machine. I think it's a great idea. In fact, the ability to do that might even improve sales - if you wanted to own the game legally. Admittedly it'd hurt console sales, since you could theoretically run every game on one console, so console-exclusives will be the laughing stock of the shelf.

 

[Saviordd1]

Why does everyone consider this a bad thing?
Theres hacking and then theres HACKING
Hacking in this case (and the ipods) is just to make the product better
HACKING is done by idiots who cant play a game by themselves and be good at it

 

[Plurralbles]

awesome. It'd be awsesome if someone could get my PS3 to run starcraft 2 via the linux install... OMG that'd be epic my laptop sucks. : (

 

[Quiet Stranger]

I hope he wins, it is our right to do what we want to the PS3 after we buy it, I remember one time when I was delivering Pizza, the people were playing Super Mario All stars on their PS3. They looked like they were having lots of fun, now they can't cause Sony are asshoes

If you buy a gun is it your right to do anything you want with it? Is it your right to do anything you want with a PC? No, you have to abide by the laws and rules. Simple as that.
All this talk condoning Sony is naive jibberish. Geohotz simply allowed pirating to occur on the PS3. That means developers and publishers lose out because some kid thinks it's his god-given right to do what he wants. Sorry, that's not how the world works.

If I want to fuck my gun (after I buy it) I will! If I want to take it apart or modify it, I will! If I want to take apart my PC or modify it in some way to make it better, I will!

Uhuh...And if you want to shoot someone with it or shoot it in public are you allowed to? Don't use inane examples.

No of course not, but that's WAY different

Cuz u say so? LAD
How about a mature, logical argument?

I'm saying guns and PS3s are WAY different, but in a perfect world, you'd be allowed to do anything....actually now that I think more about it, there is a world out there (universe?) that you can do anything, go figure

 

[SovietSecrets]

Please win. I am tired of buying crap that technically isn't even mine. I want to own what I buy, not have it out on loan for infinity.

 

[jedizero]

The jailbreaking of the iPod doesn't result in games being stoled from the app store. Hacking a PS3 does. Jailbroken iPods get their own custom apps. Hacked PS3 play stolen games. Huge difference my friend.

Say someone hacks the system because they want to do something with it *WITHOUT* pirating.

Thing is, 'Hack' is being misused here. Its modifying the software. That in itself does not say 'oh hai there I wanna pirate shit'

It means 'hey, I wanna do things that Sony doesn't particularly support'

Does this mean that piracy is possible?
Yes. It does.

Does this mean automatically that piracy is going to happen?
No.

Its like learning how to hack. Are you going to use it to hack other systems? Maybe. But you can just as easily use it to better defend your system.

 

[Kaland]

Here's my two cents about random snippets from this thread, presented horribly!

Despite what some here says, piracy was already possible before geohotz published Sonys keys. The PS3Jailbreak USB dongles ( and tons of other clones that showed up within a week) made it possible. These dongles were actually advertising that they allowed running "backed-up" games from USB drives. They were blocked in 3.42, so users were prevented from running the latest firmware.

By releasing the keys he achieved his goal. Anyone could develop software for PS3s. The side-effect was that developers were free to develop custom firmware to enable piracy. Geohotz released his own custom firmware which does not allow pirated games to run, only homebrew. However, with the knowledge that geohotz released, someone would obviosly make a custom firmware that allowed pirated games to be run. Before long both Waninkoko and Kmeaw had released such firmwares. I firmly believe that if people should rally together and yell at someone, at least they should yell at them (as well as makers of backup launcher programs) instead.
If this was a discussion about who should be blamed for the invention of the atom bomb, I feel a lot of people here would (or should, if they are consistent in their logic) be responding something like this:
"That ###### Einstein!!! He made the atom bomb possible!! His intentions might've been noble (and the knowledge he shared a huge advancement in the field of physics) but he knew the knowledge he declared could be used by someone else to make horrible weapons! Everything tragic related to atom bombs is his fault!!!!"
Personally, I would blame those who ordered the weapons created, and those who made them, as the one who provided the info who made it all possible presumably had other intentions.

I fully believe that when you buy something, you are free to tinker with it. I also don't think that you should be expected to accept any eula just by bying the machine. PSN however, is a service. If sony has any way to find out who has installed custom firmware on their ps3, they should be well within their rights to ban them from that service.

I support Geohotz right to tinker with his hardware. If sony's security team writes a random fuction that returns the same "random" number every time, that is their messup. I really hope any cheaters gets banned from PSN though .

I accept that not everyone feels the same way, but since there was so much hate on Mr. Hotz in this thread I had to do something unlikely for me, and actually write something. I don't write a lot, so if something is hard to read or incomprehensible, that's why. That, and the standard "English isn't my mother tongue!"

tl:dr - I hope George Hotz wins!

 

[vxicepickxv]

If Sony wins, EULAs get to be hardcore enforced.

If Geohot wins, I think we can say goodbye to most non-portable consoles, eventually.

 

[whtkid6969]

You buy their product, you agree to play by their rules. dont like it? dont buy it! getting games by hacking is stealing them, and the publishers get cut out. let this go and developers will not want to make games. no money, no games.

 

[whtkid6969]

Here's my two cents about random snippets from this thread, presented horribly!

Despite what some here says, piracy was already possible before geohotz published Sonys keys. The PS3Jailbreak USB dongles ( and tons of other clones that showed up within a week) made it possible. These dongles were actually advertising that they allowed running "backed-up" games from USB drives. They were blocked in 3.42, so users were prevented from running the latest firmware.

By releasing the keys he achieved his goal. Anyone could develop software for PS3s. The side-effect was that developers were free to develop custom firmware to enable piracy. Geohotz released his own custom firmware which does not allow pirated games to run, only homebrew. However, with the knowledge that geohotz released, someone would obviosly make a custom firmware that allowed pirated games to be run. Before long both Waninkoko and Kmeaw had released such firmwares. I firmly believe that if people should rally together and yell at someone, at least they should yell at them (as well as makers of backup launcher programs) instead.
If this was a discussion about who should be blamed for the invention of the atom bomb, I feel a lot of people here would (or should, if they are consistent in their logic) be responding something like this:
"That ###### Einstein!!! He made the atom bomb possible!! His intentions might've been noble (and the knowledge he shared a huge advancement in the field of physics) but he knew the knowledge he declared could be used by someone else to make horrible weapons! Everything tragic related to atom bombs is his fault!!!!"
Personally, I would blame those who ordered the weapons created, and those who made them, as the one who provided the info who made it all possible presumably had other intentions.

I fully believe that when you buy something, you are free to tinker with it. I also don't think that you should be expected to accept any eula just by bying the machine. PSN however, is a service. If sony has any way to find out who has installed custom firmware on their ps3, they should be well within their rights to ban them from that service.

I support Geohotz right to tinker with his hardware. If sony's security team writes a random fuction that returns the same "random" number every time, that is their messup. I really hope any cheaters gets banned from PSN though .

I accept that not everyone feels the same way, but since there was so much hate on Mr. Hotz in this thread I had to do something unlikely for me, and actually write something. I don't write a lot, so if something is hard to read or incomprehensible, that's why. That, and the standard "English isn't my mother tongue!"

tl:dr - I hope George Hotz wins!

see, i would agree with this up to a point, the PSN is free. people will just make as many accounts as they want, do whatever they need to do, and will recieve almost no punishment fo it

 

[Kaland]

see, i would agree with this up to a point, the PSN is free. people will just make as many accounts as they want, do whatever they need to do, and will recieve almost no punishment fo it

Hmm, wouldn't they ban the MAC-adress of your PS3, rendering you unable to connect with any account from that PS3?

 

[soulsabr]

Like I said in another topic:

If they win they will say "Its just for homebrewing!"

5 days later PSN shuts down due too many hackers and pirates because its 'legal'.

You know, I really used to think nobody bought into that FUD. I admit I was mistaken.