The Other PS3 Hacker Is (Probably) Headed to Jail

[Echo136]

Wonderful how Sony doesn't even need to win the court case, they just need to throw so much money at it that a man can't afford to defend himself.

Love how money can buy the law.

This man fixed a broken product, the PS3, which Sony deliberately broke.

It's like if your car manufacturer turned off the stereo in your car because they were worried some people might use it to play pirated music and then sent you to prison for fixing it!

Thats a stupid example. Stereo's can be easily bought at a radioshack or best buy, and replace the old one LEGALLY. Why does everyone resort to using cars as an example for software piracy.

So he bought a replacement and they sued him, the analogy still works. It doesn't matter how he did it, he restored functionality to a broken product.

A closer to home analogy, Microsoft block internet access from every windows PC because of the fact that pirates use the internet. You bought a windows PC with the expectation that you'd be able to access the internet. You circumvent that you get sued.

No in fact, in real life the example does NOT WORK! Nowadays you dont get in trouble for fixing your own engine. You dont get in trouble for changing your own tires, and you wouldnt get in trouble for replacing the radio and speakers with some nice subwoofers. None of that works. Unless there are roadblocks at every street corner where a company man from the manufacturer checks your car to make sure its still all authentic, its an unrealistic scenario.

You are getting close to understanding what we are talking about but not quite there. I pose a question to you then...

What if they could? What if they had software in every car that could tell exactly what piece of hardware is being used at any one time and then that information is being sent to GM/Ford/Toyota and whenever someone changes it (or hacks it) the police come and take your car away or something? Is that what you want corporations to be able to do to us? Cause that's what we are letting Sony do to us.

Ok, I get the point. Im not thoroughly convinced though that property rights of a car and property rights of a console are in anyway the same, because software rights are involved.

 

[Saviordd1]

So we originally had a champion for this cause but he wound up being an absolute coward and more interested in making money but when we get a man who seriously sticks to his convictions he gets thrown away...

What the hell people?

 

[DarkRyter]

Looks like he's gonna need a...

Spoiler: Come on, guess. Guess, ************

jailbreak.

Hardy har har.

 

[Corporal Yakob]

Best get ready for PSN going down again.....

 

[ameemo]

i kinda feel like all these hackers are just after the attention and publicity they get online, that's why they act all defiant and talk big. i mean have you heard anything about geohotz now after the settlement? i think he's lying, i dunno but i'll be scared to death if i was to go to prison.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

Wonderful how Sony doesn't even need to win the court case, they just need to throw so much money at it that a man can't afford to defend himself.

Love how money can buy the law.

This man fixed a broken product, the PS3, which Sony deliberately broke.

It's like if your car manufacturer turned off the stereo in your car because they were worried some people might use it to play pirated music and then sent you to prison for fixing it!

Thats a stupid example. Stereo's can be easily bought at a radioshack or best buy, and replace the old one LEGALLY. Why does everyone resort to using cars as an example for software piracy.

He didn't commit any acts of software piracy. He modified a device he purchased to restore an advertised feature which was removed without notification or consent. Do you have any evidence that he ran, or even intended to run, pirated software? No? Then get off your high horse and start talking about the actual issue of this man's case instead of the larger situation of which you perceive it to be representative and for which you have decided to blame him (an action roughly as ridiculous as blaming a maker of wrenches because the tools they produced were used to commit a crime).

The idea that aftermarket modifications performed by an individual on a product they have payed for and legally own is inherently criminal is an inherently destructive one which serves no purpose other than to advance the cause of large corporations against private individuals who often lack the resources to defend themselves (as in this case).

YOu want me to talk about the issue? No. I almost refuse to at this point. Its a stupid issue and I cant believe people even defend this guy. There. Happy? Im so tired of this subject. These people are not freedom fighters. They are just whining that they cant run linux on their consoles and play hacked games, and other people defend them saying that illegal games isnt the main purpose when that is blatant lies. Thats all I have to say about that.

You have no idea what you're talking about. First: Modifying the console still isn't a crime, so why is it being treated like one? Shouldn't only people who have been proved to have actually pirated software be the one's receiving punishment? Second: I know many people (most of them computer science students) who bought PS3s to run Linux and never even considered playing games on them, legal or otherwise. They were actually quite popular for use as servers and even desktops because of their high processing power relative to their cost. These people now effectively had bricks, so they fixed them. They're programmers who run Linux. That's what they do. Do you have any proof that all Linux users were in it for piracy? I didn't think so. You do seem to want it treated as a legal fact though, that seems pretty dangerous. Just so you know, the guy who figured out how to enable piracy through the other OS option only did it about a week before they took the option out. That means that everyone running Linux for the three years before that really were just running Linux beyond a shadow of a doubt, and running away because you don't have any actual logic or evidence to defend your position won't change that.

 

[Arehexes]

Wonderful how Sony doesn't even need to win the court case, they just need to throw so much money at it that a man can't afford to defend himself.

Love how money can buy the law.

This man fixed a broken product, the PS3, which Sony deliberately broke.

It's like if your car manufacturer turned off the stereo in your car because they were worried some people might use it to play pirated music and then sent you to prison for fixing it!

Not gonna lie I doubt everyone bought the ps3 for that killer version of yellow dog linux. You make it seem like sony bricked the system so it can't play games period. While I'm against what sony did to the ps3, it kinda is unfair to rant and rave about a feature not everyone ran out and bought the system for in the first place. It's like if microsoft advertised a feature on windows 7 that barely anyone noticed and they removed it and people freaked the hell out over it.

 

[bakan]

Ok, I get the point. Im not thoroughly convinced though that property rights of a car and property rights of a console are in anyway the same, because software rights are involved.

And these so called rights are regulated by these ominous EULAs the corporations hand out to their 'customers' which are even invalid in most of Europe and Germany, as general terms and conditions aren't allowed to be longer than one 'display page' as scrolling isn't allowed, too in these regulations.

 

[bobmus]

Because YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A CAR!


I HATE that cliche saying! Fact is: You couldn't download a car.

...
wat
...
You realize that line is a joke right? From an edited picture from an anti-piracy commercial? And I said it to explain why people always use the car example when talking about hacking.
The original, for all to see!

That music's so funky, it makes me want to obey the law!!

OT: He should just set up a donation site, I'm sure he could get enough to defend himself. He doesn't need to go to prison for what he calls his 'believes'.

 

[Echo136]

Wonderful how Sony doesn't even need to win the court case, they just need to throw so much money at it that a man can't afford to defend himself.

Love how money can buy the law.

This man fixed a broken product, the PS3, which Sony deliberately broke.

It's like if your car manufacturer turned off the stereo in your car because they were worried some people might use it to play pirated music and then sent you to prison for fixing it!

Thats a stupid example. Stereo's can be easily bought at a radioshack or best buy, and replace the old one LEGALLY. Why does everyone resort to using cars as an example for software piracy.

He didn't commit any acts of software piracy. He modified a device he purchased to restore an advertised feature which was removed without notification or consent. Do you have any evidence that he ran, or even intended to run, pirated software? No? Then get off your high horse and start talking about the actual issue of this man's case instead of the larger situation of which you perceive it to be representative and for which you have decided to blame him (an action roughly as ridiculous as blaming a maker of wrenches because the tools they produced were used to commit a crime).

The idea that aftermarket modifications performed by an individual on a product they have payed for and legally own is inherently criminal is an inherently destructive one which serves no purpose other than to advance the cause of large corporations against private individuals who often lack the resources to defend themselves (as in this case).

YOu want me to talk about the issue? No. I almost refuse to at this point. Its a stupid issue and I cant believe people even defend this guy. There. Happy? Im so tired of this subject. These people are not freedom fighters. They are just whining that they cant run linux on their consoles and play hacked games, and other people defend them saying that illegal games isnt the main purpose when that is blatant lies. Thats all I have to say about that.

You have no idea what you're talking about. First: Modifying the console still isn't a crime, so why is it being treated like one? Shouldn't only people who have been proved to have actually pirated software be the one's receiving punishment? Second: I know many people (most of them computer science students) who bought PS3s to run Linux and never even considered playing games on them, legal or otherwise. They were actually quite popular for use as servers and even desktops because of their high processing power relative to their cost. These people now effectively had bricks, so they fixed them. They're programmers who run Linux. That's what they do. Do you have any proof that all Linux users were in it for piracy? I didn't think so. You do seem to want it treated as a legal fact though, that seems pretty dangerous. Just so you know, the guy who figured out how to enable piracy through the other OS option only did it about a week before they took the option out. That means that everyone running Linux for the three years before that really were just running Linux beyond a shadow of a doubt, and running away because you don't have any actual logic or evidence to defend your position won't change that.

Look, I didnt know Other OS was around that long, but the world is full of people who are less than pure. Im not saying everyone who uses Other OS is gonna be stealing games, but you cant tell me there wont be people trying to. It probably should have been better if they found a compromise, like trying to fix the programming allowing the pirating. I dunno. All I know is you allow it as is and it opens up for pirating. No company would just ignore that.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

Wonderful how Sony doesn't even need to win the court case, they just need to throw so much money at it that a man can't afford to defend himself.

Love how money can buy the law.

This man fixed a broken product, the PS3, which Sony deliberately broke.

It's like if your car manufacturer turned off the stereo in your car because they were worried some people might use it to play pirated music and then sent you to prison for fixing it!

Thats a stupid example. Stereo's can be easily bought at a radioshack or best buy, and replace the old one LEGALLY. Why does everyone resort to using cars as an example for software piracy.

So he bought a replacement and they sued him, the analogy still works. It doesn't matter how he did it, he restored functionality to a broken product.

A closer to home analogy, Microsoft block internet access from every windows PC because of the fact that pirates use the internet. You bought a windows PC with the expectation that you'd be able to access the internet. You circumvent that you get sued.

No in fact, in real life the example does NOT WORK! Nowadays you dont get in trouble for fixing your own engine. You dont get in trouble for changing your own tires, and you wouldnt get in trouble for replacing the radio and speakers with some nice subwoofers. None of that works. Unless there are roadblocks at every street corner where a company man from the manufacturer checks your car to make sure its still all authentic, its an unrealistic scenario.

You are getting close to understanding what we are talking about but not quite there. I pose a question to you then...

What if they could? What if they had software in every car that could tell exactly what piece of hardware is being used at any one time and then that information is being sent to GM/Ford/Toyota and whenever someone changes it (or hacks it) the police come and take your car away or something? Is that what you want corporations to be able to do to us? Cause that's what we are letting Sony do to us.

Ok, I get the point. Im not thoroughly convinced though that property rights of a car and property rights of a console are in anyway the same, because software rights are involved.

Cars run software too, you know. Besides, how is physically modifying your car different from modding the software on your system. The only reason things like this can happen is that we don't have any clearly defined rights of digital property, only IP laws that were never intended to function on their own (property laws take precedence over IP when dealing with physical property), so whoever has the money and power can basically do whatever they feel like.

With this in mind, how about I amend the hypothetical: The car company sends out a software update that stops you from playing any music in your car, despite the hardware still being intact, because some people play illegally downloaded music in their cars. You hack your car and cause the device to work again, so the corporation sends the police to come and lock you up because you can't afford to fight them in court. Everyone is okay with it because piracy is obviously the only thing anyone would ever want the music player in their car for, and anyone who says otherwise is just a pirate putting on a show. That's what's happening here.

 

[GideonB]

YOu want me to talk about the issue? No. I almost refuse to at this point. Its a stupid issue and I cant believe people even defend this guy. There. Happy? Im so tired of this subject. These people are not freedom fighters. They are just whining that they cant run linux on their consoles and play hacked games, and other people defend them saying that illegal games isnt the main purpose when that is blatant lies. Thats all I have to say about that.

When they remove something that is featured, simply because they are worried that something would happen, then shit bricks when it does. It's stupid.
These guys even said all they want to do is run OtherOS on their PS3 (which WAS an advertised feature), and I don't think they are freedom fighters. People have the right to do whatever they want with what THEY themselves BOUGHT and LEGALLY paid for. If they want to put a feature that was removed when they had it but it was removed because Sony removed it, they should have every right to do so.

And trust me, the PS3/PSP groups that make the hacks really don't condone piracy, one of the CFW makers for the PSP was considering making sure that isos can't be run on your PSP unless you ripped them from your own PSP, so you can only use them as backups.

 

[Awexsome]

Go get em' Sony. The Linux feature was something used by very, very few. And those who did most of the time used it for piracy. Was behind Sony in the Geohotz case and are behind them here.

The very small number of people who actually did genuinely wanted to have a PS3 to use the Linux feature for legitimate reasons can be upset, but it's just unfortunate that it ended up being a major exploit to pirate games. Things change.

 

[Echo136]

Wonderful how Sony doesn't even need to win the court case, they just need to throw so much money at it that a man can't afford to defend himself.

Love how money can buy the law.

This man fixed a broken product, the PS3, which Sony deliberately broke.

It's like if your car manufacturer turned off the stereo in your car because they were worried some people might use it to play pirated music and then sent you to prison for fixing it!

Thats a stupid example. Stereo's can be easily bought at a radioshack or best buy, and replace the old one LEGALLY. Why does everyone resort to using cars as an example for software piracy.

So he bought a replacement and they sued him, the analogy still works. It doesn't matter how he did it, he restored functionality to a broken product.

A closer to home analogy, Microsoft block internet access from every windows PC because of the fact that pirates use the internet. You bought a windows PC with the expectation that you'd be able to access the internet. You circumvent that you get sued.

No in fact, in real life the example does NOT WORK! Nowadays you dont get in trouble for fixing your own engine. You dont get in trouble for changing your own tires, and you wouldnt get in trouble for replacing the radio and speakers with some nice subwoofers. None of that works. Unless there are roadblocks at every street corner where a company man from the manufacturer checks your car to make sure its still all authentic, its an unrealistic scenario.

You are getting close to understanding what we are talking about but not quite there. I pose a question to you then...

What if they could? What if they had software in every car that could tell exactly what piece of hardware is being used at any one time and then that information is being sent to GM/Ford/Toyota and whenever someone changes it (or hacks it) the police come and take your car away or something? Is that what you want corporations to be able to do to us? Cause that's what we are letting Sony do to us.

Ok, I get the point. Im not thoroughly convinced though that property rights of a car and property rights of a console are in anyway the same, because software rights are involved.

Cars run software too, you know. Besides, how is physically modifying your car different from modding the software on your system. The only reason things like this can happen is that we don't have any clearly defined rights of digital property, only IP laws that were never intended to function on their own (property laws take precedence over IP when dealing with physical property), so whoever has the money and power can basically do whatever they feel like.

With this in mind, how about I amend the hypothetical: The car company sends out a software update that stops you from playing any music in your car, despite the hardware still being intact, because some people play illegally downloaded music in their cars. You hack your car and cause the device to work again, so the corporation sends the police to come and lock you up because you can't afford to fight them in court. Everyone is okay with it because piracy is obviously the only thing anyone would ever want the music player in their car for, and anyone who says otherwise is just a pirate putting on a show. That's what's happening here.

Im tired of this argument. It just goes around in a circle every time I talk to someone about it. Physically owning the car means its yours. You gotta do paper work with the DMV and crap but thats it, unlike the software on a PS3 where you dont own the coding. Why is that so hard to grasp? (look, i gotta leave. I couldnt make this any better).

 

[bob1052]

Looks like all the self-righteous hackers managed to make a difference to Sony with their attacks.

Oh wait, they can't and haven't.

 

[bakan]

Go get em' Sony. The Linux feature was something used by very, very few. And those who did most of the time used it for piracy. Was behind Sony in the Geohotz case and are behind them here.

I think I have to write it again, Sony made big chunks of money for selling a console as PC because it could run OtherOS and they never had to pay anything back when they took away the advertised feature and degrading it to 'just' a console.

And piracy only became possible AFTER they unlocked the deeper levels of the architecture and not during all the time since launch.

 

[Dogstile]

Wonderful how Sony doesn't even need to win the court case, they just need to throw so much money at it that a man can't afford to defend himself.

Love how money can buy the law.

This man fixed a broken product, the PS3, which Sony deliberately broke.

It's like if your car manufacturer turned off the stereo in your car because they were worried some people might use it to play pirated music and then sent you to prison for fixing it!

Thats a stupid example. Stereo's can be easily bought at a radioshack or best buy, and replace the old one LEGALLY. Why does everyone resort to using cars as an example for software piracy.

So he bought a replacement and they sued him, the analogy still works. It doesn't matter how he did it, he restored functionality to a broken product.

A closer to home analogy, Microsoft block internet access from every windows PC because of the fact that pirates use the internet. You bought a windows PC with the expectation that you'd be able to access the internet. You circumvent that you get sued.

No in fact, in real life the example does NOT WORK! Nowadays you dont get in trouble for fixing your own engine. You dont get in trouble for changing your own tires, and you wouldnt get in trouble for replacing the radio and speakers with some nice subwoofers. None of that works. Unless there are roadblocks at every street corner where a company man from the manufacturer checks your car to make sure its still all authentic, its an unrealistic scenario.

So, you're saying that because they can take away a feature online, its ok, as long as they don't do it physically?

I get what you're trying to say, but otherOS was always authentic until sony were like "YEAH LETS TAKE A FEATURE WE ADVERTISED HEAVILY AWAY NOW".

Edit:

Oh, and lol, computer science student here. If I wanted to pirate games, i'd use this handy thing called a PC, because its easier.

PS3? Computer science students use them as servers.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

Wonderful how Sony doesn't even need to win the court case, they just need to throw so much money at it that a man can't afford to defend himself.

Love how money can buy the law.

This man fixed a broken product, the PS3, which Sony deliberately broke.

It's like if your car manufacturer turned off the stereo in your car because they were worried some people might use it to play pirated music and then sent you to prison for fixing it!

Thats a stupid example. Stereo's can be easily bought at a radioshack or best buy, and replace the old one LEGALLY. Why does everyone resort to using cars as an example for software piracy.

He didn't commit any acts of software piracy. He modified a device he purchased to restore an advertised feature which was removed without notification or consent. Do you have any evidence that he ran, or even intended to run, pirated software? No? Then get off your high horse and start talking about the actual issue of this man's case instead of the larger situation of which you perceive it to be representative and for which you have decided to blame him (an action roughly as ridiculous as blaming a maker of wrenches because the tools they produced were used to commit a crime).

The idea that aftermarket modifications performed by an individual on a product they have payed for and legally own is inherently criminal is an inherently destructive one which serves no purpose other than to advance the cause of large corporations against private individuals who often lack the resources to defend themselves (as in this case).

YOu want me to talk about the issue? No. I almost refuse to at this point. Its a stupid issue and I cant believe people even defend this guy. There. Happy? Im so tired of this subject. These people are not freedom fighters. They are just whining that they cant run linux on their consoles and play hacked games, and other people defend them saying that illegal games isnt the main purpose when that is blatant lies. Thats all I have to say about that.

You have no idea what you're talking about. First: Modifying the console still isn't a crime, so why is it being treated like one? Shouldn't only people who have been proved to have actually pirated software be the one's receiving punishment? Second: I know many people (most of them computer science students) who bought PS3s to run Linux and never even considered playing games on them, legal or otherwise. They were actually quite popular for use as servers and even desktops because of their high processing power relative to their cost. These people now effectively had bricks, so they fixed them. They're programmers who run Linux. That's what they do. Do you have any proof that all Linux users were in it for piracy? I didn't think so. You do seem to want it treated as a legal fact though, that seems pretty dangerous. Just so you know, the guy who figured out how to enable piracy through the other OS option only did it about a week before they took the option out. That means that everyone running Linux for the three years before that really were just running Linux beyond a shadow of a doubt, and running away because you don't have any actual logic or evidence to defend your position won't change that.

Look, I didnt know Linux was around that long, but the world is full of people who are less than pure. Im not saying everyone who uses Other OS is gonna be stealing games, but you cant tell me there wont be people trying to. It probably should have been better if they found a compromise, like trying to fix the programming allowing the pirating. I dunno. All I know is you allow it as is and it opens up for pirating. No company would just ignore that.

If you really "didn't know Linux was around that long" you are clearly computer-illiterate and should probably leave these discussions to people with at least a little programming knowledge (I refuse to believe anyone could have studied programming and not know what Linux is).

Your argument is basically two-fold: That anything that may be used to facilitate crime should itself be criminal and that companies are well within their rights to pursue any action against their customers in order to maintain profits. Regarding the former point I would suggest that, if this were the case, there's a long line of weapons manufacturers and authors of murder-manuals (yes they exist, and yes they are protected by law, at least in the US) who should be facing jail time before they get to the hackers. Regarding the latter point, I do not dispute that it is in Sony's interest to stop piracy and that they should take action toward this end, but I take issue with the idea that they are within their rights to damage the property of their customers in pursuit of this goal. Preventing piracy is all well and good, but private individuals have rights too and they should not casually be brushed aside.

 

[gunner1905]

That has nothing to do with what I said. Besides, the guy did something illegal and deserved what he got. He's not some freedom fighter to be put on a pedestal. The other OS was taken away over a year ago. Get over it. And just because SOME people wont use it for piracy doesnt mean you can just ignore the fact that a majority of people probably will.

How do you know what he did is illegal, the case haven't been decided yet. Even in the end jailbreaking the iPhone was decided to be legal. So, how do you know it's illegal.
And so what if some people use it for piracy, that's like saying:
-we should ban cars cause people could run over people with it.
-we should ban guns cause people can shoot other people with it.
-we should ban knives cause people can stab other people with it.
-we should ban PCs cause people (ie Lulzsec) can hack other people with it.
-we should close The escapist cause people can insult other people through it.
-we should stop the internet cause there's child porn on it.
-we should ban iphone jailbreaking cause people can pirate apps with it. (jailbreaking is legal by the way, by law)
I could go on and on.

PS I just stated that much examples cause I know you would say that my example doesn't relate i just give you the option to see which one to you would relate to this

Then why do you feel the need to hack the damn thing when you know you're just going to get in trouble for it?
Because a feature that appealed to a small audience was removed, means that the entire thing is now broken?

So being a small audience doesn't make you a customer. They have PAID for those features, they deserve to have it (without needing to choose between otherOS or PSN) cause they have paid to have ALL OF THOSE FEATURES.
That's like saying "right, you're a minority why should I care if you're discriminated."

 

[DoctorPhil]

I hate Sony now, just sue the fuck out of people for doing what they want with their own property untill they have no money left to defend themselves. Reminds me of Activision.
I hope that if he goes to court, there's a sensible, rational judge sitting on the other end.