Top
420°

Sony says sorry for Other OS take-down

THINQ: Sony has apologised for the row surrounding the removal of the Install Other OS function from older PlayStation 3 consoles.

We asked Sony UK to respond to reports that at least one user had received a partial refund from Amazon UK in compensation for the fact that part of the device's advertised functionality had been removed.

A Sony spokesman told us:

The story is too old to be commented.
Gradient3173d ago

What's the name of the Sony spokesman?

NOOBKILLA3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

The removal of OtherOS is no big deal to the majority of the PS3 gaming community. I will say this though, the people that are complaining about the OtherOS being taken away doesn't use it. There is a work-a-round to keep your OtherOS and have access to the PSN. If you are skilled enough to be able to navigate Linux you can do the work around. It's no big deal. I'm still running 3.15 and have access to PSN.

I am in school though studying programming. So me having Linux on my PS3 is beneficial to my career as well as gaming.

UnwanteDreamz3173d ago

DEY TUK AR LINUX!

dey tuk ar linux!

UnwanteDreamz3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

oops double post

player9113173d ago

Well I bought a PS3 Slim after my 360 Red Ringed... and while my slim didn't come with OtherOS... I actually didn't even realize the Slim removed this until now.

It really sucks because I bought the PS3 with OtherOS in mind because I am an avid Linux fan... and to play games of course.

The Removal doesn't affect me much because I never used OtherOS and I'm finding that my Slim never supported it anyway... but it should. If Sony is worried about piracy then just patch the problem instead of just removing a major feature.

I'm not really upset with Sony, but corporations like Sony who rip people off like this. I can name several companies that have done this exact thing; advertise a feature only to later remove it after you bought it. And honestly I would expect something in return.

I mean think of the companies that used the otherOS to network the PS3's cell processor.... I'm sure most don't stay current on firmware and probably don't bother even updating it, or even have an internet connection... but the downside is that they will NEVER be able to update it. What if Sony, in the future, has an update to open all the cells cores? Couldn't a company benefit from that?

I dunno. Again, fix the problem at hand instead of just removing the whole feature.

Christopher3173d ago

This doesn't apply to software w/their own EULA. If a user doesn't agree to an EULA, then a return is possible based on the policy of the retailer from which the item was purchased. If the user does agree to the EULA, then therein they are held applicable to those items within. Part of this is removal of features in order to prevent piracy.

Same thing happened when Microsoft disabled XML use in their Office 2007 applications last year due to the lawsuit. People can claim the same thing, they expected a feature and it was taken away. But it's not the case since it's a part of the EULA you agree to prior to installing the application(s).

This exact same thing applies to MMOs, which at any time can remove features from their game that were on the box at retail.

Software has additional rules with which are capable of circumventing that directive as long as they do not remove the core functionality of the device itself (in this case, BD player for games and movies). LinuxOS was a software feature of the system, same as being able to connect to PSN and Home.

sikbeta3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

lol @ the picture, IDK Why...

O-T:

I Know this is Not Good at all, I know, people that actually used the Feature get Screwed by this, but at The Same Time I don't Want to See the Same Thing that Screwed the PSP, again on the PS3 or any Console...

DarkSpawnClone3173d ago

"Sony says sorry for Other OS take-down"' thats ok Sony no need to say sorry for a feature i never used.i couldn't careless about it,but if your reallyyy sorry maybe you could give us cross game chat or in game music for all tittles for FREEEEEEEEEEE(YAHHHHOOOOOOO) :D

Kholinar3173d ago

That's US law, no EU law. And, even in US law, shrinkwrap or digital EULA acceptance is not universally (not even in a majority of countries) accepted as valid.

The Microsoft lawsuit was granted a stay, such lawsuits haven't even had time to go forward. I still have that feature on my installation. If Microsoft reached in an removed it, they'd have to pay.

MMOs are not a physical good. You're buying a month's access (or account) and getting software free, it's accounted for that way, which makes it legal. This is the same as confusing buying a magazine with buying a subscription. The company can't come into your house and take out pages, but they might shorten the next month's issue.

HSx93173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

Too bad you can bypass the update and still have the online PSN Feature.

Anon19743173d ago

You can't just agree to a contract like these User Agreements and then just say you don't agree with it years later.

If you clicked "I Agree" and then proceeded to use the services for years, guess what? You accepted the agreement, didn't you now? If you weren't happy with the agreement, you should have taken you PS3 back or not clicked "I Agree" and just used your PS3 as it was.

And this upgrade, like all upgrades is optional, and Sony is quite clear about what it does.

Every read your 360 Agreement? Not only have you agreed that Microsoft can do the exact same thing, but they can do it at any time without notifying you.

This is standard stuff here, people. Software is upgraded. Networks need to be made secure. They're doing this for your protection. It sucks it's necessary in the first place but thank the hackers for that.

Christopher3173d ago

***That's US law, no EU law. And, even in US law, shrinkwrap or digital EULA acceptance is not universally (not even in a majority of countries) accepted as valid. ***

It's EU law. EULAs are accepted as valid for digital services and have held up in court.

***The Microsoft lawsuit was granted a stay, such lawsuits haven't even had time to go forward.***

Incorrect. There is no lawsuit.

***I still have that feature on my installation. If Microsoft reached in an removed it, they'd have to pay.***

If you connect to the Internet, then they have reached in and removed it already.

***MMOs are not a physical good.***

Neither is the service to run OtherOS, which is a software implementation. The _only_ hardware elements are the BD drive, HDD, GPU, Memory, Motherboard, internal wireless card, internal power, and the like. Otherwise, all other features are software, and therefor not physical.

cmrbe3173d ago

My thoughts exactly. What i worry about even more is that Sony will go this rotue everytime someone finds and exploit.

Christopher3172d ago (Edited 3172d ago )

***What if Sony, in the future, has an update to open all the cells cores? Couldn't a company benefit from that?***

Then they would likely release a special firmware for those who still operate using OtherOS.

***I dunno. Again, fix the problem at hand instead of just removing the whole feature.***

That's the problem, the whole feature was the problem. Sony can't rewrite the OS installed on the system automatically to not use what the OS was designed to use.

***My thoughts exactly. What i worry about even more is that Sony will go this rotue everytime someone finds and exploit.***

I think this is just FUD. The mass majority of people who use OtherOS can still use it, just not alongside PSN features... but they don't care because they don't use any other feature on the PS3.

Now, if there was an exploit with the PS3 OS of software that runs on it, they'd patch it. The reason OtherOS is removed is because Sony has absolutely no control over the code being installed. It was the only element that they couldn't control and it led to hackers using it to access information that led to security issues with the code they can control, the PS3 OS.

pixelsword3172d ago

You took away a feature Sony, so replace a feature with a feature.

Cross-game chat will be fine, thank you.

raztad3172d ago

Nice comments up there cgoodno. I'm bubbling you up.

Kholinar3172d ago

"It's EU law. EULAs are accepted as valid for digital services and have held up in court. "

Wow. Do you even research your claims? Here's Microsoft's EULA:

"20. APPLICABLE LAW. - If you acquired this Software in the European Union, Iceland, Norway, or Switzerland, then local law applies. If you acquired this Software in any other country, then local law may apply."

The local law cited in this article supersedes the EULA. If it didn't Amazon wouldn't be giving refunds. Even Steam does this. None of them are certain that they're legal in the EU or a lot of other places. I'm sure their lawyers would be glad to hear from you though...

And it certainly doesn't apply in my state (within the US).

"Incorrect. There is no lawsuit."

Correct. As I stated, there hasn't be time to have one, and as I mention below, no user has lost functionality that they purchased.

"If you connect to the Internet, then they have reached in and removed it already."

That patch was sent out to OEMs who had already installed software on computers still in their possession. It's never been sent out over software update or thru any backdoor.

"***MMOs are not a physical good.***

Neither is the service to run OtherOS, which is a software implementation. The _only_ hardware elements are the BD drive, HDD, GPU, Memory, Motherboard, internal wireless card, internal power, and the like. Otherwise, all other features are software, and therefor not physical."

We disagree on a much higher level than this. I don't believe that buying software gives me less rights than a physical good, especially where it's integral to the device's functions. I don't believe that many jurisdiction have upheld your view. Some in the US have, certainly, but again that's more due to politically legal bribes than any rational thought about the issue. If I license software, that's great, but I don't license firmware, it's integral and the manufacturer should not be able to take things away that I bought initially. Perhaps MMO's do, and that's why I've never bought one. I've never heard of anyone doing it on a regular basis on non-server/subscription-based software. If you can provide examples, fine.

Christopher3172d ago (Edited 3172d ago )

***Wow. Do you even research your claims? Here's Microsoft's EULA:***

Saying that Local Law Applies does not negate the EULA, it only says that the EULA applies as is standard in the local region. If any portion therein is written differently in the local law, then the local law would apply.

You should also review your own directive a bit more:

"a guarantee of at least 2 years for new goods (or longer if the Member State wishes) where the seller will undertake without extra charge to reimburse the price paid or to replace and/or repair consumer goods if they do not meet the specifications set out in the guarantee statement"

Guess what an EULA is?

Morgue3172d ago

OS stands for Oh Sorry.

commodore643172d ago (Edited 3172d ago )

I can't believe there are still Sony apologists around.
Quite honestly, people are either getting paid by Sony, on here, or they are exemplary ps3 fanboys worshipping and defending-unto-the-death the great honour of their god Sony.

Unfortunately, in the real world, Sony's behaviour is woeful, in this case. Saying 'sorry' is simply a slap in the face for anyone that bought a fat ps3 and wants to continue to use the fat PS3, as it was intended at the time of purchase.

This article sums up the entire debate with its reference to "....European Directive 1999/44/EC which quite clearly states that goods must be be "fit for the purpose which the consumer requires them and which was made known to the seller at the time of purchase"."

There is going to be a lawsuit.
Consumers bought PS3s partly on the strength of Linux inclusion.
Thus, the law is satisfied that a breach has taken place.
The only debate that remains to be had is whether local law, or Sony's EULA should apply.

Based on the outcome of that, Sony could be reimbursing a LOT of deceived customers.

Bottom line:
Consumers have a right to the features which were advertised and sold as part of a competitive package.
If SOny wants to remove features, then they may be forced to reimburse customers for that part of the product which does not do what it promised it would do at purchase.

How anyone disagrees with that, I don't know.
This ain't rocket science.

I guess some of the tools in the n4g shed ain't none too bright.

Christopher3172d ago

@commodore:

The problem is the article doesn't state the whole element.

From the directive

===

Rights of the consumer
1. The seller shall be liable to the consumer for any lack of conformity which exists at the time the goods were delivered.
2. In the case of a lack of conformity, the consumer shall be entitled to have the goods brought into conformity free of charge by repair or replacement, in accordance with paragraph 3, or to have an appropriate reduction made in the price or the contract rescinded with regard to those goods, in accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6.
3. In the first place, the consumer may require the seller to repair the goods or he may require the seller to replace them, in either case free of charge, unless this is impossible or disproportionate.
A remedy shall be deemed to be disproportionate if it imposes costs on the seller which, in comparison with the alternative remedy, are unreasonable, taking into account:
- the value the goods would have if there were no lack of conformity,
- the significance of the lack of conformity, and
- whether the alternative remedy could be completed without significant inconvenience to the consumer.
Any repair or replacement shall be completed within a reasonable time and without any significant inconvenience to the consumer, taking account of the nature of the goods and the purpose for which the consumer required the goods.
4. The terms "free of charge" in paragraphs 2 and 3 refer to the necessary costs incurred to bring the goods into conformity, particularly the cost of postage, labour and materials.
5. The consumer may require an appropriate reduction of the price or have the contract rescinded:
- if the consumer is entitled to neither repair nor replacement, or
- if the seller has not completed the remedy within a reasonable time, or
- if the seller has not completed the remedy without significant inconvenience to the consumer.
6. The consumer is not entitled to have the contract rescinded if the lack of conformity is minor.

===

1. There is no lack of conformity at the point of sale.
2. There is no lack of conformity with #1.
3. Again, not applicable.
4. Again, not applicable.
5. Again, not applicable.
6. To be defined by legal action.

In fact, the portion they quote isn't a part of the consumer rights section, but the definition of conformity for the contract.

===

Conformity with the contract
1. The seller must deliver goods to the consumer which are in conformity with the contract of sale.
2. Consumer goods are presumed to be in conformity with the contract if they:
(a) comply with the description given by the seller and possess the qualities of the goods which the seller has held out to the consumer as a sample or model;
(b) are fit for any particular purpose for which the consumer requires them and which he made known to the seller at the time of conclusion of the contract and which the seller has accepted;
(c) are fit for the purposes for which goods of the same type are normally used;
(d) show the quality and performance which are normal in goods of the same type and which the consumer can reasonably expect, given the nature of the goods and taking into account any public statements on the specific characteristics of the goods made about them by the seller, the producer or his representative, particularly in advertising or on labelling.

===

1. Done
2a. Done
2b. Done
2c. Done
2d. Done

Honestly, it's just someone trying to twist this directive, or an extremely small part of it, to use as a possibility of starting a case against Sony. Now, if that person takes this case to a lawyer, I'm sure they might find it a bit harder to plea the case.

I'm not supporting companies that remove features/products that you've purchased and paid for, regardless if you use it or not. But, there is a precedent already set with software-based technologies that has allowed for the removal of features and 'digital products' if it infringes on an IP or causes a security risk with the IP of the producer.

+ Show (17) more repliesLast reply 3172d ago
sandtug0083173d ago

i dont see the point in complaining if its a risk to security then i dont mind its much better than having people hurt the gaming business

wicko3173d ago

Well, the thing I don't understand is this: "We have made the decision to protect the integrity of the console and whilst mindful of the impact on Linux or other operating system users we nevertheless felt it would be in the best interests of the majority of users to pursue this course of action."

Why is this in the best interests of the users? I mean, okay, you removed a feature to protect yourselves, there's no need to spin it so it looks like you've done us a favour. I really don't see how removing that feature is going to benefit me in any way. Just be honest, I think people can appreciate that a little more.

spandexxking3173d ago

maybe this make could make it easier for hacker to ruin online games such as MW and the likes?

wicko3173d ago

True, but even so their main reason is obviously piracy. They're still putting spin on it.

WildArmed3173d ago

Yeah, but still there isn't much they could say.

Plus, I rather not have hackors running rapant on psn lke said above.

Tony P3173d ago

Well tbh I don't care about Other OS in the least.

But I can never ever sit here and defend the fact that a corporation can just come in and control my purchase any time they want to "protect themselves". To me, it's the same thing as MS banning unlicensed memory units and I'm glad other people are pitching a b*tch about it the same way.

Kushan3173d ago

IT's just an excuse from Sony because it's cheaper to drop support for OtherOS than anything else.
There hasn't been a SINGLE breach on PSN due to any of this hackery stuff, but more importantly, "OtherOS" isn't the key to hacking the PS3. Geohot has demonstrated and claimed (now I know there's no "proof" yet, but if anyone has any credability here, it's him) that he can restore OtherOS support on PS3s - possibly EVEN Slims, which don't have OtherOS at all. This means that removing OtherOS wont prevent any future hacking at all, it wont even delay it. So why are they removing it and pissing off a lot of customers in the process? Because having OtherOS means they have to support it, supply updates, fix vulnerabilities and bugs and so on. It's simply cheaper to not bother and that's why we should all be upset with them.
How would you like it if they dropped support for the SIXAXIX in favour of just the DS3? You'd be livid. How would you like it if they dropped support for playing Blu-ray disks because they didn't want to constantly update to the latest BD spec? It's no different.

Christopher3173d ago

Because they would have been forced to look into utilizing heavy-handed DRM, like Ubisoft's always connected requirement or something even worse. Anything they can do to prevent the need to utilize heavy-handed DRM or even go so far as to disband the ability to use third-party hardware with the PS3 openly is a good thing for the users in the long run. Yes, it's to support their own property as well, but that's what any business has to do first no matter what they tell the customers.

Also, taking time to implement stricter DRM or other features to prevent piracy could have taken a lot of time away from their ability to deliver on new features as a whole.

Kratos Spartan3173d ago

dropping support of Blu Ray discs would render the PS3 obsolete. That is really not an option. I figure you were just using comparison examples for this whole thing, but that just wasn't a good one. Neither was the SixAxis. And it is different. WAY different.

Kushan3173d ago

@Kratos Spartan

When I said "Blu-ray Disks", I meant "Blu-ray films", not games. Which, tbh, is a pretty good example to use as not EVERYONE who has a PS3 uses it to play Blu-ray films in much the same way that not everyone who owns a PS3 used it to install Linux (of course, I'm sure the numbers are vastly different, but that shouldn't matter, everyone buys a device for their own reasons and it's not right for Sony to decide what those reasons should have been - if a feature was advertised, it should be available through the product's lifespan).

Christopher3173d ago

One of the nasty downsides to a digital world. It's already happened with iTunes, Amazon Kindle/Unbox, Zune, and other devices. This is why I don't want a completely digital video game future, as well, but even that doesn't stop them from coding out features through game updates.

It may look like my above post(s) are defending Sony, but they're not. All I'm saying is that this is the world we live in and while it's not cool, it's what it is.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 3173d ago
ubiquitious3173d ago

You betrayed your customers SONY.

We will forgive, but we will never forget.

PirateThom3173d ago

Yeah, like we forgot to ever actually install an other os.

LordMarius3173d ago

but Im sure you have forgotten about the 360 RROD issues, right? lol

doG_beLIEfs3173d ago

I am livid over losing a feature that I NEVER USED. Now, even though I would have never used it, I am appalled by Sony's hatred for us loyal customers. I mean...WTF? I was never...evarevarevarevar....ev aaaar going to use it, but now that Sony has removed it, I can no longer go to settings and see the (install other OS) on my XMB.

SARCASM

Eamon3173d ago

well, here you have it loyalists, there's EU law stating you cannot remove features of a product that you have paid for.

You guys may not care about the removal (well actually you are just being loyal fanboys), but there are others who do.

Can't you stop being selfish for a couple of seconds and try to look at it from their point of view? Sony isn't even paying you to be loyal to them.

sorceror1713173d ago

OK, hold up. I was one of the people who did, in fact, install Linux on my PS3. (Ubuntu 9.04, with the vram memory hack.)

I'm the first to concede that I didn't do much with it after that. But that's because I've got a family and a life. I'd certainly *intended* to get MAME and other such emulators set up - playing some of the classics on a big flat-panel would be a lot of fun. I even had some development ideas: http://mdlug.org/pipermail/...

Am I crying in my beer because OtherOS was taken away? No, it doesn't practically impact my life much. But I *do* figure Sony owes me an apology at the least.

Kholinar3173d ago

"Am I crying in my beer because OtherOS was taken away? No, it doesn't practically impact my life much. But I *do* figure Sony owes me an apology at the least."

If you live in the EU or UK, they owe you more than that. We'll have to see about the US. I'd imagine they'll owe several law firms a lot of money in a year or so.

UnwanteDreamz3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

Obviously you were not intelligent enough to understand the EULA/TOS when you agreed to it. I guess you can use this as a lesson. Do not press agree unless you know what you are agreeing to.

All of this could have been avoided if people read their EULA/TOS. Don't like the terms? Put the console in a box and take it back.

@ Kholinar

I guess you need your govenment to step in and protect you from your own stupidity huh. Can't protect yourself on your own by not agreeing to something like this huh? I mean good thing they are there to make all your ignorant decisions go away. There was always a chance this could happen and if you couldn't do without it you should have bought a PC.

Eamon3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

UnwanteDreamz, Using pages of small script in the TOS is the oldest trick in the book. Nobody reads them because nobody is bothered.

BUT, some countries do recognise this technique and have made laws that you cannot use this to trick customers out of their rights nor can you make people agree with you breaking the law.

Like for example, A Jewish merchant decides to make you sign a contract that if you don't pay him back the money you owe him, he will get a pound of your flesh. There is a law stating it is illegal to kill another person and this contract is in clear breach of this legislation. So the contract becomes invalid/illegal. (Merchant of Venice reference FTW :P)

Same with Sony here. But of course, who is bothered to sue Sony?

Baka-akaB3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

i am one of those very few ps3 linux users here . It helped me as a backup pc when mine died and i needed some important work done .

So of course i aint happy it came to this . But as one not so keen on home console piracy either , i blame as much , if not more , that Geohotz kid than Sony's drastic response .

Let's be honest here Eamon , there is a breed of people here who happily jump at every bad news for the console they dislike , and gloat about it , often without even the darnest clue .

In the related various news and articles , you can easily count at least 6 people . 6 that in the past dismissed the use of linux on ps3 as slow rubbish or useless , some of them not even with ps3 access .

And most of the same person didnt blink when the slim was released without the function .

And now they wanna play champion of the linux cause ? Yeah right .

What i want is Sony to give back a secured access to linux . At least when the console's security falls despite the removal , they better put it back .

Proxy3173d ago

By clicking disagree you agree to send me 20$ cash by the end the month.

Kholinar3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

"I guess you need your govenment to step in and protect you from your own stupidity huh. Can't protect yourself on your own by not agreeing to something like this huh? I mean good thing they are there to make all your ignorant decisions go away. There was always a chance this could happen and if you couldn't do without it you should have bought a PC."

You're right it's ignorant to buy Sony products given their history of screwing users at every turn. But I liked the fact that Sony was doing some very different things this generation. Like supporting standards like DNLA, and being region-free, and supporting OtherOS, which was also on the ps2.

But that's not the issue. Agreement isn't constituted by a shrink-wrap or onscreen EULA. Not in most places in the world and certainly not in my state. So I didn't agree to anything. Thanks for caring though. No, I haven't made any stupid decision. I knew it could happen, but Sony'll pay me back.

Oh, and, by the way, how exactly would one stand up against a company that removed something you paid for? Go to their office and shoot somebody or steal it back? Sorry I find that immoral. But if you want to be a vigilante instead of following the laws of the land, that's fine. I'm only asking Sony to do so.

@baka

"In the related various news and articles , you can easily count at least 6 people . 6 that in the past dismissed the use of linux on ps3 as slow rubbish or useless , some of them not even with ps3 access .

And most of the same person didnt blink when the slim was released without the function .

And now they wanna play champion of the linux cause ? Yeah right ."

It's cool that you use it. Sorry that all this is happening.

The slim's a completely different issue though, since the feature was clearly removed before purchase. Not by legally unsupportable EULAs.

@skv007

People don't talk about or use the fifth seat in their car much either. You'd better bet that they'd discuss it if it got recalled and wasn't replaced.

WildArmed3173d ago

lol.
When PS3 had Other OS feature.. it was played down by everyone.
Now it doesn't have it, and it's being played as the 3rd world war.

I find it very funny.. before they removed the Other OS.. I wouldn't have seen one comment on N4G in months talking about the Other OS feature

Eamon3173d ago

Baka-akaB, I completely agree with you that there are some fanboy nerds here who jump at any opportunity to bash Sony or the PS3.

But let us disregard any of their pathetic attempts and talk seriously here.

The thing about the Slim is that it came without OtherOS, so it was sold with a list of features that did not include it. That's completely fine! This is not wrong in any way, because it is up to the buyer to decide whether to purchase this product or not.

The only issue here is to remove a feature that came with the product you had purchased. Now this is morally wrong.

Tbh, my ranting over this topic and idividual rights & freedoms is due to the upcoming General Elections here in the UK. I'm 19 years old so my political views are fuelled by the rebellious youth inside of me. lol

Baka-akaB3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

@Kholinar

I agree but some people shouldnt be speaking at all about the subject , and mention it for other fairly obvious reasons .

@Eamon

I take no issue with your post , as it is at least fuelled by some logical reason ... not the usual and obvious "ahahah my console is betta than Urs!"

What i await from sony now , is for them to give back a sold feature ,be it via a more secured fashion , like a boot disc or otherwise .

kneon3173d ago

Does not the EULA superceed the EU law? by agreeing to the EULA you have acknowledged that you waive some of your rights under EU law. I'm not a lawyer but I can't see anything much coming about because of this. How can the EU do anything when both Sony and the end user have agreed that removing a feature for security purposes is ok?

ChozenWoan3173d ago

I wrote you a check for the disagree I gave you... I just wouldn't cash it for a few days after you get it.

UnwanteDreamz3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

Thank you!

I might have came off as an a** but this is getting ridiculous. When will people start paying attention and stop being surprised by these things.

My only point was that if you don't want to be "screwed" then you read the fine print. It was always a possibility and at the start you have a chioce to make. Take it back then and get your money or keep it and take a chance.

Still this seems like too much for some people.

Proxy3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

The TOS clearly states 20$ cash. Not check. :)

Ima make a EULA t-shirt next.

Kholinar3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

"My only point was that if you don't want to be "screwed" then you read the fine print. It was always a possibility and at the start you have a chioce to make. Take it back then and get your money or keep it and take a chance. "

Yep, and since Sony didn't read the large print on local/national laws, they have a problem.

EULAs are just things that companies throw out to protect themselves in small sections of the world that care more about corporate donations than people.

@kneon

Nope. Federal laws supersede contractual agreements.

UnwanteDreamz3173d ago (Edited 3173d ago )

Quoted from cgoodno (best logical explination I have seen) Read understand and stop hiding behind laws that only protect idiots from themselves.

"This doesn't apply to software w/their own EULA. If a user doesn't agree to an EULA, then a return is possible based on the policy of the retailer from which the item was purchased. If the user does agree to the EULA, then therein they are held applicable to those items within. Part of this is removal of features in order to prevent piracy.

Same thing happened when Microsoft disabled XML use in their Office 2007 applications last year due to the lawsuit. People can claim the same thing, they expected a feature and it was taken away. But it's not the case since it's a part of the EULA you agree to prior to installing the application(s).

This exact same thing applies to MMOs, which at any time can remove features from their game that were on the box at retail.

Software has additional rules with which are capable of circumventing that directive as long as they do not remove the core functionality of the device itself (in this case, BD player for games and movies). LinuxOS was a software feature of the system, same as being able to connect to PSN and Home."

For all the pissing and moaning it has caused I wish they had left the feature in. NM that the system many bought in 07 and 08 does way more than advertised. NM that they took an fuction away and that is all that matters.

+ Show (17) more repliesLast reply 3173d ago
astar1234567893173d ago

so what they took it off i dont now any one who used it anyway, and i now they will bring something big with them at E3

mcgrawgamer3173d ago

I'll miss the otherOS features. I used it just about as much as I use the printer hooked up to my ps3........

*hint* that's something else you can remove sony.