PS3 "Other OS" Removal Case Thrown Out by Judge

[RhombusHatesYou]

Sorry, people. It looks like console manufacturers can change their products capabilities after you purchase them with no penalty whatsoever.

Of course, going by the judges decision, that isn't what they did - they just forced consumers to choose which set of capabilities they wished to continue with... being a dick move but not illegal.

Which is where the judge is incorrect. By not taking away the other OS, backwards compatibility and so on they have also hindered its other original advertised function, which is play PS3 games.

Well no, not legally speaking. That function is still there, all they need to do is install a firmware update... that will fuck all the other functionality up.. but it's still there. By forcing the choice on the consumer Sony covered their arse.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

So let me get this straight, that judge just stated that nobody actually owns a PS3, we all just bought a license to use it.

Says so right in the End User Licencing Agreement. Hell, the name should have been a give away.

I fear this decision is going to lead to worse things in the future.

Not really... the decisions that make this all so anti-consumer rights were made years ago.

 

[midpipps]

Wow a judge that has a head on his shoulders wow I am amazed.

He pretty much stated exactly what was needed to be said you bought the hardware you own the hardware do with it as you please. The software is licensed if you want to upgrade then you will need to agree to the eula again. So they are legally not taking any functionality away from the system if you leave your ps3 at the firmware with the other OS option then you can continue to use said option and can continue to play the games that will run on that system. If you choose not to update then that is your choice. like any other firmware upgrade.

On the other hand the PSN on top of that is a service supplied by Sony. Which is why it has its own Terms of Service that you agree to and when it changes they send you a message or have you agree to an TOS then too. Such as when they added in the class action lawsuit parts. To use this service they require you to have the latest system software installed on you system.

The big take away here is you own your hardware cut it up repurpose it. Do whatever you want with it. The software/Firmware on the other hand is owned by Sony and licensed to you which is where they can come after you for cracking it etc. (Truthfully this is pretty much the way all closed source licenses work and even a lot of open source licenses they just allow for modification and redistribution but usually require you to leave in some comment or other thing that says who originally created it.)

So let me get this straight, that judge just stated that nobody actually owns a PS3, we all just bought a license to use it. I fear this decision is going to lead to worse things in the future.

Nope the judge just said

These contracts specifically provide PS3 purchasers with a license, not an ownership interest, in the software and in the use of the PSN, and provide that SCEA has the right to disable or alter software features or terminate or limit access to the PSN, including by issuing firmware updates,

read carefully he is saying nothing about the hardware he is talking specifically about software and firmware.

If you want to write custom firmware of you own design that would allow you to run another OS go for it but to do it legally you cannot have any part of sony's firmware in it. You would need to write it from scratch or from an open source cell based processor model and flash the chips and it would not be able to interact with sony's firmware.


EDITS for further explanation and to fix spelling and syntax mistakes

 

[Lunar Templar]

Sorry guys, if sony wants, they can just brick your ps3 when the ps4 comes out so you have no choice but to get a new one

um, no, if they did that with mine(all assuming i still had it mind you), I'd throw it out, pawn the games and go PC. just bricking a system cause they think they need your money is a sure way to not get it, least not from me.

 

[niqw]

Hey, the judge says the concession is that if you got a PS3 based on those features, then you waive your right to play new software or access the network. If you're futzing with OtherOS, then odds are you didn't buy your PS3 to do either of those things. Otherwise, you can accept the legally-binding EULA and waive your right to use OtherOS, and use it as, you know, a REGULAR PS3.

Sorry folks, nothing wrong here, no shenanigans. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too when it comes to IP law. You should have known about this when you opened the box and read the EULA; if you thought it was shenanigans then, you should have returned the system.

 

[Albino Boo]

So let me get this straight, that judge just stated that nobody actually owns a PS3, we all just bought a license to use it. I fear this decision is going to lead to worse things in the future.

In case you haven't noticed Eulas have been around for 30 years and they all pretty much say that you don't own it but merely a license to use it. The judge is simply restating the law as is hasn't been for the last 30 years or so.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Hey, the judge says the concession is that if you got a PS3 based on those features, then you waive your right to play new software or access the network. If you're futzing with OtherOS, then odds are you didn't buy your PS3 to do either of those things. Otherwise, you can accept the legally-binding EULA and waive your right to use OtherOS, and use it as, you know, a REGULAR PS3.

Sorry folks, nothing wrong here, no shenanigans. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too when it comes to IP law. You should have known about this when you opened the box and read the EULA; if you thought it was shenanigans then, you should have returned the system.

Yay! Someone who agrees with what I've been saying all along.

You can mod the shit out of your Xbox/PS3 all you like, but that means you can't access the service provided by Sony/Microsoft because the modding isn't something they want you doing. And they have the right to do that, because it's their service.

 

[Sandytimeman]

And this is why, I feel completely justified sticking with nintendo products. I've never owned a Playstation console and I probably never will if this is how they treat their customers.

 

[SilverUchiha]

So long as the function to play PS2 titles I own isn't taken away, I won't scorn Sony for this. I'll just give them a disapproving look and send them to bed without dinner, the bastards.

 

[gphjr14]

Sucks for the minority who wanted to use the PS3 as a computer for Linux etc.

Really sucks for the majority who were just wanting free games.

 

[Awexsome]

Unsurprising and the right call. If Sony started charging to re-activate it then he might have a case but it was thrown out while the reason for it being deactivated wasn't even mentioned in the article. The other OS feature was being used primarily as an exploit for pirates and other nefarious means like cheating in game.

It's highly unfortunate to those very few who did use the other OS feature for legitimate means but the console's primary functions are left completely intact and unaltered. It was a move that Sony had to make and if that sentences them to evil corporate overlords in your eyes then do everyone a favor and stop complaining about it and just start buying Nintendo or Microsoft consoles or PC only.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

If you want to write custom firmware of you own design that would allow you to run another OS go for it but to do it legally you cannot have any part of sony's firmware in it. You would need to write it from scratch or from an open source cell based processor model and flash the chips and it would not be able to interact with sony's firmware.

Yep, you'd have to flush every bit of firmware, possibly right down to all the controlling firmware for the motherboard. Not only all the Sony code but all the code licenced to Sony by 3rd parties... You'd have to rewrite practically every piece of firmware on the thing to even start going forward.

*looks at nephew's PS3 sitting next to him*

Fuck, now my fingers are itchy.

 

[Frizzle]

The plaintiffs maintain that firmware update 3.21 doesn't just forbid access to the PSN, the main functions of the console are no longer viable. To wit, if you didn't update, you could no longer play new games, play games online, play new Blu-Rays, or even play some older Blu-rays. So choosing not to update and keep the "Other OS" option alive means that no new purchases are possible and it seriously restricts the usefulness of the product.

So what about this whole part? They still going to have a case with this? Because if that goes through and wins, then that'd be a huge deal.

 

[ph0b0s123]

And people still keep on buying. I really believe that even if a new EULA was to come out with the next firmware updates, that said you had to eat poo to keep using PSN, most consumers would eat the poo...

 

[mjc0961]

This judge is a moron and I don't like him. The EULA is not just something they can wave around to do whatever they want. Didn't anyone tell him he has the ability to say "your EULA is garbage and does not give you the right to do whatever the hell you want" to Sony? What a crock. He's either an idiot or he took a massive payoff.

 

[bridgerbot]

So Sony WON in the United States and LOST in Norway.

This just goes to show, this is a government FOR businesses, BY the businesses.

Screw consumer rights, screw fall advertising, the United States Legal System is here on the side of businesses, not consumers.

I will no longer buy Sony products, it's ashame that means nothing, as there will be plenty of others buying Sony products to make lack of purchasing a moot point.

 

[Trishbot]

I do not like a future where a $600 system I paid for legally can also legally be stripped of every last single function I paid for because Sony doesn't want me to have fun with it anymore.

We just legally gave them that power, and I feel like consumer rights took a huge step back.

 

[Kapol]

So... what features would they NEED to remove for it to become illegal? Like what if they took out blu-ray movie support? Or hell, video game support? You can have access to all of your downloaded games, but can't play any disk games. Of course, you don't have to update. But if you don't then you can't play any new movies and games (if they made more) due to lack of updates.

And for those who say that 'well, that's different.' Why is it different? Who decides which features are more important then the other? As long as they're only making you 'choose between features,' isn't it alright? You're just choosing between watching blu-rays or playing games and being able to go onto PSN, buy games through there, talk to friends, and get updates for everything.

Yea, screw the PS4. I'm not going to be buying it after all this BS.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Yea, screw the PS4. I'm not going to be buying it after all this BS.

Heh... hope you don't expect better EULAs from other console manufacturers because they're all pretty much the same.