Sections

Class action: SCEA removed PS3 Other OS to save money

Thursday, 24th March 2011 21:48 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

An class action complaint filed against SCEA this month has been amended, with the claim that Sony removed the Other OS feature from PS3 in order to save money, not to protect the integrity of the system’s security.

According to the amended complaint, Sony fabricated its reason for the removal so it could claim that its Warranty and Terms of Service allowed for the feature’s removal.

Per the amendment: “In reality, SCEI and SCEA removed this feature because it was expensive to maintain (as they previously admitted when the feature was removed from the “slim” models – but which they conveniently removed from SCEA’s website); they were losing money on every PS3 unit sold (due to poor decisions in the planning and design of the Cell chip as noted above and given the PS3′s extra features); SCEA needed to promote and sell games to make their money back on the loss-leading PS3 consoles (and there was no profit in users utilizing the computer functions of the PS3); and IBM wanted to sell its expensive servers utilizing the Cell processor (users could cluster PS3s for the same purposes much less expensively).”

The updated complaint challenges that it is “virtually impossible” to use Other OS for piracy, because in order for a hacker to pirate a game, it is “necessary to perfectly emulate the operating system for which the game is designed, including the API, which is the interface for the game OS that supports all of the features of a game.”

The filing states that when Other OS is used, API and other hardware features are blocked, including PS3′s graphics chip, thus making it “impossible to run a pirated game on the Other OS.”

“Since January 2011 Sony had yet to identify a single instance in which someone used the Other OS to pirate protected content,” reads the filing.

“Sony’s actions are like a car manufacturer telling a buyer that it is going to remove the engine because it does not want to service the part anymore and then telling the consumer, ‘tough luck, we are not going to give you a refund,’” said co-lead counsel James Pizzirusso, head of Hausfeld LLP’s Consumer Protection Practice Group.

“This type of activity is exactly what our country’s consumer protection laws were designed to protect against.”

The suit, filed in April last year originally by Anthony Ventura, Jonathan Huber, Jason Baker, and Elton Stovell, had all but one claim dismissed with the presiding judge only allowing the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claim to remain in tact. This was due to Sony being unable to show that removal of Other OS through firmware update 3.21 was authorized.

SCEA has until March 28 to issue a response.

You can find a copy of the amended complaint through the link up top.

Thanks, IGN.

Latest

96 Comments

  1. pukem0n

    so sony is a bunch of greedy people that hate their customers.
    what else is new?

    #1 3 years ago
  2. Lehnsherr

    @1 Pretty much.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Alakratt

    …and MS are a bunch of saints that are here on earth just for the sole purpose of making you happy? Dude, they’re a corporation, all of them are greedy to an extent.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Crysis

    That doesn’t explain why Sony removed it from the phat model, would explain the slim model but that was never advertised to have Other OS.
    The only 2 reasons that I can think of why Sony removed it was either IBM threatened of offered a deal with them to do so or that hackers such as GeoHot who successfully managed to access closed off hardware like the GPU scared Sony into action.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. abklin

    ( http://www.voguecatch.us )
    Online Store,Get Name Brand Fashion From 12USD Now!

    Lv,Gucci,Prada,Coach,Chanel Women sandal is $30

    DG,JUICY,Lv,Gucci,Coach Hand-bag price is $35

    Polo,Locaste,Levis,EdHardy,Bape,Christan Audigier AF,COOGI Tshirt price is $12
    ( http://www.voguecatch.us )

    Jeans price is $34

    Paypal accept,Door to Door services!
    5 days arrive your home or you
    ( http://www.voguecatch.us )
    ur friends’ adress by EMS,DHL,UPs
    click my link under here!
    @#$%^&*(@#$%^&*&^%$#@#$%^&

    #5 3 years ago
  6. TheWulf

    And this is why I’m predominantly a PC owner. It’s an open platform and it always will be, and I can’t have some uninformed suit deciding what I can or cannot do with it at any given time. Which is precisely what happened here. The only real irritation with this is that the PS3 makes for a nice, cheap server. (And one that can only improve now, thanks to the hackers, who continue to do Sony favours that Sony fail to recognise.)

    Also, that’s really nonsense, Crysis. Firmware like that is version independent (‘phat’ or ‘slim’). The firmware they roll out for the older models is the same as the newer models, because the core hardware is the same. Therefore, to continue supporting something for the older models, they might as well do so for the newer ones too, since it’s the same bloody firmware. They pulled that feature to save on firmware dev costs.

    This is what rose the ire of people who had every right to want to keep the feature that was advertised at point of sale, as a feature of the product they bought. It’s not a service, that, it’s a product. So Sony can’t legally pull something like that. This had nothing to do with hackers or IBM, this was all about Sony saving money. And in doing so, they invited the ire of hackers who felt that their rights were violated. Sony did a poor rocket jump there, shooting at their own feet and all.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – the only people who’ve ever hurt Sony are Sony. There has been a bad string of management decisions in regards to the PS3, and I hope whomever is responsible for them is fired so that SCEA can find their pride again.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. lexph3re

    @1,2,and 3 you guys are funny. Did you even read the article? This didn’t say sony admitted to it. It states that they have to give a reason why they removed it. That every bullshit accusation that was originally protested was dismissed but this one. And that they have until the 28th to respond to said accusation. You guys are clearly just hating

    #7 3 years ago
  8. Cygnar

    It’s an accusation. They always sound damning if you assume they are true. #7 has his head on straight. Let’s get some facts before we judge one way or the other. Otherwise, “the fearmongerers win,” to take words from Mr. Hotz’ mouth.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. aprotosis

    #3 is why we can’t have nice things. This isn’t some odd zero-sum game of ethics accusations. Just because someone insulted Sony or MS doesn’t mean you automatically have to lodge the same complaint against their competitor in order to prevent some weird butt-hurt feelings.

    This would be like someone lobbing an insult against ExxonMobil for an oil spill or somesuch and thinking a legitimate defense would be that Royal Dutch Shell also spilt oil.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. Ireland Michael

    Just out of curiosity, can anyone actually quote specifically where in US law it states that a company does not have a right to remove features of its software when she user agrees to update it of their own free will?

    I mean, you did have to agree to update the firmware of your own free will. If you wanted to maintain the feature, you had the option of declining the firmware update.NO

    “Sony’s actions are like a car manufacturer telling a buyer that it is going to remove the engine because it does not want to service the part anymore and then telling the consumer, ‘tough luck, we are not going to give you a breakrefund,’

    No it isn’t. It isn’t anything like that at all. Its actually more like this:

    “Sony’s actions are like a car manufacturer offering you completely free new parts for your car. Some of the parts are better and more reliable in most areas, but it might not be able to do everything your old car did, such as not be able to support a media player on your radio. You, as the consumer, can accept or refuse this offer, but we can’t guard all your old parts will be supported in the future, as we have simply choosen to discontinue them.”

    #10 3 years ago
  11. Cygnar

    #10: The only thing regarding that right is the EULA–the one by which every PSN user agreed that Sony can remove features like Other OS at its own discretion. If these supposed consumer rights are so important, why are consumers giving them away without batting an eye?

    This kind of decadent thinking–this feeling of entitlement–is all too common. We sign away our rights and are surprised when companies act like we signed them away. We want protection from the law, but we are not willing to pay for it, act for it, or even speak for it until after we let others take advantage of us. We want the rights, but we can’t stand the idea of taking on responsibility for them.

    Why don’t people grow up and realize that we need to assert our rights before we sign them away? We can’t have it both ways.

    #11 3 years ago
  12. theevilaires

    Cygnar you’re trying to explain things to inferior species of humans here called euros. They don’t get it and never will thats why #10 comes from a country that is poorer than somalia. What are you on your lunch break from mopping floors O’Connor. Your constant trolling during the day was not missed. Do us all a favor and stay on the grave yard shift as we all get our rest.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. aprotosis

    I am not a lawyer, but I think they are trying to sue for false advertising coming from Sony employing a “bait and switch” tactic. In other words, you advertise to sell one product (the bait) but then replace or exchange it with a different product. (the switch) Normally this happens at the retail shelf itself, but with digital media there is the interesting instance of being able to “enter your home” and switch your product.

    And you can’t site that it is a “choice” to install the update, since it is really a Hobson’s Choice. In other words, you have a choice between one option and no other viable option. This is because if you elect to not update the PS3, you can no longer use its core features. Your choice is between having a PS3 or a hobbled computer. Another famous example is when Henry Ford said that you can have a Model-T in any color, as long as it’s black.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. Ireland Michael

    @11 Because that would require effort.

    @12. Nobody cares about your juvenile ranting, TEA.

    You’re like that annoying kid in school who always kept trying to be the centre of attention, but could never take a hint.

    @13 It’s not a bait and switch in the slightest. The feature is available in the hardware you purchased. When you choose to update the firmware, that is a choice you made.

    Your right to use PSN is a service, not a property. It is not part of the cost of your machine. They have every legal right to deny you access to it if you don’t update the software.

    You want Other OS? Don’t update the firmware. It’s that simple.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. aprotosis

    @14 It is not enough to say you are just losing the “PSN Service”. By not being able to update the firmware, you lose access to: PSN specific features like voice chat, any game features that require PSN, the ability to play games or blu-ray discs that require features added after the 3.21 udate, the ability to play games and blu-ray discs that automatically install the update, the playback of DRM’d videos, the playback of copyrighted videos stored on an external media server, the abilty to re-download legitimately purchased digital games and you lose access to any future features provided by future updates.

    This is why it is referred to as a Hobson’s Choice. You say they have every legal right to deny you access, but that isn’t actually true. Sony cannot arbitrarily create a new class to refuse service of a pre-advertised and sold product. This would be like if they suddenly said that people with the name “Dave” no longer get access to the PSN; only instead of “Dave”, the new class they created is “People who want to use a collateral service”.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. Kerplunk

    @8 “Otherwise, “the fearmongerers win,” to take words from Mr. Hotz’ mouth.”

    Nicely put. Apostrophe and everything.

    @11 Again, perfectly sound reasoning and plainly stated. Total agreement and admiration.

    Tell me, where might I read more of your fine work?

    #16 3 years ago
  17. Rosseu

    “the ability to play games or blu-ray discs that require features added after the 3.21 update” this. sure people would want the otherOS but I’m sure they bought the ps3 to play games. So if people want otherOS, they’re stuck playing old ps3 games? wow.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. xino

    lies..all lies!

    Sony are such a bully!
    Constantly lying to the court and using excuses to gain the upper hand while Hotz is doing nothing but telling the truth!

    Justice SHALL prevail and Sony will lose this court case!

    How can you remove the OtherOS to save money!?
    when was the last time they updated the OtherOS? oh yea never!

    I can understand they removed the OtherOS from the ps3 slim to save money which is obvious because the price was also lowered.
    But removing the OtherOS from older ps3 would not save money!

    I wish Hotz lawyers copied all text Sony words from their blog and use it as evidence! Because Sony said they were removing the OtherOS for security adjustment. Now they are lying and the court would buy their lie.

    @wulf
    in pc, you are not allowed to run ghost drives.

    #18 3 years ago
  19. Kalain

    Sony are being sued for this reason in Norway and Sweden, because it is illegal to remove a selling point from an item without compenstation to the buyer.

    Here in the UK companies can get away with it because of our stupid laws. If they did it within 6 months, then we can get a full refund and keep the item in question, after that they don’t have to do anything and remove what they want at will.

    @xino

    Ghost drives? You mean something that has been ghosted via Symantec/Norton Ghost, Drive Image and other such pieces of legal software? Or another type of Ghost Drive like a VDrive which points to a directory and assigns it a drive letter? In all my years of working on PCs and Servers we have used these pieces of software without anyone asking us why we are using them.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. NightCrawler1970

    #18, U got that right, now what? Does Sony gonna put back the Other OS, because they lied to costumers with a BS as “security reason”…

    Other OS they put it in before they hits the market, no wonder student are pissed, a $599,- system that play games, and installing “linux” a nice cheap computer, where else you can buy… even you can install “windows 7″ im pretty sure it will run, if you make partitions on the HDD…

    #20 3 years ago
  21. Crysis

    I’ve been reading George’s Blog & can confirm that he has good intentions, but despite this geniuses intentions, he’s clearly too arrogant to understand digital rights & the differences between services & products & why Sony wanted a closed system. Corporations have rights too & without them we would probably be in disarray because they wouldn’t be able to move forward technologically while being commercially successful.

    In saying all this, I hope George & Sony settle somewhere in the middle, this kid doesn’t deserve to have his life ruined.

    #21 3 years ago
  22. Crysis

    @20 & 18, Can you prove where Sony lied about the removal of Linux? These are just accusations with very little merit behind them.

    #22 3 years ago
  23. xino

    @20
    either bring back the OtherOS, give us back our farking money or compensate us.

    Sony chose none and think they can do what ever the hell they want.
    Installing linux isn’t just the only thing you can do on OtherOS, you can do various things and more than emulators. Such as using mozilla firefox. At least FF is better than the XMB browser:/

    #23 3 years ago
  24. Kerplunk

    @23 “Sony chose none and think they can do what ever the hell they want.”

    And people accepted an agreement allowing them to do that in advance.

    #24 3 years ago
  25. NightCrawler1970

    @23, im not a student btw, but i understand to be as a student, for $599,- wich i paid for(motorstorm package), it’s a nice game-console, and if you’re a computer-geek, you should install Linux or Windows XP or Windows 7, forget Vista it’s a waste, you should have a killer-machine to print, work, game all in 1 system, i don’t see why Sony removed “other OS feature”, even what they called “security breach” or other BS whatever have in there mind, but now they have “geoHotz” on there @ss, and they will make Sony life living hell, with there magic stick…

    I also understand Sony, want to protect there system, of “home-brew” or modifying anything on PS3 is wrong, but i think Homebrew is in every console, not only on PS3….

    #25 3 years ago
  26. OlderGamer

    @TheWulf

    Nice to read your post. You pretty much got it all right.

    I wonder how or if something like this is going to impact the Hotz case.

    #26 3 years ago
  27. ManuOtaku

    I will say it again, sony was the first part to broke the original terms of agreement as soon as they took the Other S option from the phat PS3. plain and simple, they made a mistake and the consumers paid for it.

    “they were losing money on every PS3 unit sold (due to poor decisions in the planning and design of the Cell chip as noted above and given the PS3′s extra features)”

    Thats what i been stating before, that sony as a big corporation did a poor decision when they were planning the PS3, i mean a terrible job, all the deparments at sony and his investors approved it gave it the go ahead, and thats unaceptable for a big company like this, therefore the consumers paid for that mistake, because the cost of this application was part of the total price, that the consumers paid, and didnt received any compensation whatsoever, pretty much and act of thievery.

    #27 3 years ago
  28. ManuOtaku

    TheWulf and oldergamer, + one, nice read, and i agree completly.

    #28 3 years ago
  29. Kerplunk

    @27 – But if the AGREEMENT that people have AGREED to is in place then that’s pretty much it. You’ve already declared your consent allowing them to do this.

    Don’t AGREE to it? Then don’t agree to it!
    Didn’t read the AGREEMENT? Then don’t agree to it!

    The amount of effort and reasoning going into people’s arguments all to overlook this pretty crucial point and paint themselves the victim is becoming tragic.

    Stop agreeing to stuff one day and then complaining about what you agreed to the next!

    #29 3 years ago
  30. xino

    @24
    what terms? didn’t Sony advertise PSN as part of the ps experience?
    if I don’t accept the terms how the hell would I continue to experience the PSN?

    Please use logic!

    #30 3 years ago
  31. Ireland Michael

    @30 We are using logic.

    Goods and services are two very different things, and different laws apply to them.

    When you use a service, you are signing a binding contract, and a company has every single right to deny you that service if you don’t accept it.

    You paid for the console (goods) when you bought it in the store, not for access to PSN (services).

    #31 3 years ago
  32. Kerplunk

    @30 Logic like this?:

    Justice SHALL prevail and Sony will lose this court case!

    How can you remove the OtherOS to save money!?
    when was the last time they updated the OtherOS? oh yea never!

    ;)

    “if I don’t accept the terms how the hell would I continue to experience the PSN?”

    Please tell me that was a rhetorical question. Please.

    #32 3 years ago
  33. ManuOtaku

    #29 i meant what is in the box, the features that came with the product, and for what i did paid for, thats and agreement, with all the things put in the booklets on the box too and in sonys website, so iam not contradicting myself i only stating that sony threw the first stone, and now they act like victims, because someone acted like them, come on

    www playstation com/ps3-openplatform/

    There is more to the PLAYSTATION®3 (PS3™) computer entertainment system than you may have assumed. 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.

    #33 3 years ago
  34. Ireland Michael

    @33 Yes, it is. And the firmware on the machine had the feature.

    Should you choose to update the software, you are now making use of a service, and you are making an agreement regarding the nature of that service when doing so.

    The removal of the feature was expressly stated before you selected the AGREE option.

    And why do you keep linking that? It says this at the very top of the page:

    “The Open Platform feature is not available on CECH-2000 series or later models of the PS3™ system.

    On PS3™ system models sold earlier than the CECH-2000 series models, the Open Platform feature will not be available if the system software is updated to version 3.21 or later.

    It seems to me that people just want an excuse to hate on Sony.

    #34 3 years ago
  35. Kerplunk

    Mate, you’re making broad generalisations about a very specific thing. “What about my agreement!!?”. You want to be vague and general when it serves your side of the argument but very precise and specific when you’re taking the other side to task. Shit don’t work like that bro’. We’ve been here before. It’s clear that the argument you’re passionately arguing about is one you have still failed/refused to grasp at its most fundamental level.

    #35 3 years ago
  36. ManuOtaku

    #34, because that is what it saids till the other s removal, and that is what is bound to the purchase of the fat models

    #36 3 years ago
  37. ManuOtaku

    #35 that is not for me or for you to say, as you i expresing my opinions, eventually the people that read this site, will make their own opinions based on them,thats what i been stating the way i did, in order to have two sides of the same coin, if ups to the readers to decide ,not me nor you mate
    Have a great day and nice weekend ok.

    #37 3 years ago
  38. Ireland Michael

    @36 And it is a feature, in box, in the phat model, and you have every right to it.

    Until you make use of the PSN service, in which case you are bound by their EULA if you want to make us of it.

    Again, people are just looking for an excuse to hate on Sony. I highly doubt any of you (though I’m sure there’ll probably be at least one exception) had any interest or use for this feature.

    #38 3 years ago
  39. Crysis

    “It seems to me that people just want an excuse to hate on Sony.”
    ^^The truth^^

    #39 3 years ago
  40. ManuOtaku

    #38 and thats my friend was pretty much the act of theavery, they downgraded a device, that was not part of the original agreement that came with the box, is an after event in order to take a benefit from the consumers, one i didnt receive a compensation whatsoever. so is wrong on all levels.

    #40 3 years ago
  41. Gekidami

    @38
    Yep. You buy the console, but Sony is just letting you use THEIR online service. You have no rights to PSN, no matter how much you paid for the PS3 itself. Same goes for any online system, MS are perfectly capable of banning you from LIVE for whatever reasons they see fit, as are Valve with STEAM.

    People really dont seem to understand this, they honestly think they own PSN too because they own the console. Wrong. If you want to use features Sony doesnt approve of anymore or atall, you dont have the right to access their services anymore. SImple as.

    #41 3 years ago
  42. Crysis

    It would be a bitch if you were relatively short on cash & the single reason that you bought the PS3 over a cheap computer or 360/Wii was because of it’s Gaming & Linux capability, then again I believe that the PS2 could use Linux too with some add-on or something.

    #42 3 years ago
  43. ManuOtaku

    #41 i see it too, but i see it also as a tool in order to take away a benefit, they know quite well that you cannot keep both applications with their oline service, it was a tool implemented in order to erase the original terms and agreements at the moment of the purchase, a one that came with the product and were advertised like that.

    P.D By the way, sony did put the other s on the ps3, not me, they took it and i was not compensated by this, this application form part of the total cost of the product, that i did paid full price, not without it, why is so hard to understand that

    #43 3 years ago
  44. Ireland Michael

    @40 Yes, I guess it is thievery…

    …if thievery consisted of someone walking up to you and politely ask “Hey, I’d like to take something from you, but I need you to sign this form here first, to allow me to do so. If you dont sign this, I won’t take it.”

    Good lord.

    The only way this could have been constituted as thievery is if they removed the feature without saying so. IT WAS STATED IN PLAIN SIGHT DURING THE FIRWARE UPDATE!

    #44 3 years ago
  45. furby

    Sony sent their evil flying monkeys into my gaff at night and they did a firmware update when I was sleeping.

    It’s not so bad, but those monkeys shit all over my Xbox too. :(

    #45 3 years ago
  46. Ireland Michael

    @42 It’s stated as a feature in any device whose installed firmware still possesses it.

    It is not advertised as a feature in later units.

    If someone bought a PS3 for Linux (which is perfectly legit) they should already know this. The would also be informed before updating the PS3′s software that this feature will be removed.

    #46 3 years ago
  47. OlderGamer

    Putting this over here too, for the sake of not having to follow two threads on basicly the same subject.

    I am also getting burnt out chatting about it. Some of you folks are about as sensible as a brick wall. And don’t listen as well, mind you lol. Kerplunk, imo your just about griefing. Not that it is a problem, I am sure you and a few others on your side of the sistuation would say the same about me. So live and let live I guess.

    In the end we can all toss in our two cents, but it is up to the courts to rule on. My fear is that big money(Sony) often influence the courts outcome. I hope not.

    Anyways my copied post from the other thread.

    @Kerplunk

    Nice try.

    But what may sound reasonable to one person is utter BS to someone else. Each territory has a different interpretation of rights and the laws surrounding them. That is one thing that makes this discussion tough in this site. So many folks from so many different places.

    At the crux of this is Sony claiming they can do whatever they want for whatever reasons they want. And the other side claiming that the EUA goes too far. Companies rights vs. consumers rights.

    That’s the challenge. The courts of each territory will ultimately decide.

    There are many cases where established laws have grown outdated and have been challenged and then amended. From conduct of biz to consumer protection.

    Sure people will have different povs.

    I am not for Sony in this one(wouldn’t be in favor of MS either if that were the case). I see this as a greedy move. A move to retain control. And one that steps on people’s rights. That’s my pov.

    Also the idea that someone can just not click agree is asinine. The person buys the thing, brings it home, unpacks it … what are the chances that said person isn’t interested in using it? Why do you figure the EUA are always tiny print? Always long? Always use collage level vocab? Always filled with confusing wording? And almost always displayed just before all you have to do is click to use the thing you bought, brought home, and unpacked?

    Its psychology. Designed for the average person to simply click past it. Tell me you read all the EUAs? For your Phone, websites, games, music, movies, marketplaces, etc etc? No one does. That’s why they do it in the fashion they do.

    If said consumer looking to buy the PS3 for use of the OS, was told before purchase that Sony CAN remove that feature would they still buy it? Prolly, because they would reason that if the feature was currently in there, Sony would intend for it be used. Sony wouldn’t intend to remove it.

    However if Sony told said consumer that they intended to remove the other OS to cut costs in a few months … would Sony still make a sale? No. And that is why people feel deceived.

    It isn’t because they deserve it for not reading the EUA. That is stupid.

    Let’s say said consumer did read the EUA, and decided that they didn’t want the thing. Where I live no store will accept it back. They will claim you used it(the PS3). You bought it, took it home, unboxed it, hooked it up, turned it on, set it up, then read something, and returned it to the store. That will fly like a lead balloon.

    Whatever your pov, there is an issue that goes beyond some mostly ignorant posters on a website. That’s why I say the courts will decide.

    As for Cygnar, sorry but yea, he sounds like a tool. Sony couldn’t have crafted a better statement themselves. Cygnar btw is(among other things) a name for a hacking program.

    #47 3 years ago
  48. Crysis

    @46, But say you’re an online gamer or want games that force you to have a newer update, you’re forced to choose & that’s unfair, but that’s only an insignificant minority.

    @47, “As for Cygnar, sorry but yea, he sounds like a tool”
    But he does have a point, you have to be responsible for your own stupidity when it comes to signing anything, surely you wouldn’t skim through a legal document that you have to sign in person, but everybody ignores the digital ones.

    #48 3 years ago
  49. OlderGamer

    http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html

    Tell them the other OS is worthless and pointless :)

    #49 3 years ago
  50. Ireland Michael

    @48 Is it even possible to go back to the PS3 firmware if you install Linux? I honestly have no idea as to the answer of that one myself.

    #50 3 years ago
  51. Crysis

    @50, It’s dualboot, honestly Linux did sway my decision when it came to getting a PS3 but I already have 2 full functioning computers so after failing to run it properly I gave up & happily agreed for Sony to remove it, but free online gaming, exclusives & it’s multimedia capabilities is what kept it around.

    @49, Well apparently (& I don’t believe this) that’s one of the reasons why Sony removed it, did you read this article? It kind of mentions it. Something about IBM wanting Sony to remove it so IBM can continue shifting more expensive supercomputers.-I don’t believe this because no one mentions how this would affect Sony, unless (as I mentioned earlier) IBM made some sort of deal with Sony.

    I would assume that after already manufacturing Other OS on the phat PS3s that it would cost nothing to maintain so the only logical reason for Sony to remove it would be for security, but I’m still waiting for Sony to give us a detailed reason.

    #51 3 years ago
  52. DrDamn

    @47
    “That’s why I say the courts will decide.”

    “My fear is that big money(Sony) often influence the courts outcome.”

    So is the courts decision only going to be valid if it comes out the way you think it should? ;)

    My feeling is that EUA is a sneaky place to rely on legal removal of a feature, however I would also argue that if you bought a PS3 with this fairly non-standard console feature high on your list of reasons then you probably should have looked into what and how it would be supported in the future.

    I always thought this inclusion was a bit like the PS2 programming you could do. Sony were trying to dodge an extra tax in the EU based around whether it could be classified as a computer or not. I think they were unsuccessful and hence one of the reasons for removal.

    #52 3 years ago
  53. ManuOtaku

    #48 “But say you’re an online gamer or want games that force you to have a newer update, you’re forced to choose & that’s unfair, but that’s only an insignificant minority”.

    I agree, but i dont think they are a minority, nobody knows how many they are, but the fact is that if it is only one person affected, this person becomes a precedent that will rule all of us, even if we are not been affected at the moment, in the future yes we will.

    And based on this maybe there were a minority, but i think right now they are not, because even non owners of a ps3 are angry with sony because of this so, the minority is not such minimal, but thas my humble opinion.

    #53 3 years ago
  54. OlderGamer

    ““That’s why I say the courts will decide.”

    “My fear is that big money(Sony) often influence the courts outcome.”

    So is the courts decision only going to be valid if it comes out the way you think it should?”

    Well not really Doc, there are people that are far more informed about the ins and outs then any of us posting here. So I am hoping that the facts get presented fairly in a court of law.

    As for Sonys big money, they will have the best lawyers(and other things). A court room often becomes a bit of a ballgame, and having the best players can win that thing, more so then the facts themself. Maybe I just watched too much Parry Mason lol. But in a legal battle having top tier lawyers can’t hurt.

    I wasn’t suggesting that Sony would pay/buy out the Judge.

    #54 3 years ago
  55. DrDamn

    @54
    Oh no I realise what you meant, it’s just you left a bit of a get-out clause in there. I would expect Sony to win and it may well be because they have the best lawyers than for any other reason.

    #55 3 years ago
  56. Kerplunk

    “Kerplunk, imo your just about griefing.”

    IMO I’m siding with the radical view that if one party has to take responsibility for what they’ve agreed to then the other side also has to take responsibility.

    If you consider that griefing then you may be an oldergamer but you’re not a very maturegamer. But hey, just my two cents. No hard feelings. Live and let live. Just sayin’. IMHO. (etc etc etc).

    “A move to retain control. And one that steps on people’s rights. ”

    Stop signing your rights away then. Problem solved.

    #56 3 years ago
  57. Crysis

    The developed world is ran by Legal systems NOT Justice systems, the legal way isn’t always the right way.

    #57 3 years ago
  58. ManuOtaku

    #54 i agree, iam always been afraid of laws of any kind, because most of the time the people who made them (and those who paid them in the end), create at the same time the tricks and loopholes in order to get away with his actions, in other words avoid the law as they see fit.sad but true.

    P.D and is not the song from metallica

    #58 3 years ago
  59. OlderGamer

    Understood Doc, ya know another thing just occured to me. There really are two courts here. The court of law, and the court of public opinion. Sony can easily afford to spend on lawyers and even ultimatly lose ground legaly.

    But they can not afford to lose in the eye of the public. Prolly explains there intent on “ruining” GeoHotz. Trying to destroy his credibilty to the public. Esp important to pain him badly in the eyes of loyal Sony suporters.

    And man does Hotz make doing that easy.

    Just thinking Sony would love to keep the focus on “Hotz is a loser” rather then on things they remove from PS3 or if they have the legal rights to do so.

    If this website is any indication, score one for Sony.

    #59 3 years ago
  60. OlderGamer

    “IMO I’m siding with the radical view that if one party has to take responsibility for what they’ve agreed to then the other side also has to take responsibility”

    Nagh your twisting. And enjoying it too I might add. We could sit here and go back and forth saying basicly the samethings over and over. But none of it matters. We won’t be the ones deciding anything.

    Enjoy your black and white world.

    I am gonna go play some actual games.

    #60 3 years ago
  61. ManuOtaku

    #59 older gamer i dont think is score one to sony, because if you see other sites you see plenty of people angry with sony by this, and they even not own a ps3, but they are full aware of the implications at stake, and i also believe that sony in the process of trying to make look bad GEO, they are making themselves look bad too. so i think is pretty equally even if this site show otherwise

    #61 3 years ago
  62. theevilaires

    Why won’t these fool just understand you gave up your right to use OS. You agreed to accept the firmware update and once you did that you signed a contract with SONY saying it was ok. Plain and simple as that. Why don’t the trolls who never turn their PS3′s on stop trying to look like they know anything about what they’re spewing out here.

    A guy who never turns his PS3 on is defending a guy who has violated SONY’s EUA. I would love to go back in the years and pull quotes from the people who always said the PS3 having the other OS option was a gimmick and that it was never a good selling point because they have a real PC….For all the smart people here let the dumb (XBOTs) argue with themselves. They just hate SONY period and its nothing you can do to change that. Can’t teach an old dog new tricks ;)

    #62 3 years ago
  63. xino

    solve this parable, the ones who are are defending sony…aka sony slaves.

    “you are in a restaurant and the company granted you free unlimited drinks. You ordered a pizza with 3 toppings. The company found out that the pizza would be too large to serve you and your guest on the table so they removed 1 topping leaving you with 2. You asked why did they do this? they said “we don’t want you to waste our pizza, our chef baked a large pizza for small guest”. And the company told you, if you really want your 3 topplings, your free unlimited drinks will cease. Forcing you to make a decision either pay for limited amounts of drinks and get the 3 toppling pizza you ordered for. OR get unlimited drinks the company guarantee you and get a reduced 2 toppping pizza”

    That is the same scenario Sony are doing. And if you think it is not illegal to pull customer in that situation, then you are just a sony slave who loves paying Sony your monthly bill by buying their products and exclusive games.

    #63 3 years ago
  64. Ireland Michael

    @60 He’s not twisting anything O.G. I for one completely agree with hik.

    You don’t stand up for what you believe to be your rights by signing a contract, just as you dont stand up against a company you support by buying their products and complaining about them later.

    You show opposition to something by not supporting it. If you have an issue with Sony’s online practises, don’t use their service. If you don’t agree with paying for Xbox Live Gold, you don’t go out and buy 12 months of the service…

    As long as you agree to a contract, you have very little room to argue your rights. Contracts exist for the sole reason of allowing exceptions to standard rules.

    The changing of a feature set within a piece of software is entirely legal, and when you update the software, you accept a legally binding agreement wherin the changes that will take place are clearly stated to you.

    THAT is the law.

    #64 3 years ago
  65. Kerplunk

    What am I twisting? You comment about this being an issue about rights and I (and others that you don’t agree with) insist on reminding you about how you keep overlooking the bit where you voluntarily signed them away.

    All I’m doing is reminding folk to be accountable for their own actions. And many, including you, act like it’s some evil conspiracy to take away your freedom.

    #65 3 years ago
  66. ManuOtaku

    #64 “You don’t stand up for what you believe to be your rights by signing a contract, just as you dont stand up against a company you support by buying their products and complaining about them later.

    You show opposition to something by not supporting it. If you have an issue with Sony’s online practises, don’t use their service. If you don’t agree with paying for Xbox Live Gold, you don’t go out and buy 12 months of the service”…

    With all due respect, what were the three primary reasons for get a playstation3, well one is obviously play games, second play online free PSN, and third running other S, well if i dont agree with sony and show my support to my believe, i will cease to use PSN, therefore reason two is out of the equation, then obviously i will not play any current games that ask for an upload, theres goes number one, and lastly the took it Other S, there went the last one. well not in that order but you got the idea.

    Therefore why in the world i paid for a ps3?, as a brick for my future wall, man thats so wrong again, iam the consumer in the end i dont have any choice at all, sony disguise the PSN as a tool to govern everything related with the PS3, in order to proceed with the removal of other s, violating the orginal terms, my own console, that i did paid full price for it since launch day with all three said applications and primary reasons why is that so hard to understand.

    P.D Is unaceptable by any views or the way you wanna see it, that the consumer in the end paid the consecuences for sony mistake in the first place. thas wrong from the consumer point of view and very easy to understand too.

    #66 3 years ago
  67. Ireland Michael

    You agreed to the legal contract provided to you when you updated. It was your choice. You choose to do it.

    And I highly doubt Other OS was even remotely part of the vast majority of people’s primary reasons for buying a PS3.

    #67 3 years ago
  68. Crysis

    @63, You’ve become irrelevant, you simply just don’t understand the topic at hand but you keep acting as if you do, these ‘Sony Slaves’ you keep mentioning are the guys smart enough to read a EULA before acting on it, no one here is praising Sony for removing the other OS without a detailed explanation.
    Once you learn the difference between a product & a service, then feel free to debate with the grown ups.

    #68 3 years ago
  69. xino

    @Kerplunk and Ireland
    please stop talking shit!

    http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2010/03/29/ps3-firmware-3-21-coming-april-1st/

    if I don’t upgrade, how the hell would I upgrade my bluray to play new bluray titles?
    how would I buy DLC and add-ons?

    please stop talking shit as if we have a choice! We didn’t have any choice!

    if we had a choice you think developers and third party would support the bullsh* Sony is doing? That would mean that their add ons and DLC will decline in sales.

    #69 3 years ago
  70. ManuOtaku

    #67, But it was not a choice, i was force, i deciede which one i prefer to loose, in order to save my console, not theirs, and is true PSN is sonys property, but in this case it was use to downgraded my console, afecting my investment and the money i paid for it, and like myself a bunch of others, thats not choice, sony forced me to do so , becuase i had not choice, the only choice is which application i rather loose over the other, but then again is forcing people , not given you the choice two very diferent words, that is hard to understand too.

    #70 3 years ago
  71. OrbitMonkey

    I seriously don’t know 1 ps3 owner who got it for other OS… Not fucking one. It’s like buying a whole fitted kitchen, just for the taps o_O

    I mean seriously, what’s the beef? Sony took other OS, boo fucking hoo. Sell your now “unusable” ps3 & move on. Sony will listen more to lost business, than to whiney bitches on the net.

    #71 3 years ago
  72. Crysis

    @69, Do you really believe in what you’re saying? Decreased sales because of other OS removal… LOL

    #72 3 years ago
  73. xino

    @71
    ok…so you have met 47million ps3 owners right? and you know the reasons why they bought a ps3.

    and I thought my brain was wack.

    #73 3 years ago
  74. ManuOtaku

    #71 if it was “so irrelevant”, why then sony put it on the first place,and strongly advertised, because it had high attached rates from them, at least thats what they thought.

    #74 3 years ago
  75. Kerplunk

    @69 I guess it wasn’t a rhetorical question after all :)

    If you want to use the product, you agree to the terms of usage. If you don’t agree, you don’t get the perks of usage. And if you don’t agree then don’t push the big button with the words “I AGREE” on it.

    @70 You just presented a choice. Just because you don’t like the choice you’re offered doesn’t mean a choice never existed.

    #75 3 years ago
  76. ManuOtaku

    #75 when you choose you are given two equally ponderated options, in this case it was not, it was a downgraded, disguase as a choice, but were was the other good option? , the consumers didnt see it, neither a compensation.

    #76 3 years ago
  77. Kerplunk

    @76 No you don’t. Your concept of what a choice is flawed. You’re still working on the logic that the only acceptable actions are ones where you benefit. That’s not how the world works.

    Pay the morgtage or lose my home. Shit! I don’t like either choice. Better get a class action lawsuit sent the way of my mortgage lender huh?

    #77 3 years ago
  78. Ireland Michael

    I’m a Sony slave now?

    Wait, wasn’t I an “Xbot” just last week? A few months ago, I was apparently a Wii fanboy. And late last year, I was supposedly a casual gamer!

    Man, it’s so confusing trying to keep track of what I am!

    #78 3 years ago
  79. Robo_1

    @78

    I have one question though, why all the ZX81 bias. ;)

    #79 3 years ago
  80. xino

    @75
    you are just talking shit and not answering my question!
    all you ever talk about are people pushing the agree button

    #80 3 years ago
  81. Ireland Michael

    @79 Pfft, ZX81 sucks! Amstrad CPC 464 all the way, man!

    #81 3 years ago
  82. ManuOtaku

    #77
    No iam based on the fact that this is an electronic device, such devices always are bee updated to add or modify a feature, that translates into benefit for consumers, not as a downgraded, based on that premise the chooice given by sony has to be two equal benefits for the consumer, which was not the case in question.

    Morgtage has nothing to do with this case,because you lease the house in order to get it, at least you own some quantity of money to some entity in order to get it for future paytmens, that means pay multiple ammounts of money that should be done in a estipulated period of time, once you paid all is then your property, but in this case i paid full price in the first day so it doenst apply.

    #82 3 years ago
  83. Kerplunk

    @80 The user pushing that “I AGREE” button is pretty much the key issue here. That’s the bit where YOU made the choice. Where YOU acted. Where YOU are accountable for what YOU did. Where YOU gave CONSENT.

    The fact that you and others are so desperate to overlook it is why you fail to appreciate what’s going on.

    #83 3 years ago
  84. theevilaires

    @78 I think piece of shit is generally what you are by most of our standards here @ VG247….just wanted to clarify that since you seemed confused what your destiny ultimately is….I would stay away from toilets if I were you. Your whole life could go down the drain in an instant :D

    #84 3 years ago
  85. OrbitMonkey

    @73 firstly I don’t believe I said I knew 47 million people. Guess you skim read my post in the rush to say something pithy.
    Secondly out of those 47 million people, how many ditched the ps3 after eeevvviiillll Sony took other OS away? I’m betting about 0.001% if that. Guess the rest stayed for the games & stuff huh?
    @74 Erm because it was a markrting gimmick? If Sony could have got away with saying the ps3 was reverse engineered from area 51 tec, they would have.

    #85 3 years ago
  86. OlderGamer

    Round and round we go.

    What do you want me to say? Or anyone else for that matter. It has all been said, and said by people that don’t know the extent of the case or the facts there in. We don’t know the true intentions of putting other OS in there, or for taking it out. We don’t know a lot of things. We can speculate. We can sit here and throw around insults till the cows come home.

    Nothing changes.

    I would agrue that a buyer should be made aware of such a EUA BEFORE he/she makes a purchase. Your rights shouldn’t be burried in a massive wall of legal text, only even viewable after the box is open. It would be like telling someone of food ingrediants for possible alergies after they start chewing. And worse telling them in a language they don’t easily understand.

    And them blaming them for it being their fault.

    I would also agree that the overwhelming majority of PS3 owners don’t/won’t/wouldn’t use it for said other OS. To me that doesn’t mean a thing. There is still going to be a legal hair to be split here.

    I think it just part of a larger scope and includes things like digital rights, ownership, jailbreaking, and more. Your sole and only arguement here is that its all stuffed in the EUA, and you agreed when you clicked.

    Thats weak.

    Because you completly overlook the placment of, tiny fonts of, wall of text of, difcult wording of, or even the flexiblity of(allowing sony to alter it) nature of the thing. You ignore the devient ways EUA are often used. You also overlook the fact that most people came to simply not read and ignore the EUA. Most importanly, as if to back up this paragraph…why people do not read it and why they do ignore it in the first place.

    We do it all of the time. Most of us anyways. Do you sit the correct distance away from your TV while gaming? Do you take breaks every 20 mins? Didn’t you read the warnings?

    It is one thing to take personal responsibilty for your actions. But I feel that this is something different. I know some of you don’t, I do. That is an opinion it can NOT be agrued. It is an opinion there is no right or wrong. Of course you can have your own.

    Thus round and round.

    I think we have become desensitized to warnings, labels, and yes EUAs. They are everywhere. Some practical and some not. Some we should head, some we don’t need to.

    Smog is bad for your health, you shouldn’t live in a big industrial city. But your job is that city. Should you give up your job and move? Or should you lobby to do something about the smog?

    Don’t like the EUA, don’t agree to it. Of course not agreeing means you can’t use your PS3(Other OS or not). You feel wronged but what do you do? Same as above make your voice heard and lobby.

    Thats all people are doing.

    Sony is absolutly not the only ones in the same boat. It is not legal to jailbreak certian things. Given time I see Consoles being added to that list. That boys and girls is the heart of this whole ball of wax.

    Not some EUA. Not some punk kid name GeoHotz. Not me nor you.

    What some folks are doing is smoke and mirrors, deverting the attention and focus to something else. That btw, is what I meant by twisting Kerplunk.

    This isn’t a black and white issue like eating fench fries makes you fat and you can’t sue McDonalds because of it stuff.

    Sometimes laws/rules get bent or even broken before they get changed. Jailbreaking phones comes to mind again.

    On a personal pov note, I don’t think gaming has too many more console lifecycles left. I think future consoles will be built into TV, they will be on laptops/netbook/pcs, they will be apps on ipads/cell phones. Game consoles will, imo, die and evolve into game services, ones that stream games to a veriety of devices.

    I think that issues like this one are going push that console evolution along a bit. If jailbreaking/moding/and hacking in general become expected and widespread what is a current console will be forced to evolve.

    Someday interactive entertainment/gaming will replace(or simply merge with)Cable TV, and 99% of this goes away. Till then the war drums will keep sounding.

    #86 3 years ago
  87. Ireland Michael

    @84 So full of needless hate. *shakes head* So sad.

    Nobody cares.

    #87 3 years ago
  88. StolenGlory

    ‘Hotz’ looks like his face has never felt a fist in his life.

    A good beating is what is needed I reckon to straighten out his perspective on things.

    *Nods sagely*

    #88 3 years ago
  89. Kerplunk

    @87 And there you go again. Making every possible excuse why you should not be held accountable for your own actions.

    I can’t read the agreement! It’s not my fault!
    The agreement is too long! It’s not my fault!

    Excuse after excuse after excuse.

    Yet none of those excuses will ever cover how the user, of their own free will, gives consent to all of it.

    You don’t agree to it? Fine. Then don’t agree to it. It’s no more complex than that! If those are the terms of use that you’re disagreeing with then, guess what, you don’t get to use the things those terms cover. You don’t get to have it all your own way like some 5 year old having a tantrum on their birthday.

    You talk about twisting stuff? You’re Chubby Checker.

    #89 3 years ago
  90. Ireland Michael

    @89 I think you used the wrong number there mate.

    #90 3 years ago
  91. Kerplunk

    @90. It’s not my fault. The text was too long and I had no choice. I’m going to start a class action lawsuit against VG247 and the internet.

    RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGEE!!

    #91 3 years ago
  92. OrbitMonkey

    “your chubby checker…” I think thats the nicest thing anyone has said about Michael on this site… period :-)

    I’m siding with OG on this I think. We’re all just pissing in the wind, without the facts & we’ll probably never know them. Tbh I’d be interested in peoples thoughts in what would happen if Sony lost the case? Other OS reinstalled? Refunds

    #92 3 years ago
  93. Ireland Michael

    @91 Hahahahaha!

    @92 Funny.

    That was completely unnecessary.

    #93 3 years ago
  94. OlderGamer

    @OrbitMonkey

    I would hedge my bets that Sony would reinstall Other OS option, if they should lose. But I don’t think they will lose tbh.

    #94 3 years ago
  95. xino

    @85
    from your comment, made me believe half of the posters here cannot be taken seriously!

    you say I’m jumping numbers because I skim read your post.

    “I seriously don’t know 1 ps3 owner who got it for other OS… Not fucking one. It’s like buying a whole fitted kitchen, just for the taps o_O”

    so you don’t know anyone and because you don’t know anyone you believe that people don’t want the OS. Making me pull up the numbers that you must knew 47m people and they told you they were not interested in ther Other OS.

    Hotz needs to start gathering all the bullsh* lies Sony had been spewing from end of March! He needs to present them to the court.

    if sony said they removed the OtherOS to save money, therefore they f**ing lied to their customers saying it’s for security reasons!

    #95 3 years ago
  96. mote

    we’ve all been blackmailed by sony

    #96 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.