Ok, so when you go to the store, you read and sign a contract from Sony that you can't do any of that stuff?Mackheath said:
PS3 Hacker Raised All the Legal Funds Needed to Beat Sony in a Weekend
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Well that was before Nintendo re-released it.....so if they got it for the SNES (if they had one) Nintendo wouldn't have gotten anythingdemoman_chaos said:
like i said in my first post, i don't think sony will win in the "He modded it lawsuit" even though their victory is highly probable, i do however think he will be fine raped for releasing the rootkey.
Yay, he raised money. But this Geohot twerp doesn't realize that console makers want to restrict how their consoles are used for a very good reason--it prevents piracy. The relative scarcity of piracy on consoles is one of the reasons why third party developers tend to prefer them over the PC. Thanks to Captain Failrap, though, that security could be gone, and these developers will be reluctant to bring their games to the PS3, the new home for pirate douchebags. 
And FFS, wasn't there an article a while ago about people using this hack for breaking into other people's accounts not so long ago? Hello!? Please tell me I'm not the only sane person on this webzone!
If Geohot wins, then I wouldn't be surprised if we had to sign affidavits before purchasing console systems, making us agree not to reverse-engineer, hack, or otherwise modify the operating system or internal circuitry of our console systems, leaving us no legal room to say, "BUT I BOUGHT IT I CAN DO WHATEVER I WANT WITH IT includingplayingpiratedgamescough FREEEDOOOMMM!" It will also be a huge pain in the ass, so... good job, you self-righteous sack of crap, Geohot!
(Also, The Escapist is pro-piracy now? WTF? Or do they think they're more "nuanced" than that?)
And FFS, wasn't there an article a while ago about people using this hack for breaking into other people's accounts not so long ago? Hello!? Please tell me I'm not the only sane person on this webzone! If Geohot wins, then I wouldn't be surprised if we had to sign affidavits before purchasing console systems, making us agree not to reverse-engineer, hack, or otherwise modify the operating system or internal circuitry of our console systems, leaving us no legal room to say, "BUT I BOUGHT IT I CAN DO WHATEVER I WANT WITH IT includingplayingpiratedgamescough FREEEDOOOMMM!" It will also be a huge pain in the ass, so... good job, you self-righteous sack of crap, Geohot!
(Also, The Escapist is pro-piracy now? WTF? Or do they think they're more "nuanced" than that?)
But when you walk into your local GameStop/EBGames/Best Buy/JB Hi-Fi/Target, etc, you're not purchasing a "Build Your Own PlayStation Kit". You're purchasing a "PlayStation 3". A copyrighted piece of hardware. Whatever is put into that console is assembled by Sony. There are multiple notices in the packaging stating that the console is NOT to modified or tampered with IN ANY WAY. It is to be used the way it was intended to be used. By the manufacturer. I really don't see any real reason for Linux to be on a VIDEO GAME CONSOLE. It's not a PC. It's a game console. It plays Bluray movies and video games. Sony must have had a reason to remove Linux/Other OS capability, it's their prerogative, they built it. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if hackers and modders were the only ones using it. I buy my console to PLAY LEGAL COPIES OF VIDEO GAMES ON IT. Not blatantly abuse the manufacturer by tearing it apart and fucking with it. Whatever is inside that console was MADE BY THEM. What I OWN is the right to use it for its intended purpose.Prof. Monkeypox said:
Delusional "freedom warriors" like Mr. Geodude really aren't helping. I'll accept that he didn't cause whatever Modern Warfare 1 & 2 fiasco (I don't play them, I wouldn't know otherwise), but certainly fucked with their shit.
When you purchase an appliance, there are warranties and guidelines in place. You use it HOW IT WAS INTENDED TO BE USED. When you void warranty, well, that's your own stupidity. But when you're purposefully hacking into a system to uncover rootkey codes that unlock ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING... You're just asking for trouble.
EDIT: Y'know the really funny thing? He could have modified his PS3 all he liked, not have been a royal dick by releasing it publicly so it could potentially cause harm, and just do his so-called "legal hacking". Without any consequences. That is, if he wasn't caught out. He made himself publicly known, including his full name. Of course he's going to get F'd in the A!
So by your logic Sony would be totally within it's rights to remove Blu Ray functionality from the PS3 as well? Why would anyone want to watch movies on a PS3 it's a GAME system afterall? Hell you buy your game system to "PLAY LEGAL COPIES OF VIDEO GAMES ON IT" afterall so what does Blu Ray functionality matter. Just because you didn't buy a PS3 to run Linux doesn't mean other people didn't. Sony removed an advertised feature from their hardware and these folks just found a way to put it back on.MattAn24 said:
And iirc when you first turn on a ps3 and you have to create an User ID, i believe it pops up with the EULA and ToS which are both contractsicame said:
Yes but they won't remove Blu-ray ( while they could and it would be within their rights) they are making money off it, and i'm sure they have contracts with netflix and i believe i haeard something about Hulu singing with them, not to mention all Ps3 games are prinited on blu ray disc.Xanthious said:
On all the pieces of paper you get within the box containing the console, EVERYTHING has clear notifications of what its intended purpose is. Oh, plus there's loads of "copyright" and "registered trademark", etc. Sony OWNS the PS3 brand, as well as every console they sell. Same with Microsoft owning all 360's they make.
Firmware updates are official and keep the console updated legally. Google can do whatever the fuck they want to their search engine, and not a damn thing can be done about it. It's THEIR intellectual property, you bought the use of it.
It's like someone whinging and complaining that they were banned from Xbox Live, even when they're paying for Gold. You might have 12 months worth of Gold, but if you fuck with the StepTo and his Terms of Service/Conduct, your ass will be banhammer'd. You won't be getting whatever remaining Gold time you may or may not have credited back to your bank account. You fucked up, you pay the price. That price is losing the right to use the console THEY made. Your fault.
Firmware updates are official and keep the console updated legally. Google can do whatever the fuck they want to their search engine, and not a damn thing can be done about it. It's THEIR intellectual property, you bought the use of it.
It's like someone whinging and complaining that they were banned from Xbox Live, even when they're paying for Gold. You might have 12 months worth of Gold, but if you fuck with the StepTo and his Terms of Service/Conduct, your ass will be banhammer'd. You won't be getting whatever remaining Gold time you may or may not have credited back to your bank account. You fucked up, you pay the price. That price is losing the right to use the console THEY made. Your fault.
So we get punished because Sony failed to program in the same functionality as Microsoft did? The 360 was released before the PS3, they could have easily looked at it and gone, "Maybe something to block users from being able to access online functionality when they have pirated or are cheating". They failed to have this foresight and it's now our fault?DVS Storm said:
---
I agree with what this guy is doing. It's your possession, you have the legal right to do whatever the hell you want with it. The fact that people can use it to cheat in games is not the point, that's a damn consequence of having lazy/cheap development teams. Just because the firmware has protection against cheaters doesn't mean you should skimp on protection against cheaters in your software development. It was only ever a matter of time, practically anyone could have told you that. All it would have taken is having the functionality there, they didn't even have to have something that would detect cheaters, if they had simply put in a basic screener, that could have been updated to provide more comprehensive protection when the firmware/hardware was eventually hacked. Hell, if they cared they could simply put some code on the servers that checks for abnormal conditions happening. Enough of them and you ban that PSN temporarily, if it keeps happening it's a permanent ban. That alone would help. It wouldn't exactly be hard to code up.
You don't see a problem with a company telling you that you're not allowed to mess with something you own?Hardcore_gamer said:
Hey! I'm using the car analogy again! I'm going to sell you a car, but the second you want to change the tires is the second I sue you for doing so.
On another forum I'm doing the legal play-by-play of what is going on. Here's my take on the situation... Let me preface this by saying I was involved with the Sony v. Connectix lawsuit and have stared down Sony's barrel in the past.
A lot of people think that hacking and homebrew are the only two arguments. You see, as someone who participates in the console "hacking" community, here's what I get out of it.
Did you know that the Wii has a CPU inside it's graphics chip, and Nintendo didn't tell anybody? Even the actual, official, licensed Wii developers had no idea there was an ARM chip embedded in Hollywood. ARM, by the way, is the same CPU found in the GBA and most Android phones. Heck we don't even have a name for the thing. "Starlet" is just what the hackers call it. Nintendo, NEC, and ATI *still* deny it's existence even though we've seen the stupid thing. Why is this significant? Well, no one has ever done this before. This might have all kinds of benefits to GPU processing, or programming theory in general. Well, not here though. Here, starlet is used as a hardened bootloader. Who would of thought of booting a system though it's graphics chip? That's interesting to me.
Why is Sony's master key significant? Well, first of all Elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) is still technically "experimental". It was only developed in 1985. Sony saw it as the best new thing, which is not how you approach encryption. You have to use tried and true. (Actually, you don't use public key encryption when you have to give a private key the the entity trying to compromise the system, but that's another argument). The fact is, Sony botched it. Haha lolsony, but wait! What about other companies and governments out there that use ECC too? This seems like such a trivial error. How easy is it to trip up on this function? Is it trivial? Is it a common mistake? Can this compromise the ECC algorithm as a whole?
There are people out there who study this. They are scientists. Many of them don't wear lab coats and have to publish to stay active in the community and collect a paycheck. Now we have a company saying that simply telling how something works can land you in jail.
Don't think this is relevant? Tell that to Dmitry Sklyarov [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Sklyarov] who was arrested by the feds by telling how secure PDFs worked at a security conference. Even after Adobe dropped the charges, the feds didn't drop the case. In the end he was found not guilty. How about Ed Felton [http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~felten/] who was threatened with litigation after the RIAA said that he was no allowed to tell how digital watermarking worked. It was only after the Justice Department promised that the DMCA was invalid for his line of work did he start to publish his findings. My favorite is David Touretzky [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_S._Touretzky], professor of artificial intelligence and computational neuroscience. In the U.S it's was ruled that the publishing of the code to decrypt a DVD was distribution of an illegal "circumvention device". So where does that stop? Can teach a class on how DVDs are decrypted? Can I tell my friend? Can I tattoo the code on my arm? Professor Touretzky pushed this to the extreme and put up a web site [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/] showing how the code worked though t-shirts, haikius, songs, and dramatic readings. He also issued a declaration [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/touretzky-decl.html] of his intent to the MPAA. He has yet to be sued, but really, where does it stop.
A console is not made out of pixie dust and fairy farts. It's just a computer you plug into your TV set. There is nothing "Magical" about it, and in fact, pound for pound not as powerful as a typical PC. I'm sorry that Sony decided to subsidize the cost of their game system relying on broken encryption. Don't punish others because you screwed up your business model. Subsiding costs is a dumb route to go because it makes you look stupid when the revenues don't work in your favor. Ever wonder why the PSGo cost more? Well, they didn't have the UMD movie subsidy to make up for the cost anymore, therefore they had to raise the price. Economics 101 here Sony, if you make a product that is too expensive for the market to bear, either change the target market, bring down COGS, or get out with sunk costs.
On the flip side. GeoHot must of had a wake up call shortly after the rap video. That was quite a change of tune. When I was in the Connectix case they were throwing around millions of dollars back and forth. He has only been in litigation for just shy of a month and has lost $10,000 to it already. It's pretty easy to see how Bleem imploded.
tl;dr
It's not about games, Sony needs to chill and Geohot got a reality check recently.
A lot of people think that hacking and homebrew are the only two arguments. You see, as someone who participates in the console "hacking" community, here's what I get out of it.
Did you know that the Wii has a CPU inside it's graphics chip, and Nintendo didn't tell anybody? Even the actual, official, licensed Wii developers had no idea there was an ARM chip embedded in Hollywood. ARM, by the way, is the same CPU found in the GBA and most Android phones. Heck we don't even have a name for the thing. "Starlet" is just what the hackers call it. Nintendo, NEC, and ATI *still* deny it's existence even though we've seen the stupid thing. Why is this significant? Well, no one has ever done this before. This might have all kinds of benefits to GPU processing, or programming theory in general. Well, not here though. Here, starlet is used as a hardened bootloader. Who would of thought of booting a system though it's graphics chip? That's interesting to me.
Why is Sony's master key significant? Well, first of all Elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) is still technically "experimental". It was only developed in 1985. Sony saw it as the best new thing, which is not how you approach encryption. You have to use tried and true. (Actually, you don't use public key encryption when you have to give a private key the the entity trying to compromise the system, but that's another argument). The fact is, Sony botched it. Haha lolsony, but wait! What about other companies and governments out there that use ECC too? This seems like such a trivial error. How easy is it to trip up on this function? Is it trivial? Is it a common mistake? Can this compromise the ECC algorithm as a whole?
There are people out there who study this. They are scientists. Many of them don't wear lab coats and have to publish to stay active in the community and collect a paycheck. Now we have a company saying that simply telling how something works can land you in jail.
Don't think this is relevant? Tell that to Dmitry Sklyarov [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Sklyarov] who was arrested by the feds by telling how secure PDFs worked at a security conference. Even after Adobe dropped the charges, the feds didn't drop the case. In the end he was found not guilty. How about Ed Felton [http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~felten/] who was threatened with litigation after the RIAA said that he was no allowed to tell how digital watermarking worked. It was only after the Justice Department promised that the DMCA was invalid for his line of work did he start to publish his findings. My favorite is David Touretzky [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_S._Touretzky], professor of artificial intelligence and computational neuroscience. In the U.S it's was ruled that the publishing of the code to decrypt a DVD was distribution of an illegal "circumvention device". So where does that stop? Can teach a class on how DVDs are decrypted? Can I tell my friend? Can I tattoo the code on my arm? Professor Touretzky pushed this to the extreme and put up a web site [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/] showing how the code worked though t-shirts, haikius, songs, and dramatic readings. He also issued a declaration [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/touretzky-decl.html] of his intent to the MPAA. He has yet to be sued, but really, where does it stop.
A console is not made out of pixie dust and fairy farts. It's just a computer you plug into your TV set. There is nothing "Magical" about it, and in fact, pound for pound not as powerful as a typical PC. I'm sorry that Sony decided to subsidize the cost of their game system relying on broken encryption. Don't punish others because you screwed up your business model. Subsiding costs is a dumb route to go because it makes you look stupid when the revenues don't work in your favor. Ever wonder why the PSGo cost more? Well, they didn't have the UMD movie subsidy to make up for the cost anymore, therefore they had to raise the price. Economics 101 here Sony, if you make a product that is too expensive for the market to bear, either change the target market, bring down COGS, or get out with sunk costs.
On the flip side. GeoHot must of had a wake up call shortly after the rap video. That was quite a change of tune. When I was in the Connectix case they were throwing around millions of dollars back and forth. He has only been in litigation for just shy of a month and has lost $10,000 to it already. It's pretty easy to see how Bleem imploded.
tl;dr
It's not about games, Sony needs to chill and Geohot got a reality check recently.