Try our new beta!Click here

QuodEratDemonstrandm (User)

  • Contributor
  • 10 bubbles
  • 5 in CRank
  • Score: 31530
"They're in there with their bear. There, I said it. "

Yes Hacking and Stealing ARE the Same Thing.

QuodEratDemonstrandm | 1805d ago
User blog

"It's my hardware. I'll do what I want with it."

"It's no different from modifying a car."

Has anyone else heard any other poor excuses for hacking a PS3?

Let me address the first excuse by simply pointing out that hardware and software are two different things. Yes, you do own your PS3, but you do NOT own the software stored on it. Let me make this clearer. You are an END USER. Sony STILL owns XMB, even after you buy the PS3. You have no ownership of the PS3 software. So, to use the car analogy, you're not modding your car. You're installing a substandard and possibly dangerous engine assembled from stolen schematics by a guy who isn't even authorized to change your cars oil. As for the pirated games, I only have to say one thing. IP stands for INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. All you own is the disc. The code stored on the disc is Sony's property, or Activision's, or EA's, or Ubisoft's, or whoever published the IP.

"Unauthorized copying, reproduction, rental, public performance or broadcast of this game is a vioation of applicable laws." Find one game manual that doesn't have that on the back page. If you own a copy of Killzone 3 that you didn't pay for, or borrow from a friend, you stole it. If you modify the game code, you have infringed not only on the publisher's copyright, but also my right to enjoy a fair game.

So, in short, Sony has every right to ban anyone who uses custom firmware, backup managers, or pirated games. In all honesty, the banhammer is lenience on Sony's part. Sony would be well within their rights to file civil and criminal charges against anyone caught hacking their PS3 software.

Hope this clears things up. Kthnxbai.

-Alpha  +   1805d ago
I'd hack my PS3, I just don't like it when piracy/modifying online games gets involved.

I'd love the ability to play music in all my games if hacking gave me that chance.

I think in a perfect situation if somebody hacked the PS3 with no repercussions to the online community or the gaming industry/developers nobody would care.

I am going to assume everybody has stolen music, movies, and games at one point in their lives.

With that said, if I get banned for hacking my PS3, I have no problem with it and hackers should know what they are getting themselves into.

The only reason I wont hack my PS3 is because of the repercussions of getting banned. But if the PS3 was hacked via the same loophole the iPod was hacked, I'd truthfully hack my PS3 to get any goodies the hackers have. Piracy and online modifying is something I wouldn't dare do.

But I question how many people gameshare, buy used games, etc. It's the same situation, isn't it? You aren't supporting developers in either case, but with piracy it's much easier and much more harmful
#1 (Edited 1805d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(10) | Report | Reply
QuodEratDemonstrandm  +   1804d ago
Buying a used game is a transfer of ownership. If you take MGS4 to GameStop and get a bit of money for it, then I go in and buy it for a little more money (so GameStop gets their profits) no new copy of the game is made. The disc was yours, now it's mine. The same would be true if we were neighbors or something and you sold the game to me directly. If I borrow the game from you then the transfer is only temporary. I'd give it back eventually.

What makes piracy so harmful is new copies of the game being created without the knowledge or consent of the developer or the publisher. If I buy your legitimate copy of Infamous, no new copy is created, and Sucker Punch was already compensated for the copy being sold. If I were to make an illegitimate copy of Infamous and sell you that, then that places a new copy into circulation for which Sucker Punch received no compensation. That is why piracy is harmful, but borrowing or buying used isn't.
Christopher  +   1804d ago
***But I question how many people gameshare, buy used games, etc. It's the same situation, isn't it? You aren't supporting developers in either case, but with piracy it's much easier and much more harmful***

Not until they do what MS does with their OS/Office products, and that is limit software use to a single account and/or console. Or, a limited number of console uses.

The software is considered open-ended in that it can be utilized across any acceptable platform and transferring ownership is not tied to a limitation of a specific digital key being owned by a single user.

There have been discussions on this becoming the future of console games, and it is a troublesome concept. In many ways, publishers want everything to go the digital route for this exact reason, the inability to transfer ownership of digital items.

I do get how you correlate piracy (playing a game without paying the publisher/developer of said game) with renting a game (same thing), but one is at least legal as the games are licensed for rental purposes by the publishers and an agreement is made on their use.

You can bet that if piracy were to become out of hand on the console market, the rental market would be destroyed. The rental companies do not want this and will cooperate however possible with the publishers to ensure the limitation of one's ability to pirate games.
NeloAnjelo  +   1804d ago
Alpha-Male I completely agree with what you said. Thanks for the honesty. Personally I have downloaded music and movies but never a game. I'm not separating the two though as its all the same pirating.

The potential features of a hacked PS3 are great, but I wouldn't pirate a game as I'd genuinely feel bad about it, regardless of the being banned issue. However, I'd be tempted if its getting to experience a game before official release, as I'm a sucker for first play.

Is Game-sharing not supported by Sony though? I thought so. I have two accounts, and I game share my PS plus account with one other person for the free themes and avatars and the early betas. I'll stop that if so.
yesah  +   1804d ago
if he owns the hardware he has the permission to add aditional software that may modify the existing software.

what your saying is like if you bought an engine, but because it was flowing with sony fuel, you couldnt add a little diesal or even get a different mix of fuel.

and even if you disagree with my opinion, thats fine and its just your opinion, but the courts already ruled in the case of the ipod jailbreak, and so it presents a very similar situation, and thus the law is on the side of the ability to modify ps3 software

that being said however pirating games is not legal at all
not the person sending it out, or the person downloading it.

but what geohot did is legal.

even if changing ps3 software means opening the flood gates to piraters, thats just what happens, you cant bend the law to get what you want.

but its kewl
AssassinHD  +   1804d ago
Correction: If you own the hardware you are allowed to put your own software on it as long as your software does not contain any trace of copyright protected code. That is not the case however. The people creating custom firmware are not creating it from scratch. Do you have any idea of how long that would take? They are modifying Sony's firmware. The bulk of the code contained within the custom firmware is actually Sony code.
duplissi  +   1804d ago
you are correct but geohot's download contained ONLY his code that is then added to the official firmware....

why else do you think it was only 5 mb whereas an official one from sony is 170+mb.

edit: geohot's firmware is more of an unnofficial mod than firmware itself
#2.1.1 (Edited 1804d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report
Christopher  +   1804d ago
***but what geohot did is legal.***

Incorrect per current laws.

GeoHot modified and redistributed Sony software. What you are saying is that it is therefore also legal to download any video game, which is software, modify it and then redistribute it in a manner similar to what GeoHot did.

I believe you would find it extremely hard to hold up such a defense in court.
wicko  +   1804d ago
It doesn't really work like that. Think of how patches for games work. Technically, you're modifying software, but do they send you the entire game again, or just the patch data? If they're smart, they'll send only the patch data, as that's much easier to distribute.

Same thing is happening here with firmware, he is not redistributing Sony's firmware, he is distributing a patch to modify it.
Christopher  +   1804d ago
@wicko: Actually, it does work that way. In order to modify the connection to PSN, meaning enabling it in a non-compliant FW, you have to edit Sony IP.

I know he's not distributing the whole package, but the patch he is sending is directly modifying Sony IP. Specifically the code that controls PSN access as well as re-enabling OtherOS.

Heck, just the fact that he changed the ToS text on his distributable item shows that he modified the XML file for managing the ToS data as well, which is a part of Sony IP.

He's not just installing emulators with illegally signed installer keys, he's modifying the code for PSN access.
#2.2.2 (Edited 1804d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report
wicko  +   1803d ago
Okay, but that's not really what I'm arguing. I'm saying that it's not anything like modifying and redistributing a game.

At any rate, modifying code/data for personal use is not illegal at all. Distributing a tool for others to do so as well is not illegal. Otherwise we'd never have mods for games.

Hell, modifying a settings file to add custom resolutions or fix graphical settings is the same thing.

As for modifying code for PSN access.. well that by itself is not illegal, however its use may be. Not sure how the law reacts to unauthorized access to networks.
#2.2.3 (Edited 1803d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Christopher  +   1803d ago
***At any rate, modifying code/data for personal use is not illegal at all.***

Bzzzt! Wrong.

***As for modifying code for PSN access.. well that by itself is not illegal***

Bzzzt! Wrong.


Alteration of someone's IP, whether for personal use or not, is illegal. The problem is that it's nigh impossible to detect... unless you're an idiot and you share these online with others. It is also in the hands of the IP owner as to whether or not they will go after the modder/hacker or not. There have been multiple accounts where publishers have locked down the use of mods for PC games even, as is their right since you are modifying their IP. Most IP holders don't mind the modification of game files for personal use since it actually encourages the chances that others will buy their software and apply the modifications.

The problem here is that the modifications being made to the CFW enable:

1. The installation of unsigned software that can connect to the PSN, which means that Sony has zero control over prohibiting harmful software from being installed and affecting those on PSN. Sony has every right to prevent CFW tools from utilizing PSN as it is their duty to protect the privacy and ability for other users to utilize their hardware/software as intended without fear of corruption and stolen information.

2. Has already shown signs of leading to piracy, which is far from the ability to create mods of a game. Even on the PC this distinction is made considering "cracks" are not distributions of the full software packages but the same type of patches utilized by GeoHot to enable the illegal use of something on someone else's IP. For PC pirates, it's the ability to use the game illegally, for the PS3 it's the ability to use the PSN outside of the terms dictated by Sony.
wicko  +   1803d ago
Sorry but wrong. Just like you can legally rip a CD and store it on your ipod, which is exactly modifying someone's IP for personal use, as you'd be modifying bitrate and adding metadata, etc. you can do the same for software. It may be against ToS, but ToS != law.

And you missed my argument again: Modifying the actual code is fine, using it may not be. You can do whatever you want in code, nobody can do anything to stop you, UNLESS you run it.

And just because it may lead to piracy, does not make it illegal. Torrents may lead to piracy, in fact you could easily argue that piracy is it's most popular usage, but there are still legal ways to use it, like Blizzard's patch distribution, or Linux iso distributions.

Of course, all this depends on the country. Here in Canada, doing all this is perfectly legal, and I believe it is partially legal in the US (distribution of tools may not be) according to DMCA.

To be honest, this is very gray area stuff.. if you own the disk, you may not own the IP.. but you definitely own the data on the disk, which you can modify in any way you want for personal use. Developers may have prevented people from distributing mods (though I've yet to see such an example) but they can't stop you from modifying your own copy. However if you are circumventing security to access networks.. that's a different story. To be honest, I don't believe the law has caught up with this kind of behaviour.
#2.2.5 (Edited 1803d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
Christopher  +   1803d ago
***Just like you can legally rip a CD and store it on your ipod, which is exactly modifying someone's IP for personal use, as you'd be modifying bitrate and adding metadata, etc. you can do the same for software. It may be against ToS, but ToS != law.***

Technically, this is also illegal. At least in regards to the U.S. law. The problem is that catching someone doing this who also doesn't distribute them online is impossible.

You see, there's a huge difference between illegal and enforceable. The illegality is still there, but they are unable to enforce said law up until you begin distributing the modifications in a manner that can be tracked.

***Modifying the actual code is fine, using it may not be.***

Again, you are wrong. Modifying code is, per the law, illegal. The question here is enforceability. As I've said a hundred times before, GeoHot and others would not be in the situation they are if they hadn't distributed the modified code. But, guess what, they perform the illegal act, and on top of that distribute it. It's like a robber who steals without any witnesses and then stops to write a letter to the people he just robbed from a note on how he did it and his name and address.

***And just because it may lead to piracy, does not make it illegal.***

I've never said it was illegal because it lead to piracy. Modification of someone else's IP without their expressed permission is by all accounts illegal.

***if you own the disk, you may not own the IP.. but you definitely own the data on the disk, which you can modify in any way you want for personal use.***

You can, but it would still be illegal. Even in Canada you do not own the code/software. You are granted a license to use said code. Whether it's through a license key for using Microsoft Office or OS or an open-ended license that gives you the right to resell said software similar to video games.

Yes, you CAN edit the code, but that doesn't make it legal. I CAN own and modify a gun to make it illegal for use on the streets. But, if someone of authority finds that I made such a modification to the gun, I can and most likely will go to jail.

So, what GeoHot and others did was confirm their illegal activities by promoting them on the Web as well as distributing them. If GeoHot had only said that he modified the code and never shared how he did it, Sony even then more than likely wouldn't have done anything. As soon as he began distributing the modification, then they took him to court for the illegal modification as well as intent to distribute said modification globally.

Canadian law is almost an exact copy of the U.S. law. Their recent legislations on amending the Copyright Act specifically states that they hold up the rights of an individual to make a back-up copy of their music, but not if it means having to bypass a digital lock on the content.

And, specific to software: "An exemption from copyright infringement for using pre-existing works to create new works, defined as “user-generated content”. This exemption is only available, however, if the use of the copyrighted work is done solely for non-commercial purposes, ---> does not have a substantial adverse effect (financial or otherwise) on the exploitation of the existing work (including that the new work isn’t a substitute for the existing one) <---, and a requirement (if it is reasonable in the circumstances) to mention the sources of the works incorporated in the new work."
darkpower  +   1804d ago
Your problem in this blog is that you're giving one answer to several things about the issue where there could be different answers for each element of it.

For one, if we didn't have hackers, your identity would already out there. In fact, hackers are the reason why many things on the internet are as safe as they are now. People hire them to find holes in their software or hardware that could be damaging, and then, when found, they can fix it. No one has stolen anything in this case, yet, by your logic, companies should never hire hackers because they have already stolen from them before they even get hired.

Second, let's look at your argument about modifying developer's code. That's somewhat of a game by game basis, actually. Especially on the PC. Companies like Valve and Blizzard release dev kits for modders to make additional content for their games, or things that could make your life in the game easier. In Blizzard's case, as long as it doesn't automate an action or movement, it's allowed. For example, you can make it so you can import where mining nodes are and have them be marked on your map in WoW. That's allowed. What isn't is you being able to go to one of those nodes and mine from it without any interaction from you. If anyone wants to question this, please do research before doing so, because I'm not going to entertain the circle jerk I keep getting on this. EA allows people to add their own objects to The Sims and Simcity.

Basically, on the PC, it's up to the developers to determine what they allow its users to do (and because of this, we get some pretty badass stuff). However, in THIS case, the person making the console is determining what you can and cannot do, not the developer as it should be.

Also, if you notice, the majority of what you said about the PS3 you could just as easily apply to smartphones. I remember reading an article recently, written before the DMCA was changed, that talked about jailbroken iPhones and how those hacked phones could lead to the pirating of apps. Of course, it was soon made legal, but the article seemed to be firmly against it (even bringing out a skewed poll to prove their point). The code for the interface of the iPhone belongs to Apple, yet, it was made legal to be able to tinker with that. Does that mean that stealing was then made legal? Of course not. But again, by your logic, it did.

Like I said, you gave a blanket answer to something that requires a LOT more examination than you gave it.
QuodEratDemonstrandm  +   1804d ago
Let's no..... no..... no you haven't told me anything new.

First response: The difference between getting hired and getting crushed by a software company is what you do with the security hole once you've found it. If you tell the company about the hole, they might hire you to patch it, especially if you already know how. However, if you exploit the hole, or make it public for others to exploit, then you're painting a big bulls-eye on your back.

Second: If I read this right, it's similar, but not necessarily identical, to the level creator in LBP and Mod-nation Racers. If a software developer offers an official dev kit for one of its games, then they are giving permission to modify the game. This is wildly different from breaking into the game code and changing it without anyone's knowledge or consent.

Finally: The PS3 wasn't exempted from the DMCA like the iPhone was. Therefore.... it's still illegal.

I must have confused this issue by using "hacking" instead of "pirating." My mistake, I'll try to do better.
darkpower  +   1804d ago
"First response: The difference between getting hired and getting crushed by a software company is what you do with the security hole once you've found it."

Which is exactly what is being argued in the Sony v. Hotz suit (which I think Sony needs to grow up). Sony is saying that they want their system completely closed. I believe that their mentality is that they never did want homebrew on ANY of their systems, and their past actions both here and on the PSP exemplify that. Geohot is claiming that, as long as your intention is legal, then you should be allowed to jailbreak the hardware. The releasing of the rootkeys is the elephant in the room, I'll give you that, but it seems to be something that was created because of the cat and mouse game that happened before it. Things have been because Sony never wants to negotiate and are always ready to litigate...and they never seem to give up their fight. Thing is, they need to be smarter about this. I'm not saying that Hotz is going to win the case entirely. However, I'm saying that Sony has to give up the ghost on a few of their claims.

"Finally: The PS3 wasn't exempted from the DMCA like the iPhone was. Therefore.... it's still illegal. "

One of the questions that's being brought up is WHY wasn't it exempted! You can say that it could be because of the greater risk of piracy and that involved in it, but that's just putting all your eggs into one basket. There's no avoiding the issue: that question IS going to be asked, and there will be no easy answer.

Of course, the chances of any of this getting through to the many on N4G that need to take off the fanboy glasses for five seconds? Slim to none!
kasasensei  +   1804d ago
Another whining of a ps3 fanboy.
QuodEratDemonstrandm  +   1804d ago
I used the PS3 as an example because that's the system I own and that's the system I'm familiar with the software for. Copyright law applies to the 360 as well. And the PC. And all the handhelds.
RyuCloudStrife  +   1804d ago
Don't speak sense to these guys.. Sony will get their way in court and shut every hater up(period!!)
Jezuz  +   1803d ago
If i hack my PSP but don't pirate games. Is that considered stealing?
kasasensei  +   1803d ago
You do what you want buddy. :)
I do not hack my psp because it's doing all i want from it with an official fw. Playing games and listening webradio.
Same goes for the ps3, i enjoy all the features already available. So i'm not planning to hack it.
People on N4G need to stop whining for "the ps3 getting hacked", it's like that since ages, every console or game get the treatment. All the whining and all the tears can do nothing about that. There were not so many tears when the 360 got hacked, and still not today.
Enjoy your games, PAY them if you want the creators to stay in business, making games you like, it's simple. But keep in mind hacking is not stealing every time. That's not because I am pleased with all the basics features of the ps3 that everyone feels the same. Some people want more features and some others just want free games. Deal with it guys, you can't do nothing about it except continue to support the companies you love/like.
Raven_Nomad  +   1804d ago
Please report to the Butthurt report ASAP!
bwazy  +   1804d ago
So, is GEOHOT taking it up the ass yet?

Source when you get that info.
bwazy  +   1804d ago
The only thing that caught my eye was,

"If you own a copy of Killzone 3 that you didn't pay for, or borrow from a friend, you stole it. "

So if my friend lends me his Bulletstorm... I've stolen it. I'll just assume that your actual point didn't come across when you wrote it down.
Kon  +   1804d ago
lol So basically when you rent a game you're stealing too. Strange logic.
sjaakiejj  +   1803d ago
You misread that one. It says that "if you own a copy of Killzone 3 that you haven't paid for, you stole it; Except for the situation in which you've borrowed the copy of a friend"

Though strictly speaking, borrowing software from friends isn't legal either. It's not classified as stealing either though.
NeloAnjelo  +   1803d ago
Guys i think an important point is missed here. Its the distributing and publishing of the Code that got GeoHot in trouble. His original Jailbreak didn't land him in trouble.

Now I'll be honest here... I dont like the guy. Regarless of what console. I think he likes the media attention too much, and he playing the underdog and rebel with a cause. Sony doesn't want to bankrupt the guy. Well at least they haven't filed for any damages we know of. They just want him and other Hackers to stop sharing how to hack their system, and give up any tools and information they used to do so.

With that said, why do you think Fail0verflow has been so quiet? They haven't updated their Twitter in months. These guys know the law, and are the real hackers who discovered the route key... NOT GeoHot. He's just in the spotlight (which he craves) and is being sued for the posting it on his blog for the world to see.

Forget the hardware/software argument. Think of it as simple as me having the skills to take everyday tech and household chemicals and making a bomb. I'm talented right? However, if I show others how to do so, and I give them the know how, then that is wrong. I may not have harmed anyone, but I'm giving them the tools and knowledge to do so.

Anyways that is my opinion on the whole thing. You may own your PC and can modify that PC, but copying the software is still breaking the Law. The fact remains that Sony's ROUTE KEY is what has made this all possible. This key is used in all of Sony's games and Software. How the courts see this will be another issue.
#8 (Edited 1803d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
bobrea  +   1803d ago
lol he mad

I haven't even hacked my PS3, but I'm not sitting here bitching about what other people do to theirs. I couldn't give a shit if I was the only person in the world without a hacked PS3, it's a fucking video game console, not weapons technology. It's not like the average consumer (ESPECIALLY console-only owners) are going to be hacking a PS3, it's not as simple as a few button clicks, and anything other than that goes over the average person's head.
Xander756  +   1803d ago
Great blog post man! Hackers and pirates are ruining gaming:
WitWolfy  +   1803d ago
its usually the most pirated console that sells the best... Im looking at you Wii
zeal0us  +   1802d ago
regardless of how you try to simplify it ppl will tend to think otherwise. Ppl will continue to think "Hey its mines and I can do whatever I want with it"

technically speaking ppl hack/modify(not talking about serial key generating) windows7/xp/vista does that they are wrong? Yes making windows boot faster by this article standard is hacking. So MS have the right to deactivate my copy of windows?
fullmetal297  +   1802d ago
Don't try and get hacking and pirating mixed with each other. Custom firmware allows a user to run unsigned codes, or user-created applications I.E homebrew. This means I can write make a program such as maybe calculator app and run it on my PS3 without any clearance from Sony. Thats what Geohot wanted and even said himself that he made this exploit specifically to run unsigned codes and avoid any form of piracy.
fullmetal297  +   1802d ago
I've been reading articles like these and I'm getting sick and tired people forcing the though of piracy and hacking become synonymous with each other. There is many reasons for hacking a console. Hacking to run unsigned codes relates to HOMEBREW while hacking to run games you don't own is PIRACY. Get that inside your head. The whole purpose of custom firmware is running user-created programs. USER-CREATED CONTENT.
Emilio_Estevez  +   1800d ago
Where is this user created content? All I see are pointless programs, PSN work-a-rounds, and BACKUP MANAGERS(PIRACY PROGRAMS). User created content only makes sense if their are good programs. Right now their is thievery and emulators. I'll pass and play emu's on my PC if I want to play an outdated game on my HD gaming machine. Geo said he didn't want piracy, yet he released the tools for someone to go ahead and make a program for it. Weird.
ZombieNinjaPanda  +   1801d ago
I can't believe I missed this.

They're not the same, You can try to come up with any argument you want, but hacking does not equal stealing at all. You are in no way taking an object away from someone.


Add comment

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