The Other PS3 Hacker Is (Probably) Headed to Jail

[harvz]

dear sony
are you f***ing nuts? dont you remember last time? people will put up with shit like this once and if it eventually leads to another month of your network being down, i will not be surprised.

from someone who doesn't own a ps3 so its difficult to judge the average intelligence of ps3 owners.

p.s. thats my real name

 

[The Random One]

This is hilarious in a sad way, like the Lulzsec attacks.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Is it just me or do some corporate entities never seem to learn their place?

You win the award for 'the worst kind of person' in this thread! Congratulations!

What place? The precedent for this was set. I as a PS3 owner in no way feel constrained because they removed a feature that wasn't ever actually advertised. Please, prove me wrong.

Maybe I'm in the minority, but get this. I bought my PS3 to play PS3 games and watch Blu-ray movies. I guess that's not enough for some people.

I'd like to inform you that the winner of the award changed. You sir, are the new! Congratulations!
Why? Because you're showing egoism and ignorance at their best.

No, really. You say that it's perfectly alright to take away a feature just because it is no problem for YOU. And about the advertising...products get advertised, not features. Or do you know any (for example) car manufacturer that advertises every of the thousand of features that a car has? No. Does it mean that he can take away some? No.

Back in 2007 there were people and companies that bought many PS3's to make clusters to compute, because back then this was more powerful and cheaper than other solutions.

What I'm trying to say is that you should REALLY stop speaking for everyone, because in your opinion it's perfectly alright to ignore minorities as long as it does not harm yourself.

And what Pr0 said isn't even that wrong.
Sony started the war and got a massive kick in the balls. Now they're provocing the same people again in the same way. If they don't stop...well, you know, as good as me, what will be likely to happen next. It does not matter whether you find it good or not.

You know if you don't update the firmware, it doesn't remove that feature, right? Right? Oh right then, you evidently didn't. And if you aren't on PSN or jonesing for some online gaming, you don't have to update the firmware, the console doesn't 100% force you.

It just bars you from online gaming, which is the trade-off you have to make. My friend found it worth it, he hasn't updated his firmware in damn nigh forever, for that trade-off. It's just a matter of what you want more.

So, no, the people bitching about it, have no ground at all even in the slightest. They're just people who want to have their cake and eat it too at this point. What's done is done, Sony isn't going to magically revert it. They've made their stance quite clear. And it isn't even removed unless you want to play your games online. Y'know, what the console was originally intended for. Or patch your games. It's 100% up to you, the user. What do you want more?

 

[EHKOS]

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.

Because YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A CAR!
Captcha: top drawer

LIKE HELL I WOULDNT. Given enough bandwidth and the technology, I'd try. LOL

If you can find an ethernet wire big enough be my guest lol.

 

[Ad-Man-Gamer]

You know if you don't update the firmware, it doesn't remove that feature, right? Right? Oh right then, you evidently didn't. And if you aren't on PSN or jonesing for some online gaming, you don't have to update the firmware, the console doesn't 100% force you.

It just bars you from online gaming, which is the trade-off you have to make. My friend found it worth it, he hasn't updated his firmware in damn nigh forever, for that trade-off. It's just a matter of what you want more.

So, no, the people bitching about it, have no ground at all even in the slightest. They're just people who want to have their cake and eat it too at this point. What's done is done, Sony isn't going to magically revert it. They've made their stance quite clear. And it isn't even removed unless you want to play your games online. Y'know, what the console was originally intended for. Or patch your games. It's 100% up to you, the user. What do you want more?

I would like to refer you to my post.

As for the people that say that the terms and conditions give them the right to do so. Ok. lets say that you own a Sony Blueray player that can play DVD's as well. Now Sony own the Blueray format so it would be more profitable for you to buy a Blueray. So lets say that Sony decides to remove the dvd feature in an update. You could decline the update, but due to the nature of the Blueray format you will not be able to play newer movies on Blueray. BULLSHIT! Would be your initial reaction. But. Oh. It says in the terms and conditions that they can make any changes as they see fit. So... Tough. You accepted it so Sony is in the right.

 

[Norris IV]

Seriously Sony, drop the case with no charges or you'll piss off more hackers who could shut you down again and you really cannot afford that

 

[CleverCover]

Sooooo...how long until LulzSec hacks Sony for this "offense" against "internet freedom"?

Bets? Any takers?

 

[SaintWaldo]

Speaking of GeoHot, what happened to all that money he donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109311-GeoHot-Donates-Leftover-Legal-Funds-to-EFF]? It strikes me that there's another hacker out there who could use all of it now that he's not using it.

Giving it to another defendant directly doesn't seem as kosher as the avenue he chose. I still say individual refunds would have been the best route, but, hey, I guess he's just not that into technical details.

 

[Signa]

Spoiler: snip

Is it just me or do some corporate entities never seem to learn their place?

You win the award for 'the worst kind of person' in this thread! Congratulations!

What place? The precedent for this was set. I as a PS3 owner in no way feel constrained because they removed a feature that wasn't ever actually advertised. Please, prove me wrong.

Maybe I'm in the minority, but get this. I bought my PS3 to play PS3 games and watch Blu-ray movies. I guess that's not enough for some people.

I'd like to inform you that the winner of the award changed. You sir, are the new! Congratulations!
Why? Because you're showing egoism and ignorance at their best.

No, really. You say that it's perfectly alright to take away a feature just because it is no problem for YOU. And about the advertising...products get advertised, not features. Or do you know any (for example) car manufacturer that advertises every of the thousand of features that a car has? No. Does it mean that he can take away some? No.

Back in 2007 there were people and companies that bought many PS3's to make clusters to compute, because back then this was more powerful and cheaper than other solutions.

What I'm trying to say is that you should REALLY stop speaking for everyone, because in your opinion it's perfectly alright to ignore minorities as long as it does not harm yourself.

And what Pr0 said isn't even that wrong.
Sony started the war and got a massive kick in the balls. Now they're provocing the same people again in the same way. If they don't stop...well, you know, as good as me, what will be likely to happen next. It does not matter whether you find it good or not.

You know if you don't update the firmware, it doesn't remove that feature, right? Right? Oh right then, you evidently didn't. And if you aren't on PSN or jonesing for some online gaming, you don't have to update the firmware, the console doesn't 100% force you.

It just bars you from online gaming, which is the trade-off you have to make. My friend found it worth it, he hasn't updated his firmware in damn nigh forever, for that trade-off. It's just a matter of what you want more.

So, no, the people bitching about it, have no ground at all even in the slightest. They're just people who want to have their cake and eat it too at this point. What's done is done, Sony isn't going to magically revert it. They've made their stance quite clear. And it isn't even removed unless you want to play your games online. Y'know, what the console was originally intended for. Or patch your games. It's 100% up to you, the user. What do you want more?

Ok, you know that newer games REQUIRE the update too, right? Would you want to purchase a PS3 and find you are only allowed to ever run the first 5 years of games, but never the latter 5 years just because doing so would mean losing something you want/use? Isn't full compatibility a big reason why people choose consoles over PCs, because they got sick of their PC going out of date for the newest releases? Why should a console owner have to ever pick and choose his functionality options? The point of the console is to have it all work all the time!

 

[Signa]

Sooooo...how long until LulzSec hacks Sony for this "offense" against "internet freedom"?

Bets? Any takers?

If I understand my internet groups right, we could expect anonymous in on this as well. Lulsec just does it for the luls, not the protection of anything.

 

[Saverio]

You physically own the PS3. You own the hard drive and the processor with the code on it. You don't own the rights to distribute the code or use it to make your own products, but that copy on your hard disk is yours (or would be, if we had any kind of digital property law) and you are within your rights to alter it the same way you would your physical property. If Sony were leasing you your copy of their software, they needed to say so and provide a contract to that effect.

Isn't Sony suing because he is releasing the information. I don't think they can sue someone for knowing how to do it, but he released the information to the public and that is an action that is harder to justify. I'm not sure how he did the jailbreak, but if he is distributing any part of the code than there is something of Sony's being used without their permission and even to an end that, what they think, is a loss.
I agree that Other OS was an awesome function that should have been left, but Sony didn't remove it for their health. They felt that it was a security risk to their system and removed it to protect the majority of PS3 owners. Most people did not use Other OS, and while those who did are gonna steal games if they want them anyway, they were in Sony's eyes a risk that they couldn't justify.

 

[Baneat]

If he's going to jail, LulzSec will *ravage* Sony again.

 

[BDNeon]

To sum up all the posts supporting graf_chokolo:

"We're butthurt that the legal system doesn't like our rampant efforts to pirate everything and we think they're corrupt for putting a stop to it"

Breaking anti-piracy measures is supporting piracy you idiots. It doesn't matter whether or not he did it himself, he provided the tools to do so for everyone. Just like how it's illegal to sell firearms without regulation and paperwork, doesn't matter if you aren't using the guns yourself, you're enabling others to use them illegally. It's nothing like the apple jailbreaking case because in that case they only enabled you to put your own software on it while not managing to crack the measures restricting you from running pirated apps. There's no issue with allowing a platform to run your own stuff, it's only when you disable the protection that prevents you from running pirated content, or modifying copyrighted programs in a way that would enable you to cheat and ruin other users experiences online.

If you think your little hacker holy war is gonna get Sony and the international legal system to back off and legalize piracy you're even more delusional then the religious extremists.

Because this is what you honestly fail to understand, computers may facilitate the way our world operates but they are not THE world, there is a physical world outside of those computers that we live in, and in that world there are police and government organizations that are not going to simply dissolve because you hacked their website.

The idiocy of it all is just mind-numbing

"Piracy is just a side effect of jailbreaking"

Oh yeah? Does that mean it's ok to discharge a gun into a large crowd of people, since people getting shot is only a "side-effect" of my actions?

 

[Seejur]

Ever heard about "guns don't kill people, people kill people"? U should...

 

[CleverCover]

Sooooo...how long until LulzSec hacks Sony for this "offense" against "internet freedom"?

Bets? Any takers?

If I understand my internet groups right, we could expect anonymous in on this as well. Lulsec just does it for the luls, not the protection of anything.

But we're in agreement that Sony will get hacked again because of this court case by someone or some group with a computer, internet, and too many hours on his/her hands?

 

[infohippie]

SONY may need to fight this SoB to the death and then beat back his reanimated corpse. I got a feeling he won't cave and this fight might hurt SONY.

Screw Sony. There's nothing wrong with what he did and I take my hat off to the guy for standing by his principles. If Sony weren't trying to maintain such an iron grip because they were wetting themselves about piracy, Egorenkov wouldn't have needed to jailbreak his PS3, and it's admirable that he has helped get the information out to allow others to jailbreak theirs.
As long as companies continue to treat their customers as thieves, and as long as they keep trying to pretend a sale doesn't mean we actually own anything, cases like this will keep happening.

 

[Signa]

Sooooo...how long until LulzSec hacks Sony for this "offense" against "internet freedom"?

Bets? Any takers?

If I understand my internet groups right, we could expect anonymous in on this as well. Lulsec just does it for the luls, not the protection of anything.

But we're in agreement that Sony will get hacked again because of this court case by someone or some group with a computer, internet, and too many hours on his/her hands?

HA! Undoubtedly. I'm just not 100% sure about this story, because this is the first time I'm hearing about one of the failoverflow guys getting in trouble. Geohotz obviously stole a lot of the attention, but I would have thought that some news would have reached me. Also, I didn't know jail was a possible outcome from lack of funds when declaring bankruptcy seems to be the far more common action.

 

[SoulSalmon]

You know if you don't update the firmware, it doesn't remove that feature, right? Right? Oh right then, you evidently didn't. And if you aren't on PSN or jonesing for some online gaming, you don't have to update the firmware, the console doesn't 100% force you.

It just bars you from online gaming, which is the trade-off you have to make. My friend found it worth it, he hasn't updated his firmware in damn nigh forever, for that trade-off. It's just a matter of what you want more.

So, no, the people bitching about it, have no ground at all even in the slightest. They're just people who want to have their cake and eat it too at this point. What's done is done, Sony isn't going to magically revert it. They've made their stance quite clear. And it isn't even removed unless you want to play your games online. Y'know, what the console was originally intended for. Or patch your games. It's 100% up to you, the user. What do you want more?

It's not so much "have your cake and eat it too" as much as it is "Buying your cake with both chocolate and cream and then being forced to give one topping back"

I'm just going to have to assume this post is a troll (more precisely sarcasm), because if you're arguing in Sonys defence then you're doing a terrible job :/

I mean the main argument AGAINST Sony is right there: "You don't HAVE to lose OtherOS... you can lose acess to Patches and Online Multiplayer instead, make a choice, you can't have BOTH of the things you bought it for."

 

[BDNeon]

And Sony is COMPLETELY within their right to refuse PSN service to whoever they wish.

They gave you the option of refusing to update your firmware to continue getting access to their proprietary service or opting not to update to continue using OtherOS.

The hackers just conveniently prefer to gloss over that fact.

 

[Signa]

And Sony is COMPLETELY within their right to refuse PSN service to whoever they wish.

They gave you the option of refusing to update your firmware to continue getting access to their proprietary service or opting not to update to continue using OtherOS.

The hackers just conveniently prefer to gloss over that fact.

Hardly a fact and more of a cop-out.