Sony Hacker Lawsuits Earn the Wrath of Anonymous [UPDATED]

[Khada]

Being anti copyright and a Venus Project advocator I support Anon in their endeavor. A note for those who support copyright; You may think it you write to own something which has been created out of things you do not (even your environmentally induced, emergent ideas) only hurts yourself in the end. For each object or idea you don't let others have or know, many many more are kept from you. Technology would advance much quicker if (like a scientific theory) it was allowed to be tested, scrutinised and improved by the world community. Naturally this topic is much bigger than that, but that is the basis for my view.

 

[Ishiro32]

Dude, you just made one of those things where you switch one letter and change the entire meaning of a phrase. "Braking the law": 1.) obstruction of justice, 2.) what's going to happen if congress can't get their butts in gear and approve a new budget in the next couple of weeks

Guilty . Good eye

 

[Baresark]

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip/quote]

snip/quote]

snip

snip

LoL, my favorite bit is how you had no idea about it till I called you on it. But, that is how we learn. I can admit when I'm wrong, though that just means I have to edit my arguments from here on in. It's all good. I had fun with this back and forth, but I need to get ready for work. Cheers and thanks for the mentally stimulating debate. I look forward to our next back and forth.

Wrong, again. This isn't the first time I've been forced to dissuade a member of the Escapist community that console EULAs aren't much different than PC operating system EULAs by pasting the Windows7 EULA. I can go back to my profile's list of posts, dig it out and re-post it, if you don't believe me. Or, alternatively, you can save me the leg work by visiting my profile and digging it out yourself from my list of posts. There ain't but 800 or so posts. Should be an easy find.

I never said it was different. I just know that I am allowed to create my own software for the PC so long as it isn't malicious in nature and knowingly causes harm to other people's systems.

I think you may have confused my post with someone else's though.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

"Don't you dare complain about your software being hacked or we'll hack your website" -- Anonymous

Yeah, it's one thing to counter a hateful website like Westboro Baptist Church, but riding in liek you're a super hero employing "An eye for an eye" is just... Well... I just can't support it. As it is, I want Hotz and SONY to just shake hands, come to a comfy medium, and that's it

And it's not like the inevitable blow-back is gonna win Hotz any brownie points with the Court. I can see the Judge saying, "These are the people who side against Sony and this is how they show their support? By taking over my job and passing their own judgment and sentence? I don't think so. Where that Hotz kid? Bring him in here. I wanna show him and his supporters who the real HNIC is."

Too true. If Anon does anything during this case it can and will be used against Hotz. Anon will be doing more hurting then helping here. And great of of "HNIC". Did not see that coming.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Please don't mess up the PlayStation Network. I enjoy playing games that I LEGALLY bought and own, and therefore I have a right to enjoy all of the features.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

So just how many wars are anonymous fighting now anyway?

 

[JDKJ]

snip snip etc..

You must enjoy standing in that bucket of correction. Take a look at the EULA that comes with Windows7:

8. SCOPE OF LICENSE. The software is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the features included in the software edition you licensed. The manufacturer or installer and Microsoft reserve all other rights. Unless applicable law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you may use the software only as expressly permitted in this agreement. In doing so, you must comply with any technical limitations in the software that only allow you to use it in certain ways. You may not
· work around any technical limitations in the software;

(snip)

I'm not legal expert, but doesn't work around any technical limitations in the software just sound like installing ANY software on Windows 7 which isn't part of windows? you can install software written by a company (or individual) which sits on windows without Micro$oft's express permission, isn't this then against the EULA? or am I being too literal?

No, it means what I would think it clearly says: if there is something in the OS as purchased that makes it a technical impossibility to perform a given function, then you are prohibited from devising your own means so as to circumvent that impossibility and thereby make it a possibility to perform that function.

 

[bam13302]

i lol'd
honestly, im not a hacker nor do i normally support them, but sony has never really been on my good side (except with the ps2, i did like that)
i can wait to hear what anonymous is doing to sony

 

[Dr. Pepper Unlimited]

Sony is abusing the legal system you say? Let's commit crimes and illegal activity to show them they they shouldn't commit illegal activity. That's...logical... *sigh*

Guy is about to shoot someone? Let's shoot him to show people who like to shoot people they shouldn't shoot people. Yeah, that logic works quite well actually

Entirely situational, as is with this article. In any case, this is not their [Anonymous'] fight and condoning illegal acts to "prove a point" is idiotic at best.

 

[drunken_munki]

It's easy, don't buy some shitty Sony console.

Yeah yeah blah blah blah, who cares. All the games are ported to all consoles +PC anyway, so fuck Sony. They want to control you and milk your wallet while they do it. They have clearly shown in the last 3 years with the PS£ they have no idea wtf they are doing anymore. Long gone are the ps1 and ps2 days where they were on top of their game.

Trust me, you can live without them. Let them starve themselves with their own idiocy.

As for Anonymous... yeah label them how you want. They certainly stand up for the little guy, and seem to be the force of common sense. The legality is another discussion I think.

 

[La Barata]

Anonymous has no official position on ps3.
ANONYMOUS HAS A VERY FUCKING OFFICIAL POSITION ON LULZ.

 

[BRex21]

So wait. Anonymous wants to go out and target Sony for protecting its business, but they wont touch the WBC until they are repeatedly poked and prodded to.

So thats where we're going to draw the line. Well, now I'm back against Anon.

Anonymous has always said they are in favor of freedom, not promoting a political agenda. Bad as the WBC is they dont really interfere with other people living thier lives they just shouted a lot of hatefull gibberish.
Sony on the other hand are actively working to slander someone who promotes "Fair use" and sony is fighting against that through the use of a "shrinkwrap contract," its a legal term look it up, that has outright been found as illegal at the best of times and is still a grey area at the worst of times.
Anonymous not taking down WBC for so long was simply because it wasnt part of their agenda. The same way they dont take out Palin or Obama's websites when they say something rediculous. Because they support the First Amendment.

 

[zehydra]

Anonymous has no official position on ps3.
ANONYMOUS HAS A VERY FUCKING OFFICIAL POSITION ON LULZ.

As a member of anonymous I declare you incorrect.

Now what're you gonna do about it?

 

[Illyasviel]

thinking it in terms of legality, anonymous is participating in illegal activities.
thinking in terms of good vs bad, sony appears to be wearing the horns and anonymous is the knight in shining armor.

i strongly support those who wish to modify their own equipment, and ignoring any form of legality and politics, i can certainly see anonymous's point of view. sony is outright abusing the system.

/thread =3

Geohot's also abusing the judicial system. Instead of going into court and fighting his legal case like he should, he's been tampering with evidence and using delaying tactics ( California is not the right location, I've never heard of SCEA ).

If you're going to reply with some SONY HAS A GAZILLION DOLLARS AND GEOHOT DOESN'T don't. Strictly speaking, money has nothing to do with appearing in court.

Its easy, don't buy some shitty Sony console.

Exactly what a lot of children should've done.

 

[Giddi]

As long as they don't touch my PS3 or anything that affects it, I don't really care what they do.

Technically they have. The firmware updates took away features that the PS3 once supported. It used to be possible to run Linux on the PS3 but that has been changed with their updates. Most people didn't use it but there are people who bought the PS3 over a different game system for that reason.

You misunderstood my post a little. I meant I don't care what Anonymous does as long as my PS3 still works, I already knew that Sony took that away after they had advertised it.

Sony: I have altered the deal. Pray I do not change it further.

Not to nerd it up too much here

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

I disagree with the fact that people shouldn't be allowed to mod their products because they might use it for piracy. That's like saying we shouldn't sell people knives because they might cut others.

I agree in theory. But there's a potential to really screw up other people's gaming experience since that modded product can still intermingle with a greater community. There's a balance here that Sony is likely trying to preserve. The majority of PS3 gamers are just folks who want to plug into the community and have fun interacting (I'm guessing). A modded box can really stink that up.

If some guy modded his car with armor plating and gun turrets, the cops wouldn't let him drive it to work. And if they did, I sure as hell wouldn't want to see him every day on my morning commute. Sony (the police) is trying keep the public roads (their online gaming experience) clear of tanks (modded boxes) to protect the general public (dumb gamers like me who don't mod boxes).

Good of you to bring up a car comparison, because I was just about to do the same: Sony's attitude towards modding is eerily similar to a company like Ford selling you a car with the promise that you may do whatever you wish to its engine/tires/whatever, but later has a huge recall. At this point you are informed that your sweet 500hp engine doesn't really belong in a Ford...what do they make again? Focus? Anyway, they take out your sweet 500hb engine and put the old one back in. But somebody doesn't like that, and scraps the piece o' shite engine that Ford makes, whereupon he gets sued. Granted, his suited up car could be used to illicit activities such as street racing or drug running, but the burden of proof is on Ford to show that their actions of at best questionable legality are valid, and that all "modders" are only doing so to partake in illegal activities. Before I end up confusing anybody but myself, replace every instance of "Ford" with "Sony," and "engine" with "OS."
I'm for Anon on this one. I kinda hope they stick to humiliating Sony, and not punishing their customer base, cuz I wouldn't want my information leaked all over ze net...

Where that analogy fails is that there is nothing in the Ford that is copyrighted or licensed to you for use with the understanding that you can't modify it. The Ford is yours free and clear (assuming you have title to it). Do with it whatever you want assuming that you're not somehow running afoul of some law somewhere (like removing the headlights and driving it in the middle of the night). The software in the PS3, unlike your Ford analogy, is copyrighted and merely licensed to you for use with the understanding that you can't modify it. You're comparing an apple to an orange.

But if Ford decided to license the car like that, it still wouldn't hold up; this court case is a chance to get a court of law to say "you know, these EULA things are unconscionable contracts, and are clearly invalid. Stop trying to enforce them." It's not as far fetched as it sounds, either; EULAs almost never hold up when they reach a court of law, they just don't make it that far very often because of how much money the software publishers have to throw at lawyers, who then tie up the proceedings long enough to keep their BS from getting called. What we have here is an opportunity to give some rights back to consumers. How can you possibly be against that?

Unfortunately, EULAs aren't as unconscionable or invalid as you claim and there are a number of court decisions upholding their validity and enforceability. They may not be "fair" and may be horribly one-sided but that alone doesn't make them unenforceable as a matter of law. That just makes them a shitty deal for the consumer. But just because a deal is a shitty one doesn't make it an unenforceable one.

It's highly dependent on the EULA in question; for every case where one gets upheld, there's another case where it gets thrown out. The type of EULA involved in boxed game purchases is absolutely an unconscionable form of a contract of adhesion, as is what Sony is trying to get Geohot under, assuming he's telling the truth about not having signed up for a PSN account. Even if he did, it's still not a definite win for Sony.

That's not true. You can look up any EULA online now. Hell, I can probably walk into a video game store and request to look at a copy of the EULA before purchasing anything. The EULA is not the shrink wrap contract it used to be. You can find a way to read it without spending a penny on anything. Geohotz can say he didn't sign up for the PSN and didn't agree to the EULA, but Sony could easily state that they have it up for free on their website to read at anytime. It's also in the box before you turn the damn thing on so there's no excuse for Hotz here.

 

[Emergent]

It seems to me that Sony attempted to muddy the waters by making software that locks hardware, and then claims that while you have a right to alter the hardware, you cannot first remove the software that prevents you from altering the hardware. A classic catch 22. It's a slick move, and one that seems designed specifically to leverage the uncertainty inherent to the DMCA in a manner that is abusive to their customers.

Copyright law is destroying America (our entire country runs on technological innovation), and because of globalization, that has a negative impact on the entire fucking world.

In America, lobbyists can literally just hand the bills over to congressmen to sign into law, and can legally pay them for the privilege thanks to the recent supreme court campaign funding ruling. This is a fact. It is not rumor, opinion, or fearmongering. It is FACT.

That those who oppose this sort of thing are stepping outside the bounds of said unjustly (and unconstitutional!) formed laws to raise public awareness is not only expected, but admirable.

Go get 'em, Anon.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

"Don't you dare complain about your software being hacked or we'll hack your website" -- Anonymous

Yeah, it's one thing to counter a hateful website like Westboro Baptist Church, but riding in liek you're a super hero employing "An eye for an eye" is just... Well... I just can't support it. As it is, I want Hotz and SONY to just shake hands, come to a comfy medium, and that's it

And it's not like the inevitable blow-back is gonna win Hotz any brownie points with the Court. I can see the Judge saying, "These are the people who side against Sony and this is how they show their support? By taking over my job and passing their own judgment and sentence? I don't think so. Where that Hotz kid? Bring him in here. I wanna show him and his supporters who the real HNIC is."

Too true. If Anon does anything during this case it can and will be used against Hotz. Anon will be doing more hurting then helping here. And great of of "HNIC". Did not see that coming.

He can be held to account for something someone did, who has no relation to him, that he did not endorse? I'm sorry, but no.