Sony Hacker Lawsuits Earn the Wrath of Anonymous [UPDATED]

[DemonCrim]

Anon really has no business entering this fight. Everything going on in the case is completely legit.

 

[Emergent]

I've supported Anon in their last few crusades but this is one I'm not behind. People are so quick to jump to judgment about Sony and I really don't think they've done anything wrong (at least any more so than any other company)

So you're cool with turning your paypal and web surfing information over to them without being ordered to do so in court?

 

[Therumancer]

Interestingly it seems PSN is down. I can't login either through my PS-3 or check their site online. It could just be my connection, but the timing is uncanny.

 

[Razhem]

You arent looking at this from a legal standpoint, The only way a EULA can be enforced is if the Issuer can prove that the purchaiser acepted the terms of the EULA, the problem with a shrinkwrap contract is that that almost never happens.
cases that uphold EULA shrinkwrap contracts almost always have other determining factors, such as the one you stated where a return policy was issued the customer had the option to return it or where a consumer profited directly from the misuse of the software.
The issue here is that Sony is blatantly ignoring fair trade laws that prohibit this in almost all us states. (i cant name one that they arent but im sure there is one)
The store can refuse nto accept the return but sony legally has to give you your money back if you dont want it, they dont. this renders your first example invalid. Even with the examples where consumers are given an out factored in there is no clear frontrunner in America as to these contracts being enforcable.

God knows I don't understand half of this, but just to get it straight. As I understand it, the EULA is supposedly accepted the moment you plug in your PS3 and play with it, couldn't they just confirm either your connection to PSN or just check the PS3 log to confirm if it has been "activated" or has received recent use to confirm that you have in fact "Accepted" the EULA?

 

[jawakiller]

I don't care what anybody says, Anonymous is awesome. Now I don't always agree with them but I do like their Batman approach to things. They see something they see as wrong and attack the problem, usually illegally. I guess the correct wording is vigilante. Which makes them super bad-ass.

And Sony is wrong on this one, I bought the console. Get yo damn hands of it.

 

[Illyasviel]

I've supported Anon in their last few crusades but this is one I'm not behind. People are so quick to jump to judgment about Sony and I really don't think they've done anything wrong (at least any more so than any other company)

So you're cool with turning your paypal and web surfing information over to them without being ordered to do so in court?

http://www.psmods.com/content.php?189-Sony-wins-subpoena-for-Geohot-s-PayPal-records

Tuesday's order by US Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero said the information subject to Sony's subpoena ?shall be provided on an Attorneys' Eyes Only basis?

FOR ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY.

FOR ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY.

FOR ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY.

Please stop trying to sensationalize what actually happened. Sony can't see any of the names gathered. Sony can't sue you. They don't know who you are. Only their attorneys do. Any information gathered that is not explicitly asked for as part of the subpeona is immediately forgotten. Never recorded. Sony essentially performed an anonymous census.

 

[kek13]

Interestingly it seems PSN is down. I can't login either through my PS-3 or check their site online. It could just be my connection, but the timing is uncanny.

You're not the only one, I just tried to log on to my PSN account and it's not working for me either.

And I had a day off work too!
*Kicks hat*

 

[ThatLankyBastard]

God... I love Anon...

... and it doesn't help that I hate Sony...

 

[ImprovizoR]

Anonymous is fucking stupid. There I said it.

And as for Sony, if tinkering with the console can lead to piracy, then persecute those that are actually engaged in software piracy, not everyone that wants to tinker with the product that they bought and paid for.

It's like going after the knife manufacturers because someone used a kitchen knife to murder his neighbors. It's stupid and fuck Sony.

 

[Arizona Kyle]

Sony Hacker Lawsuits Earn the Wrath of Anonymous [UPDATED]

Anonymous has accused Sony of abusing the legal system and victimizing its customers.

Sony's efforts to sue [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/106865-Sony-Breaks-Out-the-Lawyers-Over-PS3-Hacks] PS3 hackers have raised the ire of the "hacktivist" group Anonymous, who has deemed Sony's lawsuits as "alarming" and "wholly unforgiveable." In retaliation for these perceived infractions, Anonymous is turning its "undivided" attention towards the company, and plans to attack Sony websites.

In a "press release [http://anonnews.org/?p=press&a=item&i=787]," Anonymous said that Sony had abused the judicial system in an effort to suppress information about the inner workings of the PS3. Anonymous accused Sony of "victimizing" its customers, and intruding on the privacy of thousands of "innocent" people that just wanted to share information about a product they had legally purchased and should be able to do with as they pleased. What's more, the release said that judges and other legal entities involved in the suits were guilty of "undermining the well-being of the populace and subverting [their] judicial mandate."

While Anonymous hasn't been specific about what it plans to attack, it said that its actions would be symbolic. The release said that Sony was treating its customers as if they were just renting their consoles, and so Anonymous would do the same with Sony's web domains. This action, the release read, was to show Sony exactly how wrong their actions against the hackers were.

The relationship between Sony and PS3 hackers is a very complex one, even if Anonymous wants to paint it as a black and white, hackers are right, Sony is wrong, kind of deal. It's hard to know who to root for - ignoring for a moment that what Anonymous is threatening to do is illegal - as both sides make valid points in their arguments. On the one hand, it's hard to disagree with the idea that people should be able to tinker with something that they own, but on the other hand, it's impossible to ignore the fact that that tinkering can often enable software piracy. It remains to be seen, however, whether a few denial of service attacks is going to be enough to make Sony see things Anonymous' way.


UPDATE: It looks like Anonymous has started its assault. As of 13.30 EST, the US PlayStation [http://us.playstation.com/] site is down, presumably from a denial of service attack.


Source: via Kotaku [http://kotaku.com/#!5788479/anonymous-targets-sony-warns-of-penises-stuck-in-hornets-nests]




Permalink

UPDATE: us.playstation.com is back up

 

[Jopoho]

The news story said the Sony attacks should be symbolic, but according to this, they just shut down the site. That doesn't seem like it's super symbolic.

Anonymous 1: Okay guys, what can we do that will make Sony understand what it's doing?

Anonymous 2: We could DDoS them.

1: How is that symbolic?

2: I don't know, but all we know how to do is shut down sites!

1: I suppose your right. Alright, we DDoS them at dawn.

2: Huzzah!

1: God I love protecting freedom by restricting website access.

 

[Maclennan]

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 understand Sony's trepidation, but I don't agree with them.

I see your point but it's... Complicated.
Isn't the Sony software in the PS3 copyrited and secret and stuff? If so then I say you're probably not allowed to screw with it.
I'm sure it would be in the agreement that everyone signs when they buy the console or set it up or something.

There is no legal agreement from buying the console in Canada or the united states, i dont know about elsewhere but something which can be legally purchased by a minor cannot require a legal contract whether written or implied to purchase. There is an agreement to use the psn which is legal where it involves utilizing a service provided but there is no agreement made with the individual for the product purchase.
The copy write agreement only protects against distribution and duplication. Screwing with it was not protected and will only become a prescient once all appeals are exhausted or passed and the proceedings are closed for good.

Given I don't support Anonymous but Sony it writing new laws in this law suite.

 

[Composer]

what exactly does the ps3 hacks do? allow you to play pirated games?

 

[Kopikatsu]

PSN is down. Wonderful. I've been wanting to buy ZHP for a long while now (Because the game stores near me don't have it in, and I can't get junk delivered to my home), but now I can't.

Sony is using the legal system, not abusing it. Anonymous is a group of vigilante hackers (Illegal!).

Shouldn't they be able to rip the IP's from 4chan and go arrest the various people doing the hacking? Or at least investigate them.

 

[eels05]

Maybe these hackers should tackle something a bit less ah how can I put it,unimportant in the long run.

That's the thing. This IS important in the long run. The point of public awareness campaigns is to do exactly what is happening: Inspire others to think about, debate, and take action about something you believe in.

There are larger issues at stake here, basically that Sony's trick of using software to lock hardware in order to get around commonly accepted legal rights of customers (to modify hardware they purchase) by claiming that if the software controls the hardware, protections meant only for software (under the DMCA) suddenly apply to hardware too, is one that could set a legal precedent for literally every type of electronic device on the market.

As has already been mentioned, this isn't really about hackers and consoles: It's about copyright law. And I promise you, there is a definite need for more public awareness of abusive copyright practices by large corporations.

Sorry I dont see how a company big or small taking legal action to protect the basic function of their products as an 'abuse' of anyones rights.
I personally dont see the whole practice of cracking open an ipod,laptop,PS3 or any other piece of equipment to add crap to it and make it do things it wasn't designed to do by its makers as something worth having legal action taken against me for.
I mean did you read the wording of the Anynonomous warning to Sony.Dick jokes?Who are these jokers?
Seriously please.

 

[Emergent]

http://www.psmods.com/content.php?189-Sony-wins-subpoena-for-Geohot-s-PayPal-records

Tuesday's order by US Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero said the information subject to Sony's subpoena ?shall be provided on an Attorneys' Eyes Only basis?

FOR ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY.

FOR ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY.

FOR ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY.

Please stop trying to sensationalize what actually happened. Sony can't see any of the names gathered. Sony can't sue you. They don't know who you are. Only their attorneys do. Sony essentially performed an anonymous census.

While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I do have a question: Are you asserting that an employee of a corporate person is not, in fact, part of that corporate person?

 

[RoyalWelsh]

Oh wonderful, PSN is now down. ¬.¬ Maintenance apparently. I was so looking forward to a night of FIFA clubs aswell.

 

[Sandytimeman]

Permalink

Throwing a tantrum will sure teach them.

I mean, we could just get people to boycott the products and services. Let supply and demand do the "dirty work." But we're afraid that not enough people are bothered by this. So, instead, Anonymous gets louder and pretends it represents the majority interest.

And all they're going to do is make a harder road for those of us that would rather initiate dialogue with Sony to make changes. It'll be impossible to talk the issue out anymore, because they'll have clear reason to say, "This is why we don't 'negotiate' with hackers." Because we're so anxious to prove them right, they never have to admit they're wrong.

Personally I think your kidding yourself on a company changing its model based on dialogue. If they have something that millions of people are buying and a small group doesn't like it. Most likely they are gunna tell that small group to piss right off. Case in point, people who used linux on their PS3's

 

[BRex21]

You arent looking at this from a legal standpoint, The only way a EULA can be enforced is if the Issuer can prove that the purchaiser acepted the terms of the EULA, the problem with a shrinkwrap contract is that that almost never happens.
cases that uphold EULA shrinkwrap contracts almost always have other determining factors, such as the one you stated where a return policy was issued the customer had the option to return it or where a consumer profited directly from the misuse of the software.
The issue here is that Sony is blatantly ignoring fair trade laws that prohibit this in almost all us states. (i cant name one that they arent but im sure there is one)
The store can refuse nto accept the return but sony legally has to give you your money back if you dont want it, they dont. this renders your first example invalid. Even with the examples where consumers are given an out factored in there is no clear frontrunner in America as to these contracts being enforcable.

God knows I don't understand half of this, but just to get it straight. As I understand it, the EULA is supposedly accepted the moment you plug in your PS3 and play with it, couldn't they just confirm either your connection to PSN or just check the PS3 log to confirm if it has been "activated" or has received recent use to confirm that you have in fact "Accepted" the EULA?

The problem is that for a contract to be valid there has to be a "meeting of the minds" meaning both parties understand and agree to the terms. However in a "shrinkwrap contract" like this you agree to the terms when you buy the PS3 then you can take it home open in and find out... Oh i would never agree to this. There is also the issue of "we reserve the right to change this at any time" which as far as contracts go is horribly one sided.
Essentially for a contract to be valid, both sides need to agree to it before the transaction. Since i can't SEE the contract until after the transaction, they can take my money and give me nothing if i dont agree to it. This is "Unconsionable" in the eyes of the law.

 

[MrGalactus]

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.

That appears to be happening a lot lately.