Sony Hacker Lawsuits Earn the Wrath of Anonymous [UPDATED]

[JDKJ]

Oh Anon, may you never stop not having anything better to do.

This line of thinking is wrong. It's not that they don't have anything better to do, what they are doing is worthwhile and comes down to the very rights guaranteed by the US constitution, that is the right to own property. They are making the argument you do not own the property you bought from them, they in fact own it and can dictate how you are or are not allowed to use it.

You might own the console itself, but you do not own the software that runs it and you are not free to do whatever you want with it. It's not that easy. No one is denying him the right to his property, they are denying him the right to fuck with theirs.

But, if the software is not purchased with the console, they are selling a device that won't work unless they give you the ok. You don't buy a computer but not own Windows 7. You own the right to use it, update it as you see fit, or not update it, write programs that run on it, etc. You don't buy a car without an engine, it's illegal to sell it as a working functioning car without it.

Why would you ever think that you purchased the software in a PS3 and that you own it when the license agreement that governs the software in a PS3 clearly states that it is only licensed to you for use and that Sony retains all rights of ownership to that software? Please explain that you me because I've scratched my head to a bald spot wondering why anyone would think they own the PS3's software when Sony has made it abundantly clear that they don't.

I'll tell you exactly why, and this is a point that I have made so many times. It's because you purchase the system and THEN are made to sign an EULA, BEFORE you can actually use it. That is the part where they take advantage of their customer base. There are plenty of people out there that should simply as for a refund, and Sony should give it to them. But they wouldn't, would they?

If you sign an EULA before you fork over your money, then it's out of peoples hands, but since you don't, people purchase it with the understanding that you actually own the system and all things represented thereof.

So, keep scratching your head, and I hope you get it soon before you hit grey matter. I would hate to lose someone to debate against to brain damage. =P

PS. All bolds are representative of emphasis placed by myself. This way, even if you leave out all the extraneous other words, you can skim and see my point.

You aren't made to sign the EULA (putting aside the fact that you're aren't asked to sign anything, you're acceptance is implied by use of or access to the software in the console). Did Sony stand behind you with gun and demand that you accept their terms or they'll blow your brains out of your skull? I don't think so. So you buy a PS3 from Best Buy, take it home and unbox your PS3 where you discover the EULA. You read the terms of that EULA and find them to be unacceptable. Then you take that shit right back to Best Buy, tell them you don't agree to to the EULA terms that are a precondition of use and insist on a refund or a store credit. I can't imagine Best Buy refusing a refund or store credit. They wouldn't and couldn't pull that shit with me. I'll be the one to plop their PS3 on the counter before them, go home, call my credit card issuer, and have them remove the charge from my account. Plain and simple.

And you don't own Windows7. It comes with a EULA that says almost word-for-word the same thing that Sony's EULA says: you're only licensed to use it, Microsoft owns it, and you can't modify it.

 

[Echo136]

Its so funny to see Anonymous think that they are taking the moral highground when everything they do is illegal.

 

[Kroxile]

I hope that one of them screws up and gets caught, and in turn, rats out more of them.

When you mess with the PS3s software, you're not "tinkering with something you own", you're tinkering with something you're leasing. Huge difference.

If I walk into gamestop, walmart, or whatever and shell out the cash for a PS3 system it and everything it contains is now mine and mine to do what I want with. You cannot tell me I'm "leasing" something that I just paid for in full and can't access it as much as I want in whatever manner that I want.

That said: I don't even care about piracy on consoles; its just the point that I made above that gets me riled up concerning this topic.

 

[creager91]

This is really the most ridiculous argument Ive ever hear. The "I bought it legally so I can do what I want with it" argument is extremely shallow thinking. I buy a knife legally, does that mean I'm allowed to stab people in my own home cuz I bought that too so its mine and had my own set of rules completely separate from the rest of world right?

Seriously, your the one tampering with legally protected hardware, use the shit as its meant to be used or pay the consequences. I hope these hackers get the full force of the law, people like Geohot or whatever the hell his name is are the kind of arrogant bastards that think they can get away with anything and are the ones that help ruin things for everyone.

What do these people think will come of this if they win? Hackers will run rampant and gaming companies will end up going out of business because they cant compete with the hackers who would then have no legal restrictions such as sony has and the hackers dont have to worry as much about making money or employing thousands of people

Get your head out of your ass and think about the bigger picture hackers! Its not an issue of you doing it to your own system and then not playing online Im ok with that that doesnt harm anyone, its when you harm a companies profits that it becomes illegal, thats stealing and company ruining behavior. the world doesnt revolve around you or your defense mechanisms which in this case seem to be classic justification and regression.

Rant over

 

[Baresark]

Why is Che Gueara so popular in the states again? I thought they hated the Commies.

Haha, I had to take the opportunity to answer this. It's because people are ignorant and they think he accomplished something great, and didn't murder and steal to get it. I have been told he represents revolution, but it's the equivalent of the Marxist Revolution in the Russia circa 1920, and the Nazi Revolution of Germany circa 1930. People are woefully ignorant of history it would seem.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

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

 

[Th37thTrump3t]

This whole suit is like someone selling me a lego car, then suing me when I build something different out of it than the instructions call for. It's not like I'm loaning it... I payed for the right of ownership toward it, OWNERSHIP. If I pay 300 bucks for something then I better have the fucking ability to do with it whatever i bloody damn well please. It's not like I'm causing Sony any loss in profit by making it so I can use Linux on my PS3. They still got my $300. If they are going to do anything, then it should be just barring the system in question from using PSN, something that they actually have the fucking right to do.

 

[Ca3zar416]

this is where it gets really interesting now that anonymous entered the ring :O!

Yeah things have definitely escalated to make it far more of a spectacle with Anonymous coming in.

 

[RvLeshrac]

*snip*

I think this might be why, it's why it feels off for me

SONY isn't abusing the legal system, they're USING the legal system. You might think what they're suing for is wrong, but if the judge allows the case to go through, it's because it's not abusing the legal system and a case can be made by both sides. You might not like what SONY is doing, but a legal battle is a viable option for SONY, they are using it, and if you don't understand that, tough.

I've supported Anon' MANY times in the past, including the WBC bollocks they went through, but they were right for that. WBC was pushing hate on the world. SONY is not abusing the legal system, they are simply using that method

Why is it that EVERY TIME someone twitches the wrong way, Anonymous goes "You are abusing the public and misusing all of this! We shall teach you a lesson!" like their donning batman's fucking cape? I can understand it if they get involved in an issue or two, but now they're hacking for the sake of hacking, they're watching everything going "Can we find a reason to hack for that? no...... How about that? ...... no....... OOooooh, lets do THIS!!!!"

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Either they were right in attacking the WBC and they're right in attacking Sony, or they aren't right in either case.

You can't pick and choose, as both are equally illegal. Adjusting your ethics based on how much you dislike one group makes you no better than the idiots at Westboro.

Legality and Ethicality are two different things. It might be legal to sue someone for millions when they work a blue collar job, but does that make it right? Yes, Anon's hacking was illegal in BOTH cases, but it seems more justifiable in the westboro cases.

Oh, and try to keep this civil. You don't don't see me insulting anyone, so kindly don't insult me.

But you equated "illegal" with "unethical" when you said that what Sony is doing is legal, and thus they should be left alone.

*Directly* conforming to that logic, what Westboro is doing is *legal*, therefore they also should be left alone.

Either legality is unrelated to ethics, and the involved members of Anonymous may be right in both scenarios, or legality and ethics are two sides of the same coin, and they are wrong in both scenarios.

If Steve robs Bob and then Mark robs Dave, you can't punish Mark less just because you think Dave is a dick. Doing so invalidates the entire system.

 

[BRex21]

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.

Herein lies the problem, Did you sign an agreement when you bought your console? Im betting you didn't.
In most countries the "shrink wrap contract" is actually completely unenforcable, since you have to purchaise the product before reading it you are agreeing to a blind contract that you cant read until after it is "signed" if you disagree you have just purchaised a very expensive paperweight or given someone a discount on a used console.
America is the exception to this where cases tend to go either way, and what i find worst of all is that Sony has already breached the contract by removing lunux support, something that technically amounts to fraud, although i have no interest in putting linux on a game console, they did tell consumers that they could.

 

[bomblord]

The problem is not what you can do with your hardware/software we would have never heard crap about geohot if he didn't

DISTRIBUTE THE MEANS TO PIRATE GAMES AND OTHER SOFTWARE geohot can do whatever the heck he wants with his PS3 the problem is he Distributed it with full knowledge that it would be and was used for software pirating and other illegal activity

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

This is really the most ridiculous argument Ive ever hear. The "I bought it legally so I can do what I want with it" argument is extremely shallow thinking. I buy a knife legally, does that mean I'm allowed to stab people in my own home cuz I bought that too so its mine and had my own set of rules completely separate from the rest of world right?

Seriously, your the one tampering with legally protected hardware, use the shit as its meant to be used or pay the consequences. I hope these hackers get the full force of the law, people like Geohot or whatever the hell his name is are the kind of arrogant bastards that think they can get away with anything and are the ones that help ruin things for everyone.

What do these people think will come of this if they win? Hackers will run rampant and gaming companies will end up going out of business because they cant compete with the hackers who would then have no legal restrictions such as sony has and the hackers dont have to worry as much about making money or employing thousands of people

Get your head out of your ass and think about the bigger picture hackers! Its not an issue of you doing it to your own system and then not playing online Im ok with that that doesnt harm anyone, its when you harm a companies profits that it becomes illegal, thats stealing and company ruining behavior. the world doesnt revolve around you or your defense mechanisms which in this case seem to be classic justification and regression.

Rant over

Because hacking a console is clearly equivalent to murdering someone with a knife, and not, say, making a nice sheath for it. Right.

 

[v3n0mat3]

I think this is going a little too far. Personally, I don't care if other people hack their stuff, so long as they're not able to access my information. Sony does need to back off, but Anonymous hacking their websites isn't really going to do it. In fact, Sony may be more forceful in their attacks against hackers because of this.

 

[Dodgeboyuk]

i am still with anon on this one but...

but maybe they could use their talents to produce an operating system that comes on a disk

*That can be installed on the ps3 that will not effect sony's software all ready on the system their os would probally need launching from the applications menu or something like that

*That comes with an uninstaller

*That will not allow for playstation 1,2 and 3 games(inculding legit ones) to be played within the Operating System's enviroment (in other words their OS would have to be shutdown or exited to get back to the console ability to play games)

i reckon that if they could do all that they could even become leicenced by sony for use on the system
and others might even write software that can be used within this alternate OS

 

[Croaker42]

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 completly agree.
If we follow sony's flawed logic the world would be a sad place to live.
"If it does not sustain you; you can't have it. You might try and do somethig wrong with it."
Sony needs to stope with the hamfisted approach and try something with a little more tact. IDK perhaps try rewarding owners that don't mod their machines. Like buying them a pony because they are specail little flowers.

 

[Aurgelmir]

I am sort of getting sick of Anonymous.
They are not looking out for the little guy, nor are their causes Noble.

Anonymous doesn't agree with what you are doing? Well get ready to be hacked.


All they are are simple criminals with a god complex.

 

[Echo136]

As long as whatever they do doesnt affect my trophy count I'm fine with it. They are pretty much wasting their time DDoSing a website, as itll have little to no effect on the court case

 

[Baresark]

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

You aren't made to sign the EULA (putting aside the fact that you're aren't asked to sign anything, you're acceptance is implied by use of or access to the software in the console). Did Sony stand behind you with gun and demand that you accept their terms or they'll blow your brains out of your skull? I don't think so. So you buy a PS3 from Best Buy, take it home and unbox your PS3 where you discover the EULA. You read the terms of that EULA and find then to be unacceptable. Then you take that shit right back to Best Buy, tell them you don't agree to to the EULA terms that are a precondition of use and insist on a refund or a store credit. I can't imagine Best Buy refusing a refund or store credit. They wouldn't and couldn't pull that shit with me. I'll be the one to plop their PS3 on the counter before them, go home, call my credit card issuer, and have them remove the charge from my account. Plain and simple.

Only, Gamestop won't accept the return of an open item, most places will not. So, it should fall on Sony to refund your money, only they will not (I have never heard of anyone successfully doing that anyway, I'm open to correction). And, going and arbitrarily canceling a credit payment is not legal in all cases. Like, for instance, if you purchase something from a place that won't allow you to return it, then you go and cancel your payment. They should not sell you something without telling you what you are or are not buying. That is intentionally misleading the customer, and that is very illegal.

And, like it or not, they basically are holding a gun against you. And here is why. Politics, law and government concerns itself with a single thing, the use of force. They sell you something, and the law is not on your side, even though you may have been wronged, they can bring the use of force against you. And this use of force is not always violent in nature at first. For instance, they dock your pay money over time to pay for something they say you must pay (The IRS does this all the time). So, like it or not, this whole case is about that. That is the deepest issue we are facing here. If Sony is right, they now have a foot hold within the law to bring the laws use of force against you for things they do not agree with. If they are wrong, the consumer wins the day, and the laws protect the people. Like I stated earlier, this is not about piracy, like it or not. This is about property rights.

 

[Vrach]

Thumbs up for Anonymous. Beginning to like them more and more

Oh and I don't see what the article finds confusing and not black and white. Allowing tinkering can enable piracy? No shit, allowing p2p can enable piracy as well. Yet I don't see you rooting for that idiotic Canadian ISP that recently threw the brakes on that, so what exactly is different here? It's actually a "worse" case scenario considering internet is something you sorta "rent" while you buy a PS3 console and it is yours to do with as you please.

 

[JDKJ]

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.

I agree with you, car comparisons are pointless. Lets compare this to another piece of intellectual property that tends to fall under licensing and copyright. Music. What has happened is the equivalent of someone remixing a song, releasing a program that can modify the original song into the remix version(not releasing the remix itself, since you have to have a PS3 to jailbreak it), and then explaining their method of pulling individual track layers and what they specifically changed for their remix. And they of course exported it into a different sort of soundfile than it came as, to give it expanded functionality.

I don't think anyone has ever been sued for doing that.

Assuming that the remix program was written by you from scratch, then it's your intellectual property and, yes, I can't see where anyone would have a legal cause of action against you. But those facts aren't analogous to the case of Sony and its PS3. The more analogous hypothetical would be the case where the remix program was not written by you from scratch. A much more analogous comparison would be taking Ableton, rewriting or in some other way modifying that program code, and releasing your newly modified version to the public. I'm pretty confident (but will admit to not knowing for sure) that Ableton's software, like Sony's software, is only licensed for use and that they prohibit modification of their software. And I'd imagine that they, like Sony, wouldn't be too pleased with your efforts to improve on their product.