PS3 "Other OS" Removal May Violate Norwegian Law

[Hungry Donner]

Can you give any evidence where or how it was a marketed feature?

On no box, official site or ad was Other OS EVER advertised or marketed. Ever.

Sorry, it was not a marketed feature of the PS3. Like many features of the PS3, you had to go out of your way to find out about it. Or if you are an enthusiast, you'd hear about it from third parties, but never from Sony.

I still have my 60GB PS3 box and there is no mention anywhere on it that says you can install Linux on it. To claim that it does is a pure fabrication.

I can't offer any ads or marketing campaigns off hand, although some quick Google searching brings up a lot of articles quoting individuals at Sony talking about this feature. If it was never part of any official marketing campaign it seems like they still encouraged this in the gaming media - I certainly remember hearing about it quite a lot and I never followed the PS3 developement news (or Linux news for that matter).

While one could argue that a feature never included in official marketing material was never technically an advertised feature it seems to me that Sony talked this feature up a bit in the news media and that may be legally sufficient to count as advertising. Maybe not, I'm not a lawyer (or a Norwegian).

 

[nipsen]

hmm..hmmum.. hm..

Imot oss statens lover bøyes,
av skatter blir vi tynget ned.
Og fri for plikt den rike føyes,
mens ringhets rett ei kjenner sted.

j/k

This is what you get from countries around that way...Norway, Sweden...etc its why places like the piratebay are based in those areas...very loose laws that literally give no real protection to buisnesses only the users.

..the entire thing really is neither antagonistic or business-hostile in any real way, though. Businesses establish contracts, consumers sign them, everyone is happy. If businesses start breaking their contracts, it's not protecting businesses, or anyone's standing to ensure that consumers are unhappy with the product. Just as no (successful or legal) business claims the right to take people's money without returning some sort of service the customer expected..

You know, it's all rather pedestrian. File concern with the bureau, highlight massive void in consumer protection laws regarding digital distribution networks and online storage spaces.. Process moves on, hopefully establishes acceptable terms for customers and businesses alike. Everyone's happy, etc.

Meanwhile, if Sony folks have the opinion that they can legally piss off everyone, and take away people's toys after they've bought them, brought them home, and are about to re-enact the coolest stunt from Dukes of Hazzard with it ever, and so on. Then that's their business. And they can probably do that legally. Or it's at least not specifically illegal. Which is a problem with the reach of consumer laws, as protection like this is implicit for any other kind of product. And while it's an interesting subject, with many nuances, it's unlikely that this situation will persist forever.

So if Sony insists that abusing that situation is a good marketing practice... That's their choice. At least until an expansion of the laws take shape. But still, it's their choice.

And obviously, as a grade a bastard, I wholeheartedly support annoying people to within an inch of breaking criminal law, as much and as often as any amount of pocket money for lawyers can make possible. Good going, Sony! I'm your biggest fan! Let's go beat up disabled people some time!

 

[mjc0961]

Go Norway! I'm behind you 100%. Stick it to those bastards. They're already hurting on the hacker front for removing the feature. Make them hurt more!

Sony claimed that the removal of the option, which let users install alternate operating systems like Linux, was a necessary security measure

Ahahaha! That still makes me laugh. The system is a whole lot more secure without Install Other OS, isn't it?

Seriously Sony. Just fucking put Install Other OS back now so you can get at least a little egg off your face and a little respect back from people who think of you as a jerk and a bully now.

 

[poiuppx]

The problem, as I see it, is this was always a Catch 22 from the moment they put Install Other OS on there. It opened the door to frak around with the system way too openly and with too many variables to cover for... sort of like PC piracy. It was a stupid move by Sony to put it on there, but they can not, should not, and most likely will not short of direct significant government intervention put it back on there. By which I mean bigger than Norway.

And yeah, removing it sparked a lot of public interest in cracking it wide open. Doesn't matter. It never should have been on there to begin with. The whole point of consoles is to have a closed system whose core purpose is gaming. Anything beyond that should ALWAYS be secondary at best, especially if it opens you up to threats down the line.

Bottom line, you want some crappy homebrew game, go to Newground or Kongregate. Want a slightly less crappy one, buy it off of Steam or the PSN or whatever. Want to use Linux, buy a damn computer. Me, I want to play some video games, and hey, look, a perfectly good PS3 to do it on! Linux-free, no less! Huzzah!

 

[Gigano]

Interesting, I suppose that a term about being able to downgrade the functionality of a product could indeed be considered disproportionately unfair to the consumer. If SONY are banned from using that term in Norway, they'll presumably quickly be so in all of Scandinavia, consumer laws are virtually similar.

 

[Jursa]

I don't see what right Norway has to whine about this. Not that I'm saying Norway is bad in any way, I'm just saying that a Japanese company released a product that was a game console and now people are suing it for not letting them use it for other purposes. This would be a different story if it was a computer and sony decided... meh you're not gonna be able to have an OS in there.

 

[Serenegoose]

Won't someone please think of the poor corporations?! Seriously. Sony doesn't have a leg to stand on in my opinion. They sold people something and then took some of it back. Unacceptable. I'd consider it unacceptable if someone took the dining room from my house or the sunroof from my car just because I didn't use them often, but apparently when it comes to consoles, they need to be taught that what you buy is yours, and they can't come along later and take some of it back. A deal is a deal, Sony.

 

[UberNoodle]

Hey, Go Norway! The removal of otheros was a load of bollocks as far as I'm concerned. We need to demand the right to access our legally bought hardware.

But you're just licensing it, much like you license your body parts from your parents, and your air from the government of whatever country you're in.

Last year, my mum told me that due to whatever reason she didn't explain, I could no longer use my legs as I have become accustomed. Now, its much harder to walk and I can't run. It's a real drag, in fact one of my legs does in fact drag now. I wish I'd read the EULA before I was born, sadly, I couldn't read then, and when I finally learnt to read, I discovered that I'd already signed the EULA just by living and being born. Apparently, the EULA was available beforehand, if I'd asked for it.

Word to the wise.

 

[Jonluw]

Seriously? Who the hell cares anymore? if you want a computer, get a computer. If you want to play games get a ps3.

Simple, no?

It's a matter of principle. It's like selling someone a car then coming around and removing the windscreen.

Nah, I'd say it's more akin to removing the built-in cigarette-lighter.

Though I am the kind of person who wouldn't give a shit if someone came around and removed the cigarette-lighter from my car, I'm on the side of the gamers in this matter.
That is, unless Sony actually wrote in the terms of agreement that they reserved the right to remove otherOS functionality; in which case my stance changes to "meh"

Norway? More like Snoreway [http://www.weebls-stuff.com/songs/kenya/].

Oh no you didn't...

 

[GonzoGamer]

It was never removed.

You can just not update your console. You have every right not to. Since you were fully warned before updating that this would remove Other OS, this means that it is still technically a part of the system. So no law was broken. Moving on.

SNIP

So don't buy their shit.

If you deny them of profits then they will eventually get the message.

It is kinda hard to "not buy their shit" if you don't know until after you get screwed....

Then that's your fault for not having the foresight to figure out that they would do this.

Anyone with some fucking common sense could tell that they were going to remove Other OS down the line because of piracy.

Right, because advertising linux support should logically mean that linux support would be removed from the service. Clearly you are just looking for an angry response.

No, just giving to you how it is. There is nothing legally wrong with this. Morally? Probably.
But that's not the issue.

Morality is enforced by the consumers. So do your part so that we can get Other OS back.

Well, sounds like at least one country may disagree with you about the legality issue. It's just common sense, if you remove features from a product somebody already purchased, features that were advertised or even just acknowledged as existing, you may be running afoul of consumer protection laws. I'm betting that an impartial application of said laws in almost every country would find Sony's actions to be fraudulent and illegal.

And stating that it's the consumer's fault because they chose to apply an update is ridiculous. If you want to use the console as intended, making use of all of its features, you HAVE to download the updates. Otherwise, you have no access to the PSN store, no access to multiplayer, no access to demos or media, no access to game patches... Yes, you can use the console without using these things, but do you really want to gimp the console you paid so much money for? That's an unreasonable expectation.

Using the car as a parallel example, that's like telling someone that they can update their tires to get slightly better gas mileage, but the radio isn't going to work any longer. Yes, you don't need the radio to drive your car, but it's not reasonable to expect such a condition, especially since the radio was one of the features your car started with, that may have even influenced your decision about what car to purchase. It's a bit more than immoral, it's outright fraud. And it's time Sony got taken to task for it.

Go Norway.

While I would probably have never ended up using the Other OS, I did hold off getting that update for as long as possible.
It?s of course a win/win for Sony: anyone who wanted to keep the Other OS function but also play online had to buy one of the new slim ps3s.
The problem I have however is that we paid a lot of money for the ps3 (no matter when/which model you bought) and while the machine has the potential to do a lot, they haven?t really taken advantage of it and given it the support it needs to be everything that it could. And potentially, they can take away any function they want without having to answer to anyone. So instead of addressing specific exploits like they should, they always take the lazy way out even if it means screwing over their legitimate customers.
To keep with the car example, I feel like my ps3 is a really nice expensive sports car that they?ve sandbagged to the point where it?s stuck in first gear. Sure it does what I bought it to do but I got the feeling it was supposed to do a lot more.

 

[TelHybrid]

Haha I so hope this is successful. Sony are really trolling in the last couple of years, and I hope their corporate bullshit comes back to bite them in the ass.

I long for the day when users actually own their hardware, like they should, and also long for the day when complete and utter idiots stop assuming that this view is only held by game pirates and cheaters.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Then that's your fault for not having the foresight to figure out that they would do this.

Anyone with some fucking common sense could tell that they were going to remove Other OS down the line because of piracy.

You're missing the point; Sony deliberately devalued a product their customers already payed for. This isn't like a car depreciating in value, or a change in your cell phone service; it effects the performance of your product whether you updated or not.

If you updated; congrats, you can play future PS3 titles, but the Other OS option goes with it.
If you don't update; you lose out on future PS3 titles.

In either case, the unit you payed for LOSES VALUE. That's post-purchase fraud.
The end result may not matter to you personally, but this sets a precedent that corporations can dip into their customers' wallets in the future whenever they please.
It is, in essence, changing the nature of the good from a "product" to a "service"; which are two very different things.

Imagine if they instead chose to remove the PS3's ability to play Blu-Ray Movies so they could force the PS3 owner to buy one of their external Blu-Ray players instead. Lets say, under the guise of "Your trial period for the Blu-Ray Movie feature is over. It just wasn't in the miles-long EULA. Hey, you agreed to it when you bought our system, despite us never telling you it was just a TRIAL in our advertisements."

What then? It was a move in the company's financial interests, it is technically "legal", and they never advertised it as a temporary feature.

If this sounds ludicrous to you, well, it should. Because that's essentially what Sony did by removing the Other OS option.

So pardon me if I'm not buying one word of that "consumers must possess the power of prophecy to make good purchases" nonsense.

Hey, Go Norway! The removal of otheros was a load of bollocks as far as I'm concerned. We need to demand the right to access our legally bought hardware.

But you're just licensing it, much like you license your body parts from your parents, and your air from the government of whatever country you're in.

Last year, my mum told me that due to whatever reason she didn't explain, I could no longer use my legs as I have become accustomed. Now, its much harder to walk and I can't run. It's a real drag, in fact one of my legs does in fact drag now. I wish I'd read the EULA before I was born, sadly, I couldn't read then, and when I finally learnt to read, I discovered that I'd already signed the EULA just by living and being born. Apparently, the EULA was available beforehand, if I'd asked for it.

Word to the wise.

Sage advice indeed!
And don't get me started on the "Puberty Clause" they left in at the bottom in that tiny-tiny print.
You don't want to know what kind of rights they reserved down there.

 

[Royas]

It was never removed.

You can just not update your console. You have every right not to. Since you were fully warned before updating that this would remove Other OS, this means that it is still technically a part of the system. So no law was broken. Moving on.

SNIP

So don't buy their shit.

If you deny them of profits then they will eventually get the message.

It is kinda hard to "not buy their shit" if you don't know until after you get screwed....

Then that's your fault for not having the foresight to figure out that they would do this.

Anyone with some fucking common sense could tell that they were going to remove Other OS down the line because of piracy.

Right, because advertising linux support should logically mean that linux support would be removed from the service. Clearly you are just looking for an angry response.

No, just giving to you how it is. There is nothing legally wrong with this. Morally? Probably.
But that's not the issue.

Morality is enforced by the consumers. So do your part so that we can get Other OS back.

Well, sounds like at least one country may disagree with you about the legality issue. It's just common sense, if you remove features from a product somebody already purchased, features that were advertised or even just acknowledged as existing, you may be running afoul of consumer protection laws. I'm betting that an impartial application of said laws in almost every country would find Sony's actions to be fraudulent and illegal.

And stating that it's the consumer's fault because they chose to apply an update is ridiculous. If you want to use the console as intended, making use of all of its features, you HAVE to download the updates. Otherwise, you have no access to the PSN store, no access to multiplayer, no access to demos or media, no access to game patches... Yes, you can use the console without using these things, but do you really want to gimp the console you paid so much money for? That's an unreasonable expectation.

Using the car as a parallel example, that's like telling someone that they can update their tires to get slightly better gas mileage, but the radio isn't going to work any longer. Yes, you don't need the radio to drive your car, but it's not reasonable to expect such a condition, especially since the radio was one of the features your car started with, that may have even influenced your decision about what car to purchase. It's a bit more than immoral, it's outright fraud. And it's time Sony got taken to task for it.

Go Norway.

The point is that it isn't illegal.

Sony makes money off of software. So boycott all Sony games too. If you do it, more power to you.

Dude, you aren't paying attention. Norway is saying that yes, it may be illegal. If they decide it is, IT IS. Period. Your opinion, my opinion, Sony's opinion... they don't count. If Norway's courts decide that Sony broke the law, Sony will be paying for it.

As they should. Frankly, any behavior this unethical probably is illegal in any country.

 

[Shadow_Bunnies]

So basically noone looked over the user agreement from Sony and when they did what was legally within their right because of their user agreement, Norway decided to say "uh uh, no fair we can't read, time to try to abuse federal power."

 

[Danpascooch]

Hey, Go Norway! The removal of otheros was a load of bollocks as far as I'm concerned. We need to demand the right to access our legally bought hardware.

But you're just licensing it, much like you license your body parts from your parents, and your air from the government of whatever country you're in.

Last year, my mum told me that due to whatever reason she didn't explain, I could no longer use my legs as I have become accustomed. Now, its much harder to walk and I can't run. It's a real drag, in fact one of my legs does in fact drag now. I wish I'd read the EULA before I was born, sadly, I couldn't read then, and when I finally learnt to read, I discovered that I'd already signed the EULA just by living and being born. Apparently, the EULA was available beforehand, if I'd asked for it.

Word to the wise.

It's your own fault, you should know to always ask for EULAs that you didn't know existed before accidentally agreeing to them by blowing your nose or some shit.

 

[gphjr14]

Can someone enlighten me as to what benefit there is to putting another OS on your PS3? Is there some advantage over say just having a desktop/laptop computer? Or are people just bitching because Sony removed the feature to prevent piracy and they can't get free games. (serious question)

 

[UberNoodle]

Hey, Go Norway! The removal of otheros was a load of bollocks as far as I'm concerned. We need to demand the right to access our legally bought hardware.

But you're just licensing it, much like you license your body parts from your parents, and your air from the government of whatever country you're in.

Last year, my mum told me that due to whatever reason she didn't explain, I could no longer use my legs as I have become accustomed. Now, its much harder to walk and I can't run. It's a real drag, in fact one of my legs does in fact drag now. I wish I'd read the EULA before I was born, sadly, I couldn't read then, and when I finally learnt to read, I discovered that I'd already signed the EULA just by living and being born. Apparently, the EULA was available beforehand, if I'd asked for it.

Word to the wise.

It's your own fault, you should know to always ask for EULAs that you didn't know existed before accidentally agreeing to them by blowing your nose or some shit.

I made a mint last year when I went to this guy and said, 'hey buddy, we've got a contract in which you owe me 20,000 bucks". And he was shocked, until I explained that he'd signed simply by not signing it. The contract stipulates that unless refusal is given formally, the contact is considered in effect. Once he understood, he paid quite happily.