It ain't no kinda crime in the US. It may give you, the buyer, and the state and federal Attorneys General a civil cause of action in any one or more of a number of fair trade-type laws (e.g., false advertising laws) but it ain't no kinda crime.BoTTeNBReKeR said:
Oh yes so very small. We're only the biggest and only continent sized country on earth.Merkavar said:
Do you understand the difference between a "civil offense" and a "criminal offense?" I suspect that once you do, you'll no longer be so convinced that breach of a private agreement between private parties can be a criminal offense. It may be a civil offense, but it is not a criminal offense. The two are not the same.Shadow-Phoenix said:
I gotcha. Unauthorized access to and removal of data on a server is a crime. Yes, it most certainly is. The hacker is a criminal and you, like Sony, are a victim of their crime. It's unfortunate, but stuff like that does happen. The internet's today's Wild, Wild, West. Full of outlaws and renegades. A place where men are men and the women are skittish.Shadow-Phoenix said:
Thats true but its a shaame it isn't as tight as other companies have with their security.JDKJ said:
You're not really pre-maturely overreacting. I know people who removed their info from XBL last week...Johnnyallstar said:
By merchantable quality I'm assuming you mean the fact that it was hacked once? By your reasoning we should go after Microsoft a couple million times over since the XBOX has been hacked a great many times and computers are hacked often.Dys said:
I could be talking about their console being advertised as having online capabilities and it not having so for the previous two weeks, I could be talking about the utter failure of the service to protect private information (as is implied by the nature of the closed network). Or, as is far more likely I'm referring to the more significant subscription services that are obviously no longer delivering the promised content. Sony will, of course attempt to make it up to the customers, but it is still a breach of contract.Celtic_Kerr said:
I was quoting laws that sony has broken. The post I was responding too had a tone that sony had not failed at all or broken any laws. They have utterly failed their consumers and breach several contractual agreements in doing so. Breach of contract may not be a literal "crime" with police and burglars, but it is still breaking the law and as such sony are quite clearly a target for lawsuits.
...Thanks, how kind of you to teach me..... I suppose it would be far, far to obvious of me to claim that someone inside sony was involved in the hacking, and that therefore there is a real possibility that individuals or groups within sony are criminally involved and that it would be beyond negligent of government agencies to not fully investigate sony...
Sony have publicly said that the personal information was not encrypted, the privacy policy implied that all information would be encrypted (they will likely argue that that only applied to credit card information, but that probably won't float). There are currently several class action suits floating around in different countries. If you think sony are going to chew up big (rich?) groups of angry people who have feel they have been wronged (and can contractually prove that they have been) you're quite possibly overestimating the powers of sonys legal department (or you may not, I have no way of knowing at this point in time). Why do you not think that a breach of a legally binding contract is not breaking the law? A breach of contract is, quite simply, a breach of common law...That's breaking the law, the fact that you aren't going to get a big policeman to haul your ass down to the jailhouse doesn't mean otherwise.
I can't speak for the poster -- and am reluctant to even attempt to guess at what's in their mind -- but I get the feeling that their reference to "merchantable quality" is made in relation to the PS3 console. Anything else would make no sense because under America law, a service, such as PSN, can't be warranted as to merchantability. Only "goods" can be warranted in that fashion.Celtic_Kerr said:
sorry but this really buggged me. Just because people disagree with your point of view doesnt mean they dont understand the situation.Sovereignty said:
So they just said that they couldn't appear by Wednesday... that's not as bad as the sub-headline makes it seem. It doesn't mean that they wont ever go before Congress. Not that congressional hearings necessarily accomplish anything, besides Congressmen getting to yell at people to try and look like hard-asses in front of their constituents.Andy Chalk said:
Yes. That's exactly what I said. I can see right there between the words "priorities" and "straight," tiny little words that say "Anarchy rules! Fuck the law!"Canid117 said:
