What are the ethics of PS3's potential security crack?*

You have a furnace ?

 

Actually right now I don't own a furnace, but most homes have one or we'd all freeze to death in the winter.

 

You hit the nail right on the head! I think it's just like the movie industry with consumers copying movies. If you just copy the movies you bought, they won't likely come after you (although they legally have the right). But, copying and distributing tens or hundreds of thousands of movies is another story. That would seriously impact business and they won't stand for that. I just can't see how some people can not see the difference.

 

I don't see how this is property rights though. Your comparisons with CE devices isn't valid as the commercial success of those products doesn't depend on the integrity of the hardware/software systems. If someone cracks open your coffee maker to run Linux, the coffee company won't care as they lose nothing, and the State won't care. There are lots and lots of examples of people messing about with their stuff at home, and I see no slippery slope from protecting software rights in a computer systems to having to lease CE and white goods. On the flipside of this Geohotz case, we also have the case against Sony for retracting Linux. That'll be one I hope sides with the consumer as it was a feature the device was sold on.

This is more like someone cracking a digibox to enable free access to encrypted content. That has been around for years and illegal. If you don't disagree with that, than I don't see how you can disagree with the PS3 situation. But a lot depends on what exactly gets used in court as the basis for the case. Both sides are presenting a warped view from what I can see, and unless someone has read all the legal gumph that's been released and actually understands it, I doubt anyone can appreciate what the legal challenge is.

 

I'd imainge the used game market is more of a loss leader for console owners but then they're left fighting bigger organizations that can provide proper legal registance and have lobbying budgets. In that situation, Sony and other publishers come out with creative means to minimize the impact of used sales by providing new purchase DLC, coded multiplayer, full game purchaes through consoles, etc..

Thus, when facing a stong challenger, they are wiling to come up with creative means to fight back and protect their revenue! However, it's easier to go after individuals who can't mount the same resistance and the hope is that without too much time and resources they can silence it.

Regadless of the corporate jocking seen in this thread and other gaming forums, I hope this goes up the chain and ends up with the same results as the iOS ruling. If Sony "wins" then it sets the standard and will be used in other forms of media and entertainment devcies.

 

It's not like these companies don't invest lots in security measures, and Sony's measures have proven highly effective. None of them just try to silence hackers. PSP hacking is rife, and there are no lawsuits brought against custom firmware suppliers.

Again, what exactly is the ruling people are afraid of? "That shalt not do whatever these companies don't want you to do?" Because that's not the case being brought. There are specific laws being contested that relate to specific activities, which don't include running custom firmwares.

 

FYI A furnace in the US is what we'd call a boiler in the UK.

 

More like central heating.

 

Let's see how Apple handle this: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=427022

 

Again, what exactly is the ruling people are afraid of? "That shalt not do whatever these companies don't want you to do?" Because that's not the case being brought. There are specific laws being contested that relate to specific activities, which don't include running custom firmwares.[/QUOTE]

As I have stated earlier and in other threads, I have no issues with Sony banning hackers off PSN. That's a service they provide and should rightfully dictate what gets on and in what manner.

What I have an issue with is Sony (and others) telling me that I can't do whatever I want with my unit. Sure they can void my warranty and block me from PSN or even future games (FW differences) but if I want to use the PS3 as a paper weight or a hacked media server, it's my problem.

Since people love car analogies so much; I can buy a Honda Civic, gut the engine compartment out, put a custom motor in there, document it all and put it on the internet for everyone to see and copy and Honda will not be coming after me.

Here's a better one! Vishnu performance, HACKED the BMW software system to unlock performance and made a business out it. Did BMW go after them? Nope. The entitlement of software/tech companies and the apologist fanbase is a joke. It just so happens that they have the itch and resources to lobby for laws that protect them.

Dark Alex, the PSP hacker is from Spain. There is no DMCA to enforce but consensus in the modding community is that Sony paid him to finally stop hacking the PSP.

 

It's rather disturbing to see a lot of people riding "sense of titlement" bs line like it's no tomorrow, whenever someone expects quality product and service for their money. Especially in the US (which actually doesn't surprise me at all lol). I don't get it really.

 

http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/11/scea-vs-geohot-sony-wins-a-not-quite-flawless-victory/

Sony settles

Sony most likely figured out that their lieing would destroy their class action defence even more and thus they decided to focus on winning the case that will actually cost them billions of dollars

 

Whoa! Apple is going to abduct this guy's girlfriend and send him video extortion calls using FaceTime.

 

Um what? What part of being able to hack the software on your system and being able to modify it to do whatever you want has anything to do with someone expecting a quality product and service. It doesn't have anything to do with one another remotely. The only thing it could have to anything to do with is the removal of the other OS by Sony and even that is not remotely related to what that comment was in response to.

And eastmen you might want to read your link again. It says Sony says the case is settled not that Sony settled. It's far more likely geohotz lawyers offered a settlement and Sony accepted.

 

How do you come to that conclusion?

 

Do you think Hotz would Sony let settle if the odds where in his favor?
Also, Sony wouldnt gain much by winning, expect more bad press, kinda like Charlie Sheen.

 

If Sony could of proposed this settlement and got it at anytiem the cause would of never even reached court. Once it reaches court Sony has no reason on their side to settle. They could drag this thing out for years and make it very painful for the opposition even if they don't win. Plus going by geohotz behavior he would of never agreed to such terms given by Sony and if sSony would of settled with him he'd be screaming it from the rooftops. All this points to it being far more likely 75% or above the his lawyers proposed the settlement not Sony's.

 

Um... Sony caused themselves a lot of problems with this case, I'm sure it changed their priorities after the battle started. As much as Hotz's principles might have liked him to fight it to the end, it was going to be cost prohibitive in the best of circumstances. And all of Sony's efforts to move the case to California were undoubtedly not helping his costs. I really don't know who proposed the settlement, but neither of them got what they wanted.

Apparently geohotz still not a fan. http://geohotgotsued.blogspot.com/

 

Sony has 2 cases that are using the firm ware and who actually is responsible for it as a center point for the case. The class action lawsuit about linux and the geohot case. Sony is saying diffrent things in both cases and is going to end up loosing both if it can't shut its mouth .

The geohot case being settled quickly will save them hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars in loosing the linux case. The gehot situation is already far out of sonys control. The cat is out of the bag and people can hack the ps3. There is no point in fighting it if it means loosing the other case

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110402000830503

 

You're still taking a rather glowing review of a settlemenn that what we have access to says he's not allowed to hack a Sony device as long as it against the law with 10k fine for hacking the device and up 250k if he not only hacks it but distributes it.