UPDATE: PS3 Hacker GeoHot Claims He's on Vacation

[Dana22]

I don't see how that's any different than the iPhone jailbreak community, which was deemed lawful by congress.

Because iPhone jailbreaking didnt require reverse-engineering, apparently.

 

[VanityGirl]

It still looks bad for him to leave the country and go on vacation in the middle of a lawsuit. Unless his vacation is non-refundable, he should have postponed it until he was through with his new responsibility.

Why should he postponed it till after the trial? That could be years. I say take the vacation when you can especially if it was already paid for.
It is not like he is a wanted man or has to be somewhere specific until the trial starts, which is sometime in April if I am not mistaken.

Because he took donations from hard working people and now he is spending his own money in South America. He should have gotten a refund and help pay for his own defense, or in non-refundable,postponed his flight so he doesnt have to spend any additional money he could be using for his own defense.
EDIT- If he wanted to take a vacation so much, instead of asking for donations, he should have gotten a loan from a bank, that would have been the ethical thing to do.

He didn't use the donation money for vacation... he used his own money.

Also, getting plane tickets refunded really isn't that easy. Of all the times I've flown, I haven't been able to miss a flight for fear of not being able to get my money back. Most airlines won't just give you a refund because if you didn't get to your plane on time, then tough luck. The times they do usually give you refunds is if there was a problem with the plane or a massive delay of some sort. At least, that has been my expeirence.

Honestly, I don't blame him for taking a vacation. He's smart and knows that he'll probably be at this for a while. It could be years before this whole thing is settled. At least he's cooperating with the court and his laywers. If he paid for the tickets, go have fun. He's not going to be arrested so there's no reason he can't leave and enjoy himself.
Besides, they still have decided what state they're going to hold court in, so this case isn't on a precious time based schedule.

 

[wooty]

Hmmmm, maybe this fool and Col Gaddafi can share a villa together in a few weeks time.

GO SONY LEGAL TEAM, GO!

 

[debramster123]

this is his response:

Factually, it's true I'm in South America, on a vacation I've had planned and paid for since November. I mean, it is Spring break; hacking isn't my life. Rest assured that not a dime of legal defense money would ever go toward something like this. And of course Townsend loves the idea of painting me as an international fugitive. I have been in contact with my lawyers almost every day; I would not let the case suffer. That said, I also won't let this ridiculous lawsuit run my life either. Then the fearmongerers win.

I will be back, I hear it's hard to come by the Xperia Play down here.


got this from his blog

 

[Declan Skews]

Sony is gonna look REALLY SILLY when it just turns out he went to go visit his South American family

Doesn't matter if he is visiting his family or w/e. Fact is he will probably have violated at least one court order to do so. Dude's going down for that one.

it was a joke, and i haven't seen anywhere that the courts were prohibiting him from going anywhere. they'll usually mention that somewhere along hte lines if it is an issue. but again, no reason to take that comment seriously.

Sorry, I should have put a miley in there somewhere to show I wasn't taking your post as seriously as my post came across. My bad :\...But the reason I say about the court order thing is because, generally, when you are involved in court action there does tend to be automatic "don't leave the country" orders attached to stop people from doing exactly what George has done.

Again sorry if I came across as a bit of a pr*ck last post.

 

[Escapefromwhatever]

So are SCEA's law now? Honestly, it's just an agreement between a company and a customer, so the most they could so with the whole "he agreed to follow our SCEA!" angle is shut down his PSN account, as far as I know.

 

[uppitycracker]

Sony is gonna look REALLY SILLY when it just turns out he went to go visit his South American family

Doesn't matter if he is visiting his family or w/e. Fact is he will probably have violated at least one court order to do so. Dude's going down for that one.

it was a joke, and i haven't seen anywhere that the courts were prohibiting him from going anywhere. they'll usually mention that somewhere along hte lines if it is an issue. but again, no reason to take that comment seriously.

Sorry, I should have put a miley in there somewhere to show I wasn't taking your post as seriously as my post came across. My bad :\...But the reason I say about the court order thing is because, generally, when you are involved in court action there does tend to be automatic "don't leave the country" orders attached to stop people from doing exactly what George has done.

Again sorry if I came across as a bit of a pr*ck last post.

hey, no worries man, lol i try not to get offended by forum posts as they can easily be taken out of context without all the other normal parts of human interaction in the mix

but i do gotta say, i (somewhat) called that one

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

I don't see how that's any different than the iPhone jailbreak community, which was deemed lawful by congress.

Because iPhone jailbreaking didnt require reverse-engineering, apparently.

Um, what? Of course it did. How do you think the numerous exploits were discovered in the first place? By what method do you think enthusiast coders discover undocumented information about the software and hardware? Either the information is stolen from an Apple employee, or the coders do some reverse engineering - throwing things at the device, while monitoring input and output, hoping the glean some information about how it works.

This will be the last time I respond to your comments.

Victory.

 

[Echo136]

That makes absolutely no sense. Half the people in this thread seem to be just painting a target on Sony's head calling them wrong and basically saying they are evil on the basis that they are a big corporation and all big corporations by definition dont deserve the money they have and will always shit on the little guy. It makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. They are protecting their property. Anyone who says that Hotz is in the right in doing what he's doing is either a hacker, in denial, or just stupid. He's breaking the law on multiple accounts, and now he's committed fraud.

See, what you don't seem to get is that a lot of people view this case as protecting their property, and most of us see Sony's definition of who owns what as stupid, unethical and dysfunctional, and we would like to have a court agree with us even if it means supporting a guy who's kind of a douche-bag in the process.

We have just as much right to defend what we think is ours as Sony does. Why do you want to take that away from us?

Your defending your right to homebrew and hack the PS3 so you can play their games for free. Its not a noble cause. And dont say thats not what the majority of people will do, because it is. I can defend homebrewing because I myself have homebrewed an old Xbox for purposes of playing older NES, SNES, and other games, but you cant tell me that it wont be used to play stolen/torrented games. And when I say Sony is protecting their property, Im talking about the code that Geohot posted all over the net. That is by all rights Sony's property.

The court case itself is not to decide whether or not its his property when bought anyways. Its fully established by copyrights what is. I dont agree with it, but if someone wants to fight it, they should fight it seperately when they arent being taken to task for being an asshat and stealing code. Or "gasp" dont buy the hardware. Its simple as that. I have a PS3 and Ive never felt like the terms of service were shoving a red hot poker up my ass.

 

[PeregrineFalcon]

Stewart Kellar, Hotz's attorney, has responded saying the missing hard drive parts have now been delivered.

"The 'integral components' SCEA is talking about are stock controller cards, not the hard drives themselves," Kellar told IGN in an e-mail. "The neutral subsequently had to explain to SCEA the form and function of hard drive controller cards. Those controller cards have since been provided to the neutral so the point is moot."

Anyone else see a problem with the fact that Sony Computer Entertainment America had to be explained (possibly using small words and v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y) the form and function of a fucking hard drive controller card?

What with the meme usage ITT I expect to see a lot of people editing their posts to read HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS

Edit: Cool, while I was posting this, the article title got changed to something a little more reasonable. Still implies that he's fleeing with the use of the word "claims" but it's an improvement. How about "Further developments in the Sony v. Geohot case"?

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

That makes absolutely no sense. Half the people in this thread seem to be just painting a target on Sony's head calling them wrong and basically saying they are evil on the basis that they are a big corporation and all big corporations by definition dont deserve the money they have and will always shit on the little guy. It makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. They are protecting their property. Anyone who says that Hotz is in the right in doing what he's doing is either a hacker, in denial, or just stupid. He's breaking the law on multiple accounts, and now he's committed fraud.

See, what you don't seem to get is that a lot of people view this case as protecting their property, and most of us see Sony's definition of who owns what as stupid, unethical and dysfunctional, and we would like to have a court agree with us even if it means supporting a guy who's kind of a douche-bag in the process.

We have just as much right to defend what we think is ours as Sony does. Why do you want to take that away from us?

Your defending your right to homebrew and hack the PS3 so you can play their games for free. Its not a noble cause. And dont say thats not what the majority of people will do, because it is. I can defend homebrewing because I myself have homebrewed an old Xbox for purposes of playing older NES, SNES, and other games, but you cant tell me that it wont be used to play stolen/torrented games. And when I say Sony is protecting their property, Im talking about the code that Geohot posted all over the net. That is by all rights Sony's property.

The court case itself is not to decide whether or not its his property when bought anyways. Its fully established by copyrights what is. I dont agree with it, but if someone wants to fight it, they should fight it seperately when they arent being taken to task for being an asshat and stealing code. Or "gasp" dont buy the hardware. Its simple as that. I have a PS3 and Ive never felt like the terms of service were shoving a red hot poker up my ass.

Jailbreaking a device isn't just for downloading things illegally. I agree that the case should be separate from this one because of the fact that he also stole and released a code from Sony. There's a LOT on the line here, people don't realize it. Computers play an incredibly important role in everyone's life, and if you restrict what people can do with it after they buy it, then you're getting into some Orwellian shit.

Here's a scary thought: the internet is one of the last places to get good news. Television is owned by corporate interest. If you watch Fox News, you're getting the information Rupert Murdock want's you to get. With CNN it's Ted Turner. What if those guys bought into MS or other companies and made it so you could only access their news sites on your computer.

Ooops. Sorry I've got to run. Typing that last sentence almost made me shit myself.

 

[Snooder]

See, its OK that he took a vacation. My issue is that he took donations, when he could have used his own money to help pay for his legal fees. I dont know but I would imagine that having legal troubles is very good excuse to get your money back. Even if he couldnt, he is using up money from his own pocket for entertainment, when he could be using that money to help fund his own legal fees.

Its perfectly fine to take a vacation, but he should not have taken donations, if he is not willing to use his own money to fund his legal defense is what my point is.

I don't think you quite understand just how expensive legal fees can get.

Standard rate these days for an average lawyer is 200-300 an hour. The top shelf guys are charging $1000 an hour, but that tends to be for specialized IP and tax stuff. Even if Geohot is only paying $200 an hour, with all the motions and filings back and forth, he's probably looking at $50,000 and attorney fees and court costs. The cost of a $500 ticket and maybe a $200 hotel that he already paid for months before has nothing to do with the current and prospective costs of his legal defense.

Sorry, I should have put a miley in there somewhere to show I wasn't taking your post as seriously as my post came across. My bad :\...But the reason I say about the court order thing is because, generally, when you are involved in court action there does tend to be automatic "don't leave the country" orders attached to stop people from doing exactly what George has done.

Actually, no there doesn't. This is a CIVIL suit, not a CRIMINAL case. The only consequence of leaving the country in the middle of a civil suit is that if you don't respond to stuff, the court will see that as you giving up and the other side will win. That's pretty much it. Since his lawyer is still in the country and still being paid to respond to filings I doubt any court will say that taking a week's vacation is abandonment of the suit.

 

[michael87cn]

See, its OK that he took a vacation. My issue is that he took donations, when he could have used his own money to help pay for his legal fees. I dont know but I would imagine that having legal troubles is very good excuse to get your money back. Even if he couldnt, he is using up money from his own pocket for entertainment, when he could be using that money to help fund his own legal fees.

Its perfectly fine to take a vacation, but he should not have taken donations, if he is not willing to use his own money to fund his legal defense is what my point is.

I don't think you quite understand just how expensive legal fees can get.

Standard rate these days for an average lawyer is 200-300 an hour. The top shelf guys are charging $1000 an hour, but that tends to be for specialized IP and tax stuff. Even if Geohot is only paying $200 an hour, with all the motions and filings back and forth, he's probably looking at $50,000 and attorney fees and court costs. The cost of a $500 ticket and maybe a $200 hotel that he already paid for months before has nothing to do with the current and prospective costs of his legal defense.

Sorry, I should have put a miley in there somewhere to show I wasn't taking your post as seriously as my post came across. My bad :\...But the reason I say about the court order thing is because, generally, when you are involved in court action there does tend to be automatic "don't leave the country" orders attached to stop people from doing exactly what George has done.

Actually, no there don't. This is a CIVIL suit, not a CRIMINAL case. The only consequence of leaving the country in the middle of a civil suit is that if you don't respond to stuff, the court will see that as you giving up and the other side will win. That's pretty much it. Since his lawyer is still in the country and still being paid to respond to filings I doubt any court will say that taking a week's vacation is abandonment of the suit.

Can't pay the fine, don't do the crime.

By being a rebel he has to accept certain conditions.

Begging for money and then frivolously wasting your own money is in very bad taste.

It doesn't matter how expensive legal fees are. Is it my responsibility to pay your speeding ticket? If you beg me for help and I give you money, and you go out and buy a paint job, are you being a good steward of your money/respecting what's been given you?

NO you aren't.

Edit:

The point is, the guy claims he needs financial help.

He receives help from kind hearted people.

We then learn he can afford 4 PS3s and a trip to south america.

*Note I did not personally donate anything

He's a deceptive thief and he deserves to lose this lawsuit, it is criminally obvious his intentions with the rootkey are for piracy.

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

Well this guy is fucked.

 

[derducken]

@Echo136: I registered just to answer to moronic posts like yours. And sorry if you feel insulted, but you don't seem to grasp what Sony did up to now, do you? You're just waving a flag, shouting about "bad pirates"...

I legally bought my legal PS3 to legally run my legally bought games and my legally acquired legal Linux distribution that Sony legally sanctioned. Yes, SONY supported a Linux distribution for PS3, namely, Yellow Dog Linux. I bought it for these two things. Sony mentioned them on the box of the console. In its manual.

During the time I have my legally bought PS3, I legally bought some legally available accessories for it, like some secondary joypads and a keyboard and mouse to use with its browser.

Sony took away all these things ILLEGALLY. First it made me choose between using Linux or playing games: take notice, I'm not talking about "getting on PSN" - I don't care about multiplayer. If I want to play a new game, I must upgrade my PS3. If I want to run Linux, I mustn't update it. BOTH are LEGAL functions of the console I bought, and it was supposed to be able to do both. And what about the "non-Sony" accessories I bought that I can't use? NOWHERE did Sony mention when I legally bought my console that I would only be able to use THEIR accessories.

That's the equivalent of fraud. Look at it this way: it is EXACTLY THE SAME as buying apples, returning home and finding oranges in your bag. And when you go back to the store to complain, instead of giving you the apples you originally bought, they say "buzz off, we can do whatever we like with the stuff we sold you".

What you don't get as well is that, yes, you CAN do "whatever you like" with the things you buy. They're called "property" for that exact reason. Imagine buying a house, accompanied by a... EULA, where the former owner says "I can change the rules whenever I like". Notice I'm talking "buying", not "renting". You BUY a house -> its yours. You BUY a PS3 -> its yours. According to Sonys "rules", when you buy a PS3, its NOT yours. They can change it, reduce its functionality, brick it, do whatever they wish. And, to return to our house example, imagine 2 years after buying your house, living happily in it, someone knocking on your door, saying...

-"Hi, I'm your new houseguest"
-"Guest - who?"
-"Ah, the owner of the house told me that I can live here with you."
-"But -I- am the owner of the house!"
-"No, you are not. You are LEASING it. The man who sold it to you didn't really `sell` it, he just gave you a permission to live in it. And now he's changing the rules as he sees fit."

So, do you now understand what we mean when we say "we should be able to do whatever we like with OUR console"? We're not talking "playing pirated games", "stealing Sonys property" or anything like that. But I WANT to be able to do what's written ON ITS OWN FUCKING BOX. INSIDE THE MANUAL. Written there by Sony itself. Got it? Nothing more, nothing less. They SHOULND'T be able to take away what I paid for - or else, I should be entitled to a refund. It's not a case of "if you don't like it, don't buy it", as you mention: if the rules, when I bought it, where the same as they are today, I WOULDN'T buy a PS3. They weren't. Noone said, at that time, that "I'd have to choose between games and Linux". They sold me a machine that was supposed to be able to do BOTH. And THEN they forced me to choose.

And do you know why Sony was able to do this? And why they can get away with banning from use my LEGALLY BOUGHT accessories for my LEGALLY BOUGHT console? Because of idiots like you, that only care about "fragging others online on COD".

And yeah, I don't care if I'm banned after this very first post. As I said, I only registered to try to explain to you why I think your opinion, at least as stated, is moronic. So, get of your "legal user" pedestal. And if you trully are happy giving away your rights, your freedom of choice, your own property, for the sake of a faceless company that only cares about your money, maybe instead of playing your multiplayer FPSs and worrying that "we will ruin your precious game", find and read 1984 by George Orwell.

 

[Panorama]

Well this just gives Sony more ammo

This is me hoping it is still untrue, but believing he is screwed.

 

[Grickit]

All while setting the legal precedent that you do not own physical property in your house and it's new owner can retroactively claim that whatever you did was illegal, can sue you under whatever jurisdiction suits them best and can get an injunction against the computer and phone you use to contact your lawyer as well as the address, IP and internet history of anyone you ever met for further punitive charges against them.

The only "crime" committed against Sony by Geohotz is telling them "lol pwned" on behalf of fail0verflow, which he is NOT directly affiliated with. And it hasn't been established that California has any jurisdiction at all over Geohotz(who isn't from California) so until then all court orders from there are null and void.

Okay I'll give you the jurisdiction thing, and sure the crimes against Sony are still up in the air.

But what've you got to say for him tampering with evidence and tricking people into giving him money for a court case that it looks like won't happen now?

By the way, anyone who donated money to him should certainly be reporting this fraud to the FBI.