Try our new beta!Click here
Submitted by Anon1974 2098d ago | article

PS3 lawsuits threaten entire gaming industry

If recent lawsuits against Sony regarding the removal of the Other OS feature on the PS3 console go forward ending with a court decision against Sony all gamers will pay the price. Simply put, a ruling against Sony in this matter would be a death keel for innovation throughout the entire gaming industry. It would effectively tie the hands of console makers among others from this point forward. (Industry, PS3, Wii, Xbox 360)

Alternative Sources
« 1 2 »
sid4gamerfreak  +   2099d ago
being a little optimistic are we?
Anon1974  +   2098d ago
What's up here?
I think the article raises a valid points (although, this is coming from the author). A ruling against Sony in this case would invalidate User Agreements in the eyes of the law, it wouldn't just be a simple ruling against Sony. Everyone uses these type of clauses.

The effects of this would be very serious indeed and would fundamentally change what companies could and couldn't do with their software once it's sold to the consumers and could be one of the biggest blows to the gaming industry we could see in our lifetime.

And yet there's seven people claiming this article is "lame". This is a serious issue staring down the gaming industry. Why is it no one is willing to talk about it? Take off your fanboy googles and try to grasp the significance of the outcome of this case. This isn't just a matter concerning Sony updating their console. This has the potential to change everything, for everyone.
#1.1 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(30) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
-Alpha  +   2098d ago
Wall of text, apologies in advance: Don't mean this offensively but I think that's a little overdramatic and the article attempts to try being over-dramatic to make the article sound interesting. Nothing wrong with that though (I'll get back to this point later). The reason I say this is because this kind of problem has existed way before gaming.

Anyone remember people suing McDonald's because it got them fat? What came out of that, a McDonald's Fast Food law? I see this issue as minor. No, Sony did not take the BEST course of action-- banning ONLY known hackers would have been more suitable but assuming that they were not able to do this it seemed it was in their best interest to protect the company. Not only does hacking damage their company but it also screws loyal customers who buy products legally. Should they start to sue Sony if Linux remains and piracy begins to become popular? None of us knows the legalities of the situation and that's where a lawyer works his magic. In all honesty we as gamers hate this as much as we hate people ripping on gaming being an acceptable entertainment form of media. Doesn't mean that people who oppose us/Sony don't have valid points, it just seems like people are making a big deal out of nothing. I'm open minded to the lawsuit and have no personal care for Sony losing this case because I gain nothing of them losing or winning. I dont work for Sony. Maybe that's why this article is so important. Maybe I should take a firmer stance against injustice. But we have such little information aside from the fact that people are suing BECAUSE THEY feel that Sony was unjust to them. Why? Who? Does anybody know the answers to this? I see good points raised on both sides that a judge could potentially go either way.

I think Sony will be alright. A case exists because of small loopholes like this but Sony isn't foolish to remove the OS without thinking of the consequences. I am sure they will be fine and this will all be forgotten. Surely they were smart enough to protect themselves for removing the feature. They are not idiots, they are a company that has existed and faced lawsuits before. I am more surprised that people have gone through the trouble of creating a lawsuit as I do not see why Linux was THAT Important to them. I have not seen Linux advertised which is another good point people bring up. This case seems to be viewed classically as the little guy trying to leech off of the big guy and though I don't know the people suing personally it seems like that is the case. McDonald's was protected from fat people suing them. If people are really trying to exploit Sony then I'm sure they will be protected against people like this too


I see... Well hopefully Sony learned their lesson!
#1.1.1 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(28) | Disagree(5) | Report
Nike  +   2098d ago
@darkride666: That's all well and good
But most people are just annoyed (hence the "Lame" reports) because when Microsoft is hit with a lawsuit for anything - be it faulty hardware or "unethical practices" - almost every type of person who's not so much anti-360 or pro-PS3 as anti-Microsoft feels they're getting what they deserve. However, an article stating how Sony getting sued threatens the entire industry will inevitably draw sympathy from PS3 supporters, since...well, they're PS3 supporters after all.

I know there aren't that many comments agreeing with the article yet, but this being N4G, I'm guessing the people who reported the article know very well how it's going to be received.

On topic, it's an issue of terms of service and I'm sure Sony will win out. Just because Jack Thompson could bring several cases against video games to the courts doesn't mean he had a good chance of winning them in the face of ineffable facts (which in Thompson's case was "games being protected by the First Amendment, you friggin' nutjob").
#1.1.2 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(9) | Report
Persistantthug  +   2098d ago
Alpha-Male22 said,
"Sony isn't foolish to remove the OS without thinking of the consequences."

*points down*
Darkstorn  +   2098d ago
Ruling against Sony would ultimately be in the interest of the consumer, though. I don't think user agreements should be the be-all-end-all in terms of outside regulation, especially when features are involved.
Anon1974  +   2098d ago
But you have to see how User Agreements are important
That was the point of the article. User Agreements offer companies the flexibility they need to be able to adapt to a changing environment. Take that away from Sony and you take it away from everyone. It sets a precedent. While the title might seem a bit dramatic, when you think about it it's not that far off. The death of user agreements would forever alter how a company is allowed to alter software after it's sold to a customer. That has wide ranging implications beyond just games consoles.

In the end these types of cases are usually settled out of court and that's probably what these people are after. Rather then drag this through the courts and risk bad PR, it's more likely they'll be paid their "Shut the hell up" money and this will go away, which is probably what these people are betting on. There's better ways to get Linux then dragging this through the courts. But there's so much negativity, so many people saying "Damn straight! Serves Sony right." This article was more of a response to those, because it's clear they haven't thought through what the repercussions of a court ruling against this type of stipulation in the User Agreements would mean.

Everyone uses them. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo. The right to change the software adjusting, updating and removing features is what enables us to have consoles that evolve. If the courts take that right away from everyone, then what?
drdistracto707  +   2098d ago
this whole thing reminds me of michael jackson

everyone hated him before he died, and then they worshiped him

here, nobody cared about Other OS, then all the sudden its the worst thing in the world when its gone?

I dont remember lawsuits when they removed Backwards Compatiblity, and for some reason Other OS is MORE important than that?
randomwiz  +   2098d ago
I agree with Alpha, this article is being WAY too overdramatic.

99.9% chance Sony will win the lawsuits

.1% chance that Sony will lose and the only consequence that Sony faces is that ps3 fat owners get reimbursed $1-30.

0% chance something else will happen.
Lich120  +   2098d ago
@ persistent

Every time someone talks about companies not being foolish I can't help but think of that ridiculous situation. A freaking rootkit?! Are you kidding me.

That said, I do agree with pretty much everything Alpha said.
edgeofblade  +   2098d ago
Instead of taking sides, let me point out the irony here:

When Microsoft does something to protect their profits, they are evil.

When Sony does something to protect their platform, the same people who called Microsoft evil now defend Sony.

And then there are the Linux-heads who call Sony evil for removing Other OS... and call Microsoft evil because it's written into their Linux-loving DNA.

Meanwhile, Joe Gamer wonders what that noise was.
WikusVanDeMerwe  +   2098d ago
Gotta agree with others on this one. As soon as I saw "death keel" in the header I thought "oh boy here we go" and knew then this bit of "news" was going to be over the top in one way or another.

Other than that I agree with and believe Sony, no matter the outcome, will be alright and learn from this lesson and move on but it will not be the death of them in any way.
#1.1.10 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report
Christopher  +   2098d ago
That's a massive slippery slope you're playing with there.

EULA set the terms that not only protect the business, but customers as well. While I know you said they shouldn't be "be-all-end-all" solutions, defining what is and isn't acceptable is extremely messy work on only leads to 1. businesses getting screwed over; 2. customers getting screwed over; 3. lawyers making lots of money.

No matter the outcome, in the end the result is still going to be unfair to the consumer. It's a need for this level of agreement by the users for use of the business' service/products that is going to be needed and the businesses will find a legal way to ensure that the level meets their needs in order to protect their business from the possibility of a frivolous lawsuit.
FarEastOrient  +   2098d ago
Well, I'll have to agree that Sony does have the right to remove the OS feature since we as gamers accepted the EULA. Why isn't anyone suing Hulu for being blocked on PS3 browsers...

I'm one of those "hackers" that haven't pirated any PS3 games, but I did get Starcraft, Command and Conquer, Crysis, and World of Warcraft to play on Yellow Dog Linux on PS3. I used their real licenses but I did have to hack to get them to play, I have no place to complain that Sony is removing this feature and others shouldn't.

If you've seen my comments before the reset of everyone's profile I do work for the US Army and this update hasn't stop plans to use PS3 clusters for supercomputers especially for the US Air Force.
jf3sh13  +   2098d ago
@ alpha-male22
The problem as I see it is that sony has put into there user agreements that they can add or remove software without notice at there discretion and in this case they gave notice, and now there are people who I assume clicked the I agree button and are now filing lawsuits because they didn't read the agreement first, so if they win there lawsuit it will have ramifications not only for the gaming industry but for any business that uses such agreements, your mcdonalds reference does'nt make sense to me, I don't remember mcdonalds getting there customers to sign agreements stating they will get fat if they eat mcdonalds food? I usually find myself impressed by your well thought out and intelligent comments but this time I feel I must respectfully disagree
Captain Tuttle  +   2098d ago
A User Aggreement does not supercede the does not give the issuer the right to break an existing law, it has nothing to do with law. The question for the lawsuits is not whether Sony has the right to uphold a User Agreement, it's whether Sony broke the law by removing a feature that it's customers paid for (I think it sucks they removed otherOS but I'm not sure if they broke the gut tells me they did). There's precedent for this. California (I think) and most European countries have strong consumer protection laws, laws that all but cancel out a EULA.
#1.1.14 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
KozmoOchez  +   2098d ago
Sony BMG =/= Sony Computer Entertainment

Completely different branches, plus we all know the music industry is super retarded and super corrupt
Christopher  +   2098d ago
***California (I think) and most European countries have strong consumer protection laws, laws that all but cancel out a EULA. ***

Partially correct. State laws supersede EULA, but do not negate them. What that means is that if there's a state law that requires companies to reimburse users who have been banned from a game, the company has to do that in that state regardless if their EULA says otherwise. It doesn't mean that the rest of the EULA is not valid or that they have to do as such in all states.

Lawyers utilize the severability clause in almost all agreements of this sort. The severability clause pretty much states that if any portion of the contract becomes unenforceable, it doesn't invalidate the rest of the contract.
#1.1.16 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report
Captain Tuttle  +   2098d ago
Interesting. Thanks cgoodno
Perkel  +   2097d ago
@ all above claiming sony did right and is right.

So if Sony remove feature of playin games you will still sayin it's right ?

It's the same with Linux. Linux was part of the system and Sony sold Fatps3 as linux platform too.
So removing it should be connected with reparations in cash because linux integration was part of the price you paid.

It's like mobile phone. You can't just sell iphone with Wi-fi and then after 3 years you have message from apple. Upgrade to newer Os and lose your Wi-fi or don't and then your iphone will not play any songs or video file.

Would you be happy with that ? :>

@ Captain Tuttle

all True
#1.1.18 (Edited 2097d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(4) | Report
Hideo_Kojima  +   2097d ago
you do realise that if they are asked to pay back just $30 like you said to every ps3 phat owner that could cost them half a billion $?

No matter how big the company is that is a huge amount of moneyzz.

It is the cost of making 25 uncharted 2 games.
rockleex  +   2097d ago
I don't care WHAT you say...
Sony WARNED you before you updated your PS3.

If you want to use PSN, you have to follow its ToS and keep your PS3 updated. But you had a choice to update or not.

Sony did not forcefully come into each and everyone of our houses and update it secretly behind our backs.

Sony gave us a choice. Its up to each and every single one of us to decide whether PSN or Other OS is more important.
#1.1.20 (Edited 2097d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report
CimmerianDrake  +   2097d ago
I don't get it...
The people who are pro-lawsuit continue to use the same flimsy excuse of "what if Sony BD playback or the ability to play games" obviously don't understand the monumental difference. Other OS is a perk, BD playback is a basic and key feature to the basic function of the console. Removing it would damage the PS3's most basic capabilities and no longer make it a game console and/or video player. Removing the Other OS option literally does nothing to hamper what the console was actually designed for, hence it is NOT the same thing.

You people seem to ignore key aspects of this decision in favor of trashing Sony with your alleged crusade for consumer rights. Well guess what, as a consumer, I have the right not to be threatened with identity theft. I have the right not to have to pay extra money for a game because theft has driven the market prices up to compensate for losses. I have the right not to be faced with increasingly strict DRM attempts to prevent further piracy.

You people seem to have forgotten about those rights haven't you? You really think consumers would win if Sony lost? In the war against piracy, consumers ALWAYS lose. You want that to stop, look to the hackers and crackers and make them stop. Because as long as they try to one up software and hardware companies, as long as they take the illegal routes because they are too lazy or too cheap to get a real job and actually pay for what they want, all companies will take measures to protect their bottom lines. Some measures are wrong, like the rootkit debacle. Some measures shouldn't be a big deal, like this one.
Megaton  +   2098d ago
I fail to see the correlation between Sony taking back something people paid for and the death of innovation in gaming.

I know I take an unpopular stance on this topic, particularly among the Sony loyalists, but I'm advocating for you guys, consumers. Just because the ToS says Sony can do this doesn't mean it's right. You buy something, they decide they don't want you using it anymore, they take it away without compensation. If you don't see how that's wrong, I don't know what to tell you.
the-show-stopper  +   2098d ago
nobody paid for other OS
other OS was a perk not a feature
besides Sony has a team of lawyers that cost more then all our ps3's put together who have looked to see if there was anyway Sony would lose a lawsuit about other OS being taken away
Darkstorn  +   2098d ago
Sony WILL win this case, but it's still an issue that should be discussed further.
Persistantthug  +   2098d ago
I'm a strong PS3 supporter, and all I own is a PS3
I agree with everything you just said Xiphos.

To me, this is a CONSUMER RIGHTS issue.

Also, because this case(s) is taking place in California, Sony could very well lose.

I predict they'll settle.
Citizen_King  +   2098d ago
How much did the Other OS feature cost PS3 owners since you believe they need their money back. I know the PS3 cost me $600 when I bought the hardware. I'm not sure how much the Other OS feature takes from that price tag.

When you agree to the ToS that means you agree with their terms BEFORE you go ahead with the service, or owning the product. Why can't people understand this??? If you read the ToS and most of it sounds fishy or just plain wrong then return the thing. Unfortunately I don't see people doing that because it takes less energy to whine or think illogically than it does to get up and go back to the store to return the console.
#1.2.4 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(6) | Report
darkpower  +   2098d ago
It's not a Sony loyalist vs. the rest of the world issue, because so many people outside of the so-called "Sony loyalists" are siding with Sony on this one.

Why? Because why the hell SHOULD Sony have to pay for anything? No one gave a crap about this feature until it was removed. Then people just pretended that it was the only reason they BOUGHT a PS3. Seriously, these are frivolous suits that were filed because they thought Sony was vulnerable here. Who here actually USED this? Did they NOT remember that Sony didn't even include the feature on their Slim models (how many times will this point be completely ignored in this conversation, as that ALONE is enough to dismiss ALL these cases)? Those that think this is a case of Sony taking away features that they "promised", since WHEN did Sony even ADVERTISE this feature as being on the PS3? It was obvious that it was added as an afterthought. Why would I WANT to install Linux on my PS3, anyway? From what I saw on the YouTube videos about how you did it, it was painstakingly difficult and not worth my time (what the hell would I even USE it for?).

And before someone says it, yes, Microsoft HAS taken away options before (remember all the controversy concerning third party storage devices that happened just late last year). Thing is, the MS loyalists (since we're ON the subject of loyalists) just completely sided with MS without a second thought. And this doesn't mean we're siding with Sony on everything, either (BC needs to come back, as I think it will once the PS2 is officially retired from Sony support, as I believe it will this year). But on this one, this is the time that you SHOULD side with the "Sony loyalists".

@Persistantthug: On another about this topic, you talked as if you were one of the plaintiffs in one of the cases. I would love to see where you ever actually used this feature. If it bricked your console, then I could see where you would have a case, but it seems as though all it did was make you want to file a frivolous suit to get extra money for something you didn't use anyway. If you are one of the plaintiffs, I hope you lose.

EDIT@Xiphos Below: Yeah, I forgot to bring up that "point" about Blu Ray. Remember what I said about Sony never actually ADVERTISING the Other OS feature. Did they advertise the PS3 as a Blu Ray player? I rest my case.

I bought my PS3 never even knowing that the thing existed, and when I saw it, it was so buried that I thought "why bother? WHAT Other OS?" I never even considered that in my purchase, and many people who bought the PS3 would be THAT tech savvy to even CARE. And you completely ignore, AGAIN, as so many have in this debate, that Sony didn't even INCLUDE the feature in the Slim models, and THOSE launched last August, far away from when we even HEARD of George Holtz. Why didn't anyone sue THEN? Why didn't anyone care THEN, and why didn't anyone charge Sony with any of this crap THEN? I'm not saying this was the most intelligent decision Sony made, but it's not exactly anything I'm exactly losing sleep over! I think you're just reaching for a reason to flamebait the "Sony loyalists".
#1.2.5 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(9) | Report
Megaton  +   2098d ago
Compensation for a particular feature is arbitrary, and not at all the point of this, but something that should have been worked out when they decided to steal features from their customers. Several of you have also completely ignored the part where I said the ToS covering Sony from being accused of wrongdoing doesn't mean they're innocent. Legally they might be clean, but it doesn't mean what they did was right.

You paid $600 for the whole package, which included the other OS feature. As someone else around here said in another article; what if Geohot figures out a hacking method that works through BluRay movie playback? If Sony decides to remove movie playback you're cool with that? It's just a feature right? You bought the console not the ability to play BluRay movies.

It's purely about consumer rights, and you guys are throwing yours away for Sony.

Edit - Just to be clear, I never used Linux on my PS3s and never planned on it. I'm not one of the bandwagon riders who hopped aboard as an excuse to further their anti-Sony agenda. I'm simply a strong believer in consumer rights.
#1.2.6 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(4) | Report
Therealspy03  +   2098d ago
for those of you siding with sony because of their BS hacker excuse, you do realize hackers could just...hack...the firmware and allow for the installation of other OS's anyway, right? this isn't hurting the hackers, this is hurting the honest people who do things legitimately.

now, how is that hard to comprehend? it boggles my mind how willing the sheep are to support the major corporations instead of their peers.
MetalFreakMike  +   2098d ago
All this complaining and explaining about customer rights is getting out of hand. Everyone is acting like Sony is going to start removing every other feature now just because they took out the "OtherOS" feature. As the-show-stopper pointed out, "OtherOS" was not a feature as it was not advertised on as a feature. It was put in as a perk for people that wanted to run linux off of their PS3.

Sony is not dumb enough to start removing other features just because they can. Even if someone figures out how to run burned games off of the Blu-ray drive does not mean Sony will go and remove that feature as the console needs to read blu-ray to play games. Also this "Feature" was "Advertised" as a selling point for the console so if they took it out then we all can complain about it.

All these articles and complaining are getting really old really fast. People are just using this as a excuse to burn Sony.
#1.2.8 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(6) | Report
jerethdagryphon  +   2098d ago
@ Xiphos

heres the coralation

guy buys car, car has gps link up.

gps linkup proves bad causes someone to steel your lisnence plate info (or something)

car maker says whoops thats bad for us and the consumer, they remotely disable gps linkup..

cars driver goes hey i needed that and sues.

guy wins:
car makers can no longer put changable (upgradable) features in cars

cars lose advancement and step back to 1990s. no new features no new tech. that can be remotley updated/altered

guy goes yea me i struck a blow for common man.

guy waiting for drive by wire crys as it wont come.

if sony loses then there can be no updates in anything

you buy a game, it updates causing you to lose oyur save you sue....

so no updates to games no firmware updates for new features
hell even windows will have problems with patches.

its BAD NEWS if sony loses. its not just about this incident.
its what it creates precedent for other lawsuits other problems its a snowball affect.

if you cant understand that then look at the wider picture
DaTruth  +   2098d ago
I agree with Xiphos!
But I don't want piracy to screw with my awesome PS3 exclusives. If piracy were to run rampant on the PS3, I might end up with a $600 non-portable PSP. The games on PSP are just terrible and I'm almost certain that that is entirely due to piracy!

It may not be right, but it's in my best interest! I prefer to pay for great games, than pirate crappy games!

Edit @ DarkPower: I'm sure they had it flying past in at least one of the "It only does commercials". It only does Linux! Could be wrong here though.
#1.2.10 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report
MysticStrummer  +   2098d ago
Sorry Xiphos but if you can't see that this is not just a case of Sony deciding they don't want us to use a feature then I don't know what to tell you. That hacking jackazz exposed a hole that could get people's personal info stolen. Imagine what would happen if Sony just let that go and people's credit/debit card numbers were taken.
zag  +   2098d ago
You do understand that before anyone gets paid out the court is going to want people to first prove they used the feature and then ask what they did with Linux on the PS3.

Just because yellow dog is installed doesn't mean you made use of it.

You'd have to explain what you were doing and why etc, no court is just going to hand out cash just becuase people are wanting cash.

Also the Class action cases HAVE TO prove that it's an advertised feature and you'll find it's never been a one in law.

Also if anyone has upgraded their firmware will have to prove that they didn't agree to the T&Cs before installing the update.

Also even if the ruling goes in favour of the class action, do you really think Sony isn't going to appeal the case.

It'll be years plus anyone sees a cent from this.

Plus you forget that the lawyers will be wanting their cut of the money and it'll probably be 75%+ so the end result is going to be minor in terms of cash paid.
beavis4play  +   2098d ago
at xiphos
from the article: "Sony’s decision was based on this little used feature becoming a gateway for hackers to plunder the PS3, pirate software, steal your credit card info and pretty much wreck havoc on your Playstation gaming console. The hack was announced boldly to the world by the ones responsible so others could do the same, prompting Sony to remove the entire flawed feature in response to this threat on their customer base."

so, what don't you understand? your post is (almost) literally what the hackers response was to this.
it's hackers and their actions that brought sony to this action - and i think it's the right thing to do.
Luzce  +   2098d ago
No Beavis, it is absolutely NOT the right thing to do. Some people may have bought a $300 PS3 as a console to simply to play video games on, but some of us paid $600 for a piece of hardware that did much more.

This would be the same as Sony removing the ability of my PS3 of playing SACDs or reading Memory Sticks. I agree, hardly anybody has even heard of SACDs, but a small minority may have even decided to shell out the extra cash over, say, a 360, because it provided this extra functionality.

I was one of the early adopters who paid the premium precisely because of all the features. I had installed Ubuntu on my PS3, and although I'll agree that I rarely used it, I can see users who came to depend on it as their home theater computer or whatever.
facelike  +   2098d ago
"This would be the same as Sony removing the ability of my PS3 of playing SACDs or reading Memory Sticks."

I wouldn't have a problem with them removing it if that SACD feature could allow someone to hack into my PS3 and obtain my account number, credit card number, personal info, etc.

If it's truly for the safety of using the platform, then it's good. Especially if were talking the theft of stolen info. Imagine if they left the feature in and someone stole your credit card number or stole the money from your account, would you be defending the hacker then. If someone used your name and address to buy a car or ship stolen merchandise to your home, would you like that?

This has happen on Xbox live already, it gets hacked and people suddenly find all kind of charges on there credit cards. I do not want that to happen here.
ikkeweer  +   2098d ago
lol, one person's optimism is anothers pessimism.
No one really cares about this lawsuit, unless they win, then it's going to be a real big deal.
But they won't win, pretty much every manufacturer has taken things away, if they were for the better overall.
Anyone even watch Toyota for the last few years? (I need that software Toyota, don't you dare take it out, one sec., I need to stop for those lights)
#1.5 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Mr Tretton  +   2098d ago
"I dont remember lawsuits when they removed Backwards Compatiblity, and for some reason Other OS is MORE important than that?"

That's not the same thing. And I think you know that. BC wasn't removed from my 60 GB.

Anyway, this is all BS. Opprotunist BS.

Find the fools that are filing this lawsuit and destroy them. The End.
mastiffchild  +   2098d ago
@edgeofblade-it isn't that, imo, people are saying Sony are doing this to protect the future of gaming and that's why we support them in this case. No, the fact is that, however altruistic or otherwise Sony are being the net effect is that PS3 gamers future gaming is being protected in terms of quality and quantity.

Also, had MS done something similar and been taken to court(i.e something to prevent piracy and potentially turning devs away from their platform and hurting THEIR gamers) we'd ALL(well almost) have stuck by them as well. I have no love for any console maker-I occasionally love the things they provide or the way they do certain things but I'm not naive enough to think they do anything FOR me that isn't really FOR THEMSELVES.

Whatever, Geohot 's only possible reason for doing what he did was the ultimate chance of piracy after CFW-why isn't he getting the blame? Sony are just preventing what happened with PSP going to PS3. It's fair enough and should MS have done the same kind of thing they'd be just as right.

Nobody used other OS and those that have lost out should look at the man who moved the goalposts and not Sony. I cannot believe how greedy and litigious some people are either-feebly selfish. Anyway, shoukld the feature be THAT important they can keep it but Sony saying you have to abide by their terms to use THEIR PSN seems fair to me. Sony won't lose the case, either.
Tony P  +   2098d ago
Oh please, drama queen.

Sony losing here does not equate with the downfall of gaming. It just means change. *Hopefully* for the better.

If they lost, they would certainly not be the first company unable to hide behind a ToS agreement.
mindedone  +   2098d ago
I'm glad I read through the posts first
so I didn't post one that mirrored yours. I don't know why people think this is the first, second, or even hundredth time the fairness andlawfullness of a contract has been challenged in the software industry
AAACE5  +   2098d ago
So let me get this right...
A lawsuit against Sony threatens the entire industry because of an OS issue, which has nothing to do with gaming. So now every gamer should take up arms to defend Sony for something that is not directly tied to gaming?

Yet, when the 360 had it's problems, and gamers were trying to sue MS, where was the support? Why didn't anyone want to rally the troops for gaming on a real issue?

I just don't get some people's logic! If a console they don't like has problems, they wish it would die off, not concerned with the overall effect it will have on the entire industry. Yet when a console they like is in trouble, they want everyone to get involved.

If you want to be involved in gamer politics, you have to be a fan of the entire industry, not just a fanboy interested in one console.

So again, the OS issue is not directly tied to gaming, so technically there is no threat!
commodore64  +   2098d ago
This article misses the point, entirely.

The gaming market is HUGE!
Companies are falling over each other to secure marketshare.
The idea that this lawsuit will somehow stop companies from innovating is probably the biggest load of codswallop I have heard on this site.

The lawsuit being brought against Sony, will serve to protect minority consumers from being steamrolled by a Conglomerate's (Sony, in this case) profit agenda.

What's more, Sony's specific actions are not repeated elsewhere.
The xbox360 has not removed any features (of the original point of sale) , yet it has continually added them.
The Wii has also not removed features.

The only company that seems keen on removing features, is Sony.
First it was backwards compatibility, now it is Linux.

Of course, very importantly, in the case of linux, the consumer has NO CHOICE, and of course, THAT is what the lawsuit is about.
Is it just me or does the article simply not get the distinction here?

Sony's actions have to do with removal of a feature that was inherently a part of the purchase price package.
Other manufacturers do not repeat this pattern at all.

I am very surprised this got approved. We certainly can do better than excusing the deceptive behaviour of a major conglomerate like Sony in this matter, especially when the comparison to other EULAs and TOUs is grossly out of context and inappropriately simplified.

As for the repercussions to the gaming industry, I shudder at the fantasy and 'flight of imagination' of the author. Is he for real?

#1.10 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Instinct_Gamer  +   2097d ago
**Of course, very importantly, in the case of linux, the consumer has NO CHOICE, and of course, THAT is what the lawsuit is about.**

Do you even know what your talking about???
There was a CLEAR CHOICE IN BLACK AND WHITE that said you can CHOOSE TO UPDATE OR NOT, as with any update. If you don't wanna update then sign out of PSN and use it for your Linux. They just don't want hackers on PSN.. What don't you understand about that? At times it sounded like your post was attempting to sound somewhat intelligent, but your information is completely wrong. Do you even have a PS3?? Did you read the terms of service when you signed up for PSN???? What good is a contract if any Lazy basterd, that wants to file some frivolous lawsuit would actually win? I'm glad you are not a Judge cause you are not of sound mind.
LoVeRSaMa  +   2098d ago
'When Sony announced that their latest update to their popular PS3 platform would remove the Other OS feature on older model PS3’s, most PS3 owners either shrugged it off or asked “I could install another OS?'

It was removed in 3.21 the latest update is 3.30
MEsoJD  +   2098d ago

just because theres people that didn't care too much for the feature, doesn't make it right.
Sony could remove the ability to play movies or games, then you bastards would be pissed off.

I don't know about you guys but I work hard. I bought my 60 gb with $600 hard earned dollars and I expect to have every feature that came with it.

Oh wait you can use the TOS argument against me but the majority of people just click and agree to it without reading it.

Also you can say Sony did this to protect themselves. So what if another exploit was discovered to take advantage of the system. Would Sony remove that too???

Geohotz: Hey guys I hacked the system through the blueray movie feature!!!
Sony: Oh FCUK, its time to remove the ability to play blueray movies.
UltraNova  +   2098d ago
The only people who could be and rightfully so affected are the professionals and academics that use the ps3' OS function to create computer clusters to help them with their scientific projects.

Then again one would expect more from these professionals as a question arises from this; did those professionals read and examined all facets of the user agreement upon purchasing the systems? Did they even have a lawyer to examine those agreement terms before accepting them?

The other group are hackers which I dont care about and neither should anyone if they got affected.

As far as I see it things are simple here. This is indeed a case of small guy leeching on the big guy through new found loopholes as alpha stated above.

Most importantly Sony is fully covered by their user agreement contract. If the people who sued Sony win this then prepare for a new era of law suit saturation. Basically if they find the way to bypass contracts like this then I am afraid court rooms will have their jobs cut out for a long time to come!

Time will tell i guess..
JsonHenry  +   2097d ago
Nah. It would just keep them from taking away features that were promised when we bought our products. It wouldn't keep them from innovating anything. No one is complaining because they are improving/adding anything. Just the stuff they are taking away. This was probably put forth by Sony as a PR move.
Alvadr  +   2097d ago
Im sure Sony would put the feature back with hacks fixed before having to pay out huge amounts of cash to the pathetic whinners out there.
N4g_null  +   2096d ago
Seriously people with out updating you can not effectively use the PS3 in a computer cluster. It locks you out of networking features, which is how most super computers are built.

Come one people the only people that are going to win this lawsuit are the super computer users, if they join the fight it's all over and SONY will get hit pretty hard, or they can simply provide some workaround yet that workaround will get leaked.

Seriously I thought the massives size of blu ray would stop pirating right, not really, most data on disk is filler or uncompressed, hacking this and compressing data would solve all of that and SONY knows this.

Yet SONY can win this case and then the super computer owners may actualy join the fight to unlock the PS3, many of this groups have the expertize and it would lead to this system getting hacked even faster.

Most of these people bought like 2,000 PS3 on avg. You can almost say 500,000 to 1,000,000 PS3s may be used for some sort of super computer network.

I understand this is scary to most of you but there is nothing you can do but wait and hope this works all out. The Wii and the xbox are fully hacked yet they still sell tons of games so really SONY should be fine.

What killed the PSP was developers would nolonger support it with games and SONY could not expand the market to non tech heads which usually haack stuff.
THC CELL  +   2099d ago
All the courts in the world would be happy if Sony is protecting piracy
8thnightvolley  +   2098d ago
yeah i dont see how sony would lose .. coz its in everyone's best intrest that it was taken out...

i wouldnt like my details to be hacked on my account that would suck.
Lucreto  +   2099d ago
I am sick of this Other OS nonsense
Trophy support,
ingame music,
ingame XMB,
Video store,
Dynamic themes,
Life with Playstation,
Custom avatars,
Minis playable on PS3,
Ability to play DivX and WMV files that are 2 GB or larger,
Improved XMB navigation,
Added Facebook support,
BBC player,
The PS3 and wireless controllers can now be set to turn off automatically
The PS3 can be set to automatically turn off after a background download
Blu-ray Disc playback supports DTS-HD Master Audio and DTS-HD High Resolution Audio output
Blu-ray BD-Live Profile 2.0.

Also update for 3D gaming and Move support on some games coming soon.

I think I have been well compensated for the loss of an insignificant feature over the years. There are just a lot of spoiled brats out there as far as I am concerned.
#3 (Edited 2099d ago ) | Agree(28) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
UnwanteDreamz  +   2098d ago
Thank you! The list you provided will just keep growing.
Lucreto  +   2098d ago
If people can add to the list it will be much appreciated. I have been using it in Sonys defence.
ABizzel1  +   2098d ago
I agree with you. People are just complaining and trying to get money anyway they can. Hopefully they waste their time finding an attorney who's also looking to fatten his pockets, and the court dismisses their case leaving them with court and attorney fees.

The only people who could possible be upset with this are hackers and companies that run a supercomputer from PS3 clusters. And even then only the supercomputer buyers should be upset, however, I'm sure that Sony personally reached them and told them not to update the console if their using the PS OS which I'm guessing they don't.

It sucks that it was taken out, because I was one of the people who took the time out to install it, but deal with it. We lost the Other OS feature it's not the end of the world and no other companies are not going to start taking features out claiming that it's for piracy protection. So stop the crying.
Hotel_Moscow  +   2098d ago
internet browser
photo gallery
non seizure causing themes when playing music
remote play
printer support
sajj316  +   2098d ago
Amen brotha!! I certainly am intrigued on how all this plays out. Sony has added a ton more features than taken out. Should I pay Sony for the additional stuff?
fOrlOnhOpe57  +   2098d ago
Spot on but you missed the biggest and best feature...
FREE online gaming.
Lucreto  +   2098d ago
I was going for items that we got through firmware updates. I thank all the above and below me who contribute to the list.

If somehow Sony lost and we all get a cheque for a small amount I would rip it up as they did what was right and I support them for it.
I wish I could reply again but just having 3 bubbles is a annoyance.
the-show-stopper  +   2098d ago
if i got a cheque from Sony id use it to buy a ps3 exclusive game
at least that way im giving some of it back
either that or ill donate to a chairty
mookins  +   2098d ago
Montrealien  +   2098d ago
I agree we got some nice features with the PS3 and myself I would never sue sony for money because of a feature they remove. However to open the flood gates and let the companies have the right to remove any feature they please from a product I bought is a no go. Would we be defending Sony if they disabled any of the features you listed, WiFi for example? or the backward compatibility of the original PS3? of course not.

And to think this will kill progress in the gaming industry is absurd. This lawsuit is to defend us from big companies screwing around with us, and I hope most of you understand this.
Gamer_89  +   2099d ago
its not that they used the feature and think of the great things sony has offers us like free service vidzone and free online play
unrealgamer58  +   2099d ago
lol dont do drugs while you're pregnant ladies, thats all im saying
mushroomwig  +   2098d ago
Is it wrong that I actually facepalmed in real life?
Spawn-KING  +   2098d ago
They should know Sony did this to stop HACKERS .............
Plain and simple .....With Linux install to a PS3 HACKERS do alot of you know what to it ....
Luzce  +   2098d ago
What about all the non-hackers that paid for a gaming machine which could run Linux?
commodore64  +   2098d ago
BUBBLES for Luzce!

You sir, have hit the nail on the head.
The law exists to protect consumers in this case and those people are exactly the people that need protecting from Sony, in this case.

Sony has sought to protect its bottom line, by discriminating against a minority of ps3 users.

Of course, Sony didn't mind at all that those same users bolstered its coffers with additional ps3 purchases at the time that Linux was being touted as a unique selling point.

Funny then, how this article says gamers are at risk, when in fact, gamers are being protected by the lawsuit.
Instinct_Gamer  +   2097d ago
Then you shouldn't have updated, someone thats a "non-hacker" hacker should know how to read. Sounds like you need to reassess your situation in life, if you want your little Linux so bad then you should not have agreed to update. These were all gifts from Sony, Other OS has nothing to do with gaming. If you use your PS3 in a cluster then why are you piddling around on PSN with it??? You really need to look at your priorities and get a life. Go get a job and buy a proper setup if your needs your Linux so bad. A PS3 slim is 300 bucks, and then you could have used the Phat PS3 for you little Linux.
Xander756  +   2098d ago
Actually it would be a good thing for gamers. It would prevent companies, like Sony, from advertising that their machines do something, then pull the plug on it. It's called bait and switch. You can't say your machine supports an OS, then people buy it because of this, and then they no longer support that OS. It's not as if they just took that functionality out of future models but ripped it right out of the consoles of the people who already bought it for that.
the-show-stopper  +   2098d ago
but if Sony does lose then this will show that user agreements mean nothing and we'll get nothing for free anymore
Sarick  +   2097d ago
nothing is free. there is always a cost. Even though PSN doesn't cost money from a subscription Sony pays for it, also you paid for the PS3 hardware and software to use it.

What is different here though is the product had features that where included some and people paid for them. This was no optional update. Either you updated or your system stopped functioning elsewhere.

So no matter which choice you took you'd be losing features you paid for that wheren't free to begin with.
#8.1.1 (Edited 2097d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
rwarner174  +   2098d ago
This was never advertised. Not once. Show me an advertisment of the otherOS feature. I don't think its even on the box, but I could be wrong on that one.
Luzce  +   2098d ago
It was definitely touted as one of the features, along with PS2 backwards compatibility, memory card readers, etc.
Hotel_Moscow  +   2096d ago
oh really but was it advertised on the box was their a tv commercial saying it i dont think so i think people are mixing what they read and heard from other people as being from sony
edgeofblade  +   2098d ago
Actually, bait and switch is different. From Wikipedia:

"In retail sales, a bait and switch is a form of fraud in which the party putting forth the fraud lures in customers by advertising a product or service at an unprofitably low price, then reveals to potential customers that the advertised good is not available but that a substitute is."

This is an Implied Warranty situation. Also from Wikipedia:

"The UCC allows sellers to disclaim the implied warranty of merchantability, provided the disclaimer is made conspicuously and the disclaimer explicitly uses the term "merchantability" in the disclaimer.[1] Some states, however, have implemented the UCC such that this can not be disclaimed."

Sony could have EASILY done this, and probably did. But the question will be if this is disallowed in California. And I haven't the time or need to pour over California law for the answer.
jjesso1993  +   2098d ago
Xander756 the qustion who in the world spend ££250-£425 to use os on a ps3 no one there cant be single person in this world that said oh ps3 dose linux lets buy so and can play few 2d games that can play mobile phone people need serious help if thats how they decide to spend there money.

god what world come to sony stop people from stealing theres other partners products by removing bareley funtional os that could not emulate a 3d game people need to get a life if care about so much why cant they just go out get pc install linux on it and do 1000 times more than what you could do on ps3 ? linux base pc would cost about £150 by the way to do about 1000x what was done ps3.
#9 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
blair_enigma  +   2098d ago
but regarding security updates like in the ps3 via this removal of otherOS, if i compare that to a car, does TOYOTA change the chassis or the door of a vehicle because they think there might be 'hackers' that harm the driver? i havent heard of a car manufacturer changing the specs of the car because its not safe.

like a prius, or that smart car, after getting into an accident and killing the driver, does the car maker CHANGE the specs of the car because of that? NO they dont.

so what im saying is, i know sony has a valid argument but if they change the specs of the ps3, then people will complain to upgrade their cars too. and everything else.
dizzleK  +   2098d ago
those manufacturers can order a recall to fix a defect. the other os backdoor was a defect.
The Lazy One  +   2098d ago
they didn't fix the defect. They removed the feature.

To use the above example, when cars have a problem they recall and return the car in the advertised condition and usually pay a handsome fee as well. In this case, the car manufacturer saw a potential way for people to break in through your door, and replaced your driver side door with a solid steel plate that doesn't open.
commodore64  +   2098d ago
@ ^^^

a perfect analogy.

This is what the lawsuit is about.
Instinct_Gamer  +   2097d ago
Horrible analogy
They did not remove anything, they denied access to Playstation Network IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO USE YOUR PS3 WITH LINUX. You had the CHOICE, PSN is their service they provide for free under their terms of service. People running their PS3s in clusters or as a computer have no need to sign in to PSN or to ever update their firmware... Get a clue buddy.
Hotel_Moscow  +   2096d ago
that analogy is wrong

if you want a reall analogy the only one that works is if apple released a iphone

that charges you for apps

one of the features allows you to install the android os on youre iphone

someone uses that same feature in order to make it so that they dont have to pay for any apps

this hypothetical iphone company made its money not off of the iphone itself but the apps would apple rather shut the feature off through update or recall all 33.5 million phones

besides with some people claiming that their were no hacks out and they should have waited same with the psp no hacks out for it when it started once it got hacked everyone had the cfw my friend even cfw my psp and all he did was use a memory stick and a battery
#10.2.3 (Edited 2096d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
jerethdagryphon  +   2098d ago
not hackers no but they have and ocntinue to change thengs if its a weakness, faulty wires batteries brakes recalls and reissues are a part of the modern wolrd
user858621  +   2098d ago
does this mean, people who wanted the blades rather then NXE could have sued microsoft??
Jack Klugman  +   2098d ago
blades aren't a feature but nice attempt at distracting sonys problems by trying to bring up xbox.
fallingdove  +   2098d ago
Blades being replaced by NXE isn't much different than Linux being removed. You now can't access either unless you failed to update your firmware.
Godmars290  +   2098d ago
At the very least, given all the crap over DRM, companies attempting to hold onto all rights to a game or product after they've sold it for private use, is that hopefully some regulation will be put in place to remove the free hand they don't have in the matter. Especially considering online interaction.
Zerodin  +   2098d ago
Sony fans are the worst.
The gaming universe doesn't revolve around those suits you worship.
PSN-JeRzYzFyNeSt  +   2098d ago
lets hope these judges arent Xbox fanboys lol
dizzleK  +   2098d ago
fanboys, this would realistically open up ms to lawsuits over the removal of the blades interface. if i paid for blades but had nxe shoved on me i could sue.
The Lazy One  +   2098d ago
Go ahead and try. M$ gets new lawsuits every month if not every week. Have fun paying their legal fees when you lose.
ALFAxD_CENTAURO  +   2098d ago
Sony is prepared for this cases, they will not loose any case. They knew this was coming.
dillydadally  +   2098d ago
Not quite accurate...
This guy actually does a pretty good job at making his points seem accurate, but it's all propaganda and inaccurate. Courts already make tons of decisions all the time that go against EULAs - anything the judges feel wasn't lawful to be in there, they rule against, and that's the only way Sony will lose is if the judge feels it was unlawful or didn't exactly state that.

Not only that, the author makes it sound like console makers innovateto be nice - which they don't. They innovate to protec their investment - do you think you won't get security updates if Sony loses? Do you think there still won't be innovations to compete with competitors?

On the other hand, what if Sony wins? The result would be far worse for gamers as a console manufacturer could put a feature in their console to bait consumers and take it away after purchase.

The key problem here though is the author fails to see the issue at hand - this isn't just A little feature that they removed that almost no one cares about - this is THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE CONSOLE for many people - those that use the other os likely bought the ps3 For the purpose of a powerful server and not to play games. So in othewords, this is more online with Sony removing the ability for he Ps3 to play games for us. We would certainly sue.

The stupid thing is although Sony should be required to keep this feature as it was the purpose of purchase for many individuals, they shouldn't be required to keep updating for individuals who want it, so they should just keep the old firmware from a legal standpoint.
Citizen_King  +   2098d ago
Then they shouldn't of bought it. The primary purpose of the PS3 is to play games and movies. Its not our fault that they are using it for something its not intended for.

I'm also getting sick of people saying Sony baited you with the feature when they never advertised it in the first place. I didn't even know the PS3 came with that feature until I looked at the settings when I was changing them. Im sure lots of PS3 owners found out about the feature the same way I did.
The Lazy One  +   2098d ago
read the lawsuits. They're mostly available online. It's advertised as a personal computer repeatedly by sony. That's why there's a case.
gypsygib  +   2098d ago
Another successful irrational argument by a pseudo-journalist to attract attention.
corneliuscrust  +   2098d ago
some dude on joystiq
posted a link to a good read by a Digg commenter, thought i would share it here.

"The big point is that it would be like buying a Prius hybrid (runs on electricity and gasoline), then one day, for 'security' reasons, Toyota told you you had to pick, right this second, whether your hybrid would run only on gasoline, or only on electricity, but you couldn't have both. For people who wanted a game system and a CELL processor system, Sony really screwed them. If you are upset do something about it. Contact Sony, and your attorney general.

CREDIT goes to Xrobx on Slashdot who posted these in another thread and i wanted to make sure that everyone sees them...

Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.:
"In addition to playing games, watching movies, listening to music, and viewing photos, you can use the PS3 system to run the Linux operating system. By installing the Linux operating system, you can use the PS3 system not only as an entry-level personal computer with hundreds of familiar applications for home and office use, but also as a complete development environment for the Cell Broadband Engine (Cell/B.E.)."

- google's cached page of the above hyperlink from March 30th 2010 which does not say anything about FW 3.21 removing Other OS. I've saved the page in case it goes offline, copy http address into browser as link probably won't work. Or, just search google and get the cached page. - kiyyto..."

-truncated due to size. second half in next comment
#19 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
corneliuscrust  +   2098d ago
second part
Phil Harrison, February 2007,
President of Sony Computer Entertainment Worldwide Studios 2005-2008:
"One of the most powerful things about the PS3 is the 'Install Other OS' option." []

Sony Computer Entertainment Inc., 2006-2009:
"The Linux Distributor's Starter Kit provides information, binary and source codes to Linux Distribution developers who wants to make their distro support PS3." []

Izumi Kawanishi, Sony, May 2006:
"Because we have plans for having Linux on board [the PS3], we also recognize Linux programming activities... Other than game studios tied to official developer licenses, we'd like to see various individuals participate in content creation for the PS3." []

Geoffrey Levand, August 2009,
Principal Software Engineer at Sony Corporation:
"Please be assured that SCE is committed to continue the support for previously sold models that have the "Install Other OS" feature and that this feature will not be disabled in future firmware releases."
mailing list to PS3 customers using Linux

Phil Harrison, May 2006,
President of Sony Computer Entertainment Worldwide Studios 2005-2008:
"The Playstation 3 is a computer. We do not need the PC." []
Make.Believe... you didn't see that"

appologies if some links dont work, the original post link is at the start of my first post.
#19.1 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
ChickeyCantor  +   2098d ago
Exactly, it was promoted as is.
And now its just ripped out.

They even held demonstrations on how Yellow dog works pretty well with it.
ReBurn  +   2098d ago
I guess that sort of takes care of the "Sony never advertised it" argument. Phil Harrison was playing it up all over the place. Perhaps it wasn't "advertised" but it sure was "publicized."
corneliuscrust  +   2097d ago
the funniest part
is that I got disagrees for posting quotations from Sony's own people.

Good lord fankids, get a freakin grip. Realize when Sony is wrong...for ONCE. please. It CAN happen

Even the motherf***in airforce is pissssed
#19.4 (Edited 2097d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
ChickeyCantor  +   2098d ago
I hope sony doesnt win this, cause im not using other OS anyway..N4G tears taste great.

That said,
Why the drama?
Anon1974  +   2098d ago
It's pretty obvious you didn't bother to read the article.
Otherwise you'd know what the "drama" was about.

Most places that put out software have User Agreements. It allows them the flexibility they need to update, upgrade and change their software on the fly for whatever reason. Without it we'd be stuck with software that never changes, never evolves because if a feature of the software doesn't work properly, get's hacked, etc...the company without the protection of the EULA's wouldn't be able to legally make any changes to the software. If a program is released with a faulty feature that's hacked, tough! You have no right to go in and change that feature.

Each console's makers have the right to change any feature at any time without user consent in their EULA's. If suddenly the courts rule against EULA's it ties their hands from making any changes to these systems without opening themselves up to litigation.

That's what the drama is about. Quite frankly I don't think this is about the Other OS feature at all, and I don't think the courts will rule against Sony in this matter but I believe it's important that gamers are aware of what's a stake. If these people wanted Linux they'd save the lawyer fees and buy a laptop with the money. People launch frivolous lawsuits against corporations all the time hoping to be paid hush money. That's all this is in my opinion, but those trained seals making noise, clapping and clamoring for Sony's downfall haven't stopped to think what effect this would have on the industry.

That's what the article is about.
working4games  +   2098d ago
This is not as simple as some people see it...
I have a PS3 and love it, but losing the Other OS option was a bit annoying as I actually planned on using it. Even have a copy of Ubuntu Linux on my laptop HDD long before they decided to remove it as proof. I'd love to see if people accuse me of just downloading Linux just to pretend I was going to use it on my PS3. My point is that it's easy for those that never planned on using that feature or had that feature to dismiss it as no big loss. The early adopters took the biggest risk and investment in buying the PS3, so why should we all be punished because of one hacker? I'm pretty sure the majority of people angry at this feature being removed are early adopters (which I am). As if the PS2 or 360 needed an Other OS feature to enable them to be hacked. Sad truth is it's going to happen one way or another eventually. Sony just attempted to take the easy way out in this case instead of putting any work into preventing this from happening with the feature intact.
fallingdove  +   2098d ago
We all aren't being punished. In fact, the vocal minority are the only ones that wanted or were using linux. And guess what, a large percentage of those individuals were either hackers or wanted to hack their PS3. Granted, all hackers aren't bad, but piracy has destroyed the PSP and I kinda like my launch PS3.
working4games  +   2098d ago
I agree that piracy did more or less destroy the interest of developers for games on the PSP. In the case of the next gen consoles on the other hand, the 360 and Wii have both been hacked and pirated on, but both still are doing quite well. Even the DS is doing well despite hacking. Not all programmers like to hack and probably fewer do than most people think.
ReBurn  +   2098d ago
I would argue that most of the people with Linux on their PS3's were not hackers. Most PS3's with Linux were probably in clustered environments for number crunching. It was on mine because I've been a software engineer for a decade and a half and I like to push the hardware. I had Linux on my PS2 as well.

I was in the vocal minority because Sony took away something I used. I was in the minority, but does that mean I have to give up part of what I loved about my PS3? I have since given up and upgraded the firmware. But I certainly didn't like to have to choose between features I wanted. Sony did this one wrong in my eyes.
#21.3 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
ChickeyCantor  +   2097d ago
Lets not forget, future games need the latest updates..
So you were forced on that too.
#21.3.1 (Edited 2097d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
GigaGaia  +   2098d ago
This article is poinless, because it won't end with a ruling against Sony. Sony basicly can't lose here, they were prepared. Beside, it's their right to remove such features.

In fact, the person not in their rights are the one complaining about it. Even though you bought the console, the software in it doesn,t even belong to you.
knightoftears  +   2098d ago
I really don't see the big deal with Sony protecting their product/software. When the Xbox360 and Wii were hacked nobody did crap for the longest time, now Sony attempts to protect their console from the same fate and it's a problem? Why is it imperative to allow Linux on the system? Last time I checked Sony owns the source code to the PS3 so they can do with it as they please. I can't even come close to believing these people who are suing ONLY bought their PS3 to put Linux on it.
Shendow  +   2098d ago
I Like This One
This person point out that 360 has remove things as well, take that people that cry about PS3 losing OS and how 360 has never lost anything or got anything remove.

Anyways he does have a point that it kind of gives people to sue, but people are going to sue no matter what dumb thing it is about. From being fat from eating BK or McD's or what happen in Kansas.

Getting sue for having junk on your stairs an you fell down the stairs and you broke into the house (The guy that broken in won -_-). Its sad because the lady was only in her 80's an she got sued by someone that broke into her house.
Gr81  +   2098d ago
jerethdagryphon  +   2098d ago
last post :( stupid 3 bubbles.



this isnt about a tiny usefull function
nor is it about licensing of software vs owning it outright

its about the larger picture.

sony loses companys will go one of 3 ways.

everyone will pile into cloud computing where NOTHING is on your system and you rent time on a game

b thell take a step back and not bother with future generations and keep stuff as is

or c which is the least disirable

they stealth it,

load game game update found installing,... congratulations your on new firmware

and the'll sneak that into further eluas

hell noone reads them as proved by adding a we own your soul unless you opt out at this website...
nefertis  +   2098d ago
Its geohotz fault for all this happening. None of this would have happen if he wasnt trying too go for the fame.
tiamat5  +   2098d ago
If the idiots read the user agreement they signed, Sony has all the rights to do this. I mean seriously do these idiots really think they have a chance? People seem to think that because Sony is not the top system at the moment, they don't have enough money to hire lawyers to grind their sorry @$$es into powder? They will be lucky if Sony even bothers to pay them the cost of the OS or bothers to give them anything at all. You people are playing with fire. Don't do this.
ReBurn  +   2098d ago
User agreements are not the end-all, be-all of protection for service providers, anyway. I've testified in two cased where ToS and ToC came under fire, one of which the company I worked for lost.

These agreements are not valid if they unfairly infringe upon the rights of the consumer. Even when someone reads and agrees it doesn't mean that they give up their rights. They're especially vulnerable to challenge if they change after a contract has been established. Just saying that you have the right to change a contract at any time doesn't automatically give you that right in the eyes of the law. People who used the feature have rights, and the lawsuits will determine the extent of those rights.

I think the author is blowing this a bit out of proportion. This case won't have a ripple effect. At worst Sony will have to provide people a voucher for a greatest hits game or a free PSN download or something trivial that doesn't really cost them much. Any cash that is awarded will be gobbled up by lawyers. But that's only if they lose.
#29 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
evilmonkey501  +   2098d ago
I think Sony should offer two ps3 types, one for games which run the Sony os and another strictly for supercell computing, which can run any os designed for it.
I cant imagine why this has become such a huge issue. From what Ive read, this doesn't seem to affect a large percentage of people. Sony needs to protect the ps3 from piracy and I'm glad they have.

anyone else having comment posting issues? thos new n4g is being a pain in my
#30 (Edited 2098d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Is it time E3 opened its doors to gamers?

7m ago - MCV: E3 must find a way to incorporate more consumers into the show, say leading games industry... | Culture

Patches and the dreaded “Day One” – Reasons to Be Cheerful

13m ago - Lee Garbutt: "It’s Monday, so you probably need cheering up – So here I am with another Reason to... | PC

Track the Release Date for PlayStation VR

Now - Sony is yet to reveal the exact release date for PlayStation VR. Start tracking it now using | Promoted post

What's so great about Undertale and The Witness?

13m ago - DTOID: It's a secret!, Spoilers. In the last few months, two games were released that I feel mig... | The Witness

PS4/PS3/PS Vita Exclusive Attack on Titan Gets New Video, Hilarious Count-Down Art

13m ago - Just ten days to go until the release in Japan of Attack on Titan for PS4, PS3 and PS Vita, and K... | PS3

Is it about time to revive the WW2 shooter?

13m ago - Apparently so, Battalion 1944. Years ago, World War II shooters were everywhere. Then the bubble... | Call of Duty