Sections

PSN hacking law-suit binned, Sony cleared of charges

Tuesday, 23rd October 2012 12:06 GMT By Dave Cook

PlayStation Network’s outage in 2011 left user accounts at the mercy of hackers, prompting a class-action lawsuit against Sony for failing to protect customer accounts. Get the details of the case’s collapse below.

CVG reports – by way of Courthouse News – that Sony’s charges were dismissed by US District Judge Anthony Battaglia.

The reason? “Because none of the named plaintiffs subscribed to premium PSN services, and thus received the PSN services free of cost,” Battaglia proclaimed, and he added that the plaintiff’s claim itself takes Sony’s responsibility out of the picture.

“Plaintiffs freely admit, plaintiffs’ personal information was stolen as a result of a criminal intrusion of Sony’s Network,” Battaglia explained, “Plaintiffs do not allege that Sony was in any way involved with the Data Breach.”

Battaglia also recognised that the end-user agreement accepted by all PSN users states that such errors may occur and that the service is not perfect, essentially suggesting that the plaintiffs accepted the terms at their own risk. Claims that Sony misrepresented the level of security on PSN were also thrown out as a result.

What do you make of the decision? Should further compensate be awarded, or is it time for the plaintiffs to stand down? Let us now what you think below.

Latest

17 Comments

  1. Hamster34

    Time to move on. They were trying their luck in the first place!!!

    How can you sue a company when they didn’t cause the hack?!

    #1 2 years ago
  2. Beta

    Good news in my opinion. Stupid lawsuit in the first place.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. Deacon

    Yep. About time. I still don’t know one single person who was defrauded as a result of the hack.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. OrbitMonkey

    If the court had rules against Sony it would have opened a can of worms. I mean it would have meant anyone who’d had a phishing scam run on them, would have been able to put in a lawsuit wouldn’t they?

    #4 2 years ago
  5. Fin

    Lawsuits like this are the reason class actions are banned in some EULAs.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. Mike W

    But who thought these lawsuits were going to go any where?

    #6 2 years ago
  7. polygem

    this was a big deal but they should indeed lay it to rest…good thing about this is that sony prolly fixed the issues and made everything better, so it´s safer for everyone now.
    there was a fifa 12 hack though which was kind of big too but strangeley didn´t make such a fuss. it happened to me on 360. all my points: gone. fifa 12 achievements unlocked though i have never played the game. i received a refund (4000ms points, while only 160 or so got ripped), changed all my security settings…still was my most creepy experience this gen.
    it was connected to an EA account hack. never use the same passwords kids…i should´ve listened.

    #7 2 years ago
  8. Mike W

    @5

    Yea some lawsuits up here in the US, is just beyond stupidity. For example, some fat woman can sue McDonald’s, because their food is making them fatter. That was the craziest one I ever heard. But when I seen these individuals trying to sue Sony because of the hack, I just laughed.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. Deacon

    @7 – yeah, weird isn’t it? From the sounds of it the Fifa hacks affected way more people than the PSN hack (with to regards to any real loss), yet while the media threw a party with the PSN hack, the Fifa issue was kept relatively quiet. Perhaps it was companies not wanting to upset EA.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. tenthousandgothsonacid

    In this rather excellent book about Anonymous and Lulzsec (which has extensive interviews with topiary, sabu etc)

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/We-Are-Anonymous-Lulzsec-Insurgency/dp/0316213543/ref=sr_1_sc_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1350995784&sr=8-2-spell

    Lulzsec specifically state that psn was not hacked by them or anyone else. A disgruntled Sony employee opened a vulnerability in psn and posted it all over hacker boards.

    I find it weird that this hasn’t been reported more fully.

    #10 2 years ago
  11. Deacon

    ^ I wouldn’t buy a book about Lulzsec and take every word for gospel. Is the employee thing just a rumour? I haven’t heard anything about that, which immediately makes me sceptical.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. ManuOtaku

    Iam more concerned/worried about the reasons why this wasnt took into consideration, legally speaking, not for this case per-se, but for future cases for the precedents it stablishes,cases that somehow users would end up being really affected, like:

    1.- “Because none of the named plaintiffs subscribed to premium PSN services, and thus received the PSN services free of cost”.
    Therefore if someone was indeed affected by this, lets say lost some money, they do not have the chance to claim something because is free?

    2.- “Battaglia also recognised that the end-user agreement accepted by all PSN users states that such errors may occur and that the service is not perfect, essentially suggesting that the plaintiffs accepted the terms at their own risk”
    So if they have indeed the fault in future cases, they will get free because they stated this on the TOS and EULA, man this is worrying on so many levels.

    #10 it was a Sony Employee or an ex-sony employee, because that will make such an important difference here, at least at the moment he gave the information.

    edit: move the paragraphs to give a nice view.

    p.s the only one that i do agree because it do not gives future precedents, that will affect the users in future procedures is the following: “Battaglia explained, “Plaintiffs do not allege that Sony was in any way involved with the Data Breach.”, and that will be the only spot on one, the other two i put above are worrying, from the end user perspective.

    #12 2 years ago
  13. tenthousandgothsonacid

    @11 good job you mentioned that otherwise I’d have believed everything I read ever. ffs could you *be* any more patronising ?

    In 2 separate interviews (as they obviously don’t get on any more) Topiary and Sabu refer to it. It’s just not reported anywhere as it’s not from an online interview that can be linked to by news websites and besides, it’s probably all a bit too complicated for em.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. tenthousandgothsonacid

    @12 He opened it up before he left and then pasted it after he’d got the boot in a round of redundancies

    #14 2 years ago
  15. Deacon

    @13 – Apologies. Didn’t mean it to sound patronizing, I just wondered if you bought the story that’s all.

    If that’s true then at least it takes a lot of the blame away from Sony’s infrastructure and security. No company can protect themselves from an inside job eh.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. ManuOtaku

    #14 Well that will be a tricky one to prove, but if its like that, and if its true then they do have some fault on this.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. NeoSquall

    @10 From what I understand, this books looks like a work based on the biased opinions of the alleged protagonists, sourced by interviews and testimony from the former lulzsecs and other hackers, other media reports and statistics. It doesn’t include any official informations or official reports from Sony or the cybersecurity firms hired to investigate the crisis.
    Well, I’d take this book’s content with more than a grain of salt.

    #17 2 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.