Sony Gains Access to PS3 Hacker's PayPal Account

[Celtic_Kerr]

This guy just lost the case then. I mean now sony is going to treat it like any money he received was for the hacking of the console. Which means any money he gotten since the PS3 came out is likely to be called in as payment for the service.
Sony beaten this guy right off the bat.

Can they make that assumpsion though? Just because he did something related to their console and at the same time as recieved money from people doesnt make it that he has made money off their product does it? Just because 2 things happen at the same time doesnt mean they are related.

It doesnt work in medicine and id like to think its not how the legal system works

Besides, ive never visited his site, but from what I understand hes never charged for anything has he? If im wrong then fine, sony has a good case here. But if anything hes ever done has been released free of charge then how does his paypal accounts prove anything?

The only thing I thought sony were proving is the number of people who have hacked and stolen games through the hack, in which case, shouldnt they be getting torrent site records for those that have downloaded pirate PS3 games?

I genuinly dont understand this legal case due to being English and having no legal experiance

Paypal has item descriptions and stores information very nicely. It won't just say "Payment received, # 85764846748967454 for $250.00"

It will say who bought it, the item description Hotz set on the item/service, the amount, etc. If all the items are "PS3 - Hacking" or "PS3 - Donation" or "Donation" or "Play station" or any thing sketchy, then yeah, he can be considered to have gotten those funds for that, but if it's "1967 Cadillac Eldorado Engine" then I don't think they can

 

[ZombieGenesis]

In a just world, the courts would slam this out so fast Sony's logo would spin...
I emplore everyone to hack their PS3s, as soon as possible! Just to piss them off.

I shall not be doing so, as a lawyer, I cannot do such a thing
/ Hypocritomos.

 

[Callate]

Interesting that he says he hasn't received any donations from his hacking activities, but he got a TON of donations to oppose SONY... For his hacking activities.

No... He got a ton of donations to defend himself legally. For which his benefactors may have any number of reasons, not least among them the recognition that an individual facing legal charges from a large corporation tends to get squashed like a bug, and might have to accept a settlement involving an admission of guilt rather than go through a long, drawn out, and expensive trial.

The notion that those who donate to him all benefited from his hacking activities is completely unfounded. You don't have to have hacked your own PS3 to believe that Hotz actually deserves his day in court, or that the establishment of legal precedent regarding things like modifying one's hardware could be widely detrimental.

 

[Maxman3002]

This guy just lost the case then. I mean now sony is going to treat it like any money he received was for the hacking of the console. Which means any money he gotten since the PS3 came out is likely to be called in as payment for the service.
Sony beaten this guy right off the bat.

Can they make that assumpsion though? Just because he did something related to their console and at the same time as recieved money from people doesnt make it that he has made money off their product does it? Just because 2 things happen at the same time doesnt mean they are related.

It doesnt work in medicine and id like to think its not how the legal system works

Besides, ive never visited his site, but from what I understand hes never charged for anything has he? If im wrong then fine, sony has a good case here. But if anything hes ever done has been released free of charge then how does his paypal accounts prove anything?

The only thing I thought sony were proving is the number of people who have hacked and stolen games through the hack, in which case, shouldnt they be getting torrent site records for those that have downloaded pirate PS3 games?

I genuinly dont understand this legal case due to being English and having no legal experiance

Paypal has item descriptions and stores information very nicely. It won't just say "Payment received, # 85764846748967454 for $250.00"

It will say who bought it, the item description Hotz set on the item/service, the amount, etc. If all the items are "PS3 - Hacking" or "PS3 - Donation" or "Donation" or "Play station" or any thing sketchy, then yeah, he can be considered to have gotten those funds for that, but if it's "1967 Cadillac Eldorado Engine" then I don't think they can

But wont they all just say "Donation" or "website donation2 or "legal funds"? I was under the assumption that he hadnt sold anything, just given away something that sony didnt like

 

[Devi Darkside]

I know I could get some hate for saying this... but I kinda support Sony...

Playstation 3 was always more open than any other console, but it was hackers that forced "OtherOS" feature to be removed, It was hackers that fucked up MW, MW2 mp experience for a lot of PS3 owners.

I know I know... It's a few guys VS Corporation, but these guys are ruining peoples experience for the device they paid. 99% of the people who bought PS3 don't care if it's not as open platform as PC.

edit: yes this is my first post and no I'm not from Sony ;D

I actually agree completely.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Sony continues to worry me with their less than palatable legal practices in this case. I see no reason to be accessing his paypal account. What were they unable to scrounge up enough cali residents when they wanted the list of everyone who's ever been to his site to make their case?

The longer this goes on the more Sony appears to be grasping at straws and making a bigger ass out of themselves the longer they do it.

Personally i hope Sony run this guy into the ground because i have distaste for hackers.

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

This guy just lost the case then. I mean now sony is going to treat it like any money he received was for the hacking of the console. Which means any money he gotten since the PS3 came out is likely to be called in as payment for the service.
Sony beaten this guy right off the bat.

Can they make that assumpsion though? Just because he did something related to their console and at the same time as recieved money from people doesnt make it that he has made money off their product does it? Just because 2 things happen at the same time doesnt mean they are related.

It doesnt work in medicine and id like to think its not how the legal system works

Besides, ive never visited his site, but from what I understand hes never charged for anything has he? If im wrong then fine, sony has a good case here. But if anything hes ever done has been released free of charge then how does his paypal accounts prove anything?

The only thing I thought sony were proving is the number of people who have hacked and stolen games through the hack, in which case, shouldnt they be getting torrent site records for those that have downloaded pirate PS3 games?

I genuinly dont understand this legal case due to being English and having no legal experiance

Paypal has item descriptions and stores information very nicely. It won't just say "Payment received, # 85764846748967454 for $250.00"

It will say who bought it, the item description Hotz set on the item/service, the amount, etc. If all the items are "PS3 - Hacking" or "PS3 - Donation" or "Donation" or "Play station" or any thing sketchy, then yeah, he can be considered to have gotten those funds for that, but if it's "1967 Cadillac Eldorado Engine" then I don't think they can

But wont they all just say "Donation" or "website donation2 or "legal funds"? I was under the assumption that he hadnt sold anything, just given away something that sony didnt like

the legal donations ARE allowed, depending on whether the court looks at it as a donation to fight this and go back to hacking, or a donation to defend hacking, etc. It depends on how the court looks at it.

Hotz says he has sold nothing in regards to hacking. If Sony just finds that he sold a ton of computer parts to a ton of people, that's one thing.

What people don't understand is that sending in donations for this man to fight SONY gave them a voice. They have officially spoken up. SONY isn't looking to prove anything, they just want to see where his donations are coming from. You speaking up means you're "siding" or kinda defending Hotz in a way. You're aiding in the events of the trial. So if enough donations cam from California, SONY can say "Our defendant can be held according to California legislation" it's actually quite genius. Something Hotz probably wasn't expecting with his cry of "HELP ME!"

 

[Xanthious]

I remember a time when I actually used to own the things I bought with my own money. I could hit them with a hammer til they were in little pieces or set them ablaze or open them up and fiddle with the inner workings and not a soul could say anything. Now companies want to believe that they, not you, own the products even after they have sold them.

Sony obviously feels like people who purchase their consoles do not in fact own their PS3s. Apple felt this way once and they got shut down in the courts and I suspect at the end of the day Sony will as well. People are free to do whatever the hell they want with their hardware until such a point they begin breaking a law and just because someone jailbreaks an iPhone or mods a PS3 doesn't automatically mean they are going to pirate software.

Bottom line this is exactly like the case involving the iPhone and should go the same way. We own our PS3s Sony not you and as the owners if we want to mod them and put Linux on them we are free to do so irregardless if that allows us to play pirated games or not. Just because that option is there doesn't mean it's being used and you need to wait til such a time that it is before you go all lawsuit happy.

 

[Lord_Gremlin]

Just tell me when that damn hacker is jailed. That will teach him.

 

[Sandytimeman]

another example of how American justice is bought and sold. Wont be long before we find out something disturbing like Sony caught bribing judges or some other shit. I just hope the donations for his legal fees keep coming in and sony loses millions in fighting the case that stretch into the release date of the PS4 rendering the entire case pointless.

 

[Scorched_Cascade]

EDIT: I really wanna say right now I'm not taking sides on the debate, I just found it ridiculous that someone made it sound like a judge was bought. As evidenced by the post after me...

Actually it is more like the judge they are using has little to no experience in terms of electronic information and therefore is happy to give Sony these wide-focus awards. A more cynical man than I would perhaps suggest that Sony chose this judge for precisely this reason.

I can't see paypal complying to this without a fight, at least to narrow down the records to relevant entries rather than just handing them *everything* as the judge seems wont to do.

EDIT Couldn't this be seen as a move on Sony's party to gain the information of people who donated to fund a case against them? People who have committed no crime and wished to donate anonymously?

 

[icame]

I'll repeat my post from an earlier story about this hacker. "Good. I hope this guy burns."

 

[Danpascooch]

Are you fucking kidding me!? What's next? They want a stool sample?

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

Okay, now this shit has gone way to far.

It's been way past "dubious" for a while now, but sony REAALLLY needs to get their ass handed to them now.

I suggest the hacker appeal, hopefully til the supreme court, or request another judge.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Curious and Curiouser (wow didn't know curiouser was actually a word! XD)

can we get to actual court case already? damn it all, all this time and they're still just trying to get the case tried in Cali. XD

 

[Silent Biohazard Solid]

Meh, good for Sony. People shouldn't have been supporting this guy.

 

[gigastar]

I dont think Hotz is going to be able to keep up his lawyers pay for as long as Sony can. Donators will only donate so much.

I second that notion, I'm not buying anything made by Sony ever again. Not if this is how they're going to use the profits.

Id just like to point out the obvious here.

Sony isnt obsessed with its legal battles. Its the lawyers job to be that or they dont get paid for sifting through countless pages of fine printed text to find grounds to convict people on.

Sony does use some of its profits to fund its legal ventures, but most of the profits go towards the various other stuff they do. Like the upcoming PSP2 and that Spiderman movie reboot.

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

EDIT: I really wanna say right now I'm not taking sides on the debate, I just found it ridiculous that someone made it sound like a judge was bought. As evidenced by the post after me...

Actually it is more like the judge they are using has little to no experience in terms of electronic information and therefore is happy to give Sony these wide-focus awards. A more cynical man than I would perhaps suggest that Sony chose this judge for precisely this reason.

I can't see paypal complying to this without a fight, at least to narrow down the records to relevant entries rather than just handing them *everything* as the judge seems wont to do.

EDIT Couldn't this be seen as a move on Sony's party to gain the information of people who donated to fund a case against them? People who have committed no crime and wished to donate anonymously?

Even if it COULD be seen as that, People have the right to donate money to whomever the hell they want. SONY can't move against them, and cannot include them in anything. The only thing SONY can do is try and get jurisdiction from it all.

And I understand that you say it might be an inexperienced judge, but...

I wonder how much cash sony is passing under the table to the judge.

See? Paying the judge off?

In my experience, judges aren't usually inexperienced, and they wouldn't toss a newbie into a case involving a giant like SONY. You don't choose your judge. You present your case at the courthouse and the expert in the matter is assigned.

If SONY really had bought a Naive judge or one was just given, then why did this judge [practically "Belonging" to SONY deny them the shortened time limit for Hotz to respond with information? It would have guaranteed them a win

 

[LGC Pominator]

Sony does use some of its profits to fund its legal ventures, but most of the profits go towards the various other stuff they do. Like the upcoming PSP2 and that Spiderman movie reboot.

Soo... more reasons to avoid sony's products like the plague then?

OT I cannot stand the way sony have treated this, if it were simply a case of hotz being an annoying game hacker who just screws with people for the hell of it, then sure, I could understand them giving him a clip round the ear, but to unleash the force of the california legal system on someone who is trying to restore the store bought functionality of his product, then I can in no way support them, this is incredibly dickish of sony, not only have they taken an advertised feature away from their consumers, they have also taken to actively ruining someone who seeks to restore what he paid for.

 

[ClaytronJames]

If you want to hack your console, whatever. But when you start to interfere with my online play or possibly even compromise my account info because of your actions, that's when I have a problem. And I know it's not all of them, but I feel that the people raising the biggest fuss against Sony on this are the ones coming mostly from the guilty party. Just sayin...