News PS3 hacker defends console jailbreak

that is exactly it ! ... it's something like DELL saying you can't (and forcing you to not ) run anything but Windows 7 on their machine anymore, after it came with an ability to run other operating systems

 

Actually, this sounds a lot like core unlocking. Workaround that gets you something that was never paid for. But oddly enough, some mobo makers actually advertise it as a feature.

And it's a bit odd for suing based on potential harm or crime. Based on that, the chip and pin guy should have been sued to kingdom come. But then again, they do have a law faculty that could drag things out till the cows come home and moo at someone.

 

he should get a cash prize for this hack! Really sony should be thankful for these people in spotting security flaws in their system so that they can patch them!

 

"Sony removed the option to install other operating systems in March last year, citing 'security concerns'."


Looks to me like it HAS been payed for ... then removed
I think sony doesn't have a leg to stand on, and is leaving behind quite a bad taste more and more often these days

 

I have to agree with Deadsea. You buy a tri core chip and unlock the quad core chip, whats fair about that you only paid for 3 cores but yet you hacked something to get the 4th core unlocked? Or how about the 5950 crack to make it a 5970( i think those are the model numbers). Someone hacked the BIOS and unlocked stuff you didn't pay for so does that give AMD/ATI the right to sue these people that hacked it? What about the people that published the articles on it? Should they be sued too?

 

Hackers are................no comment............ but i never get this thing that..........why they does all this things like hacking and all that.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12307891

I'm happy for Sony! Quite right. Sony is correct to do this in my opinion!

 

Ugh, I do hope you are joking.

And the first paragraph in that "news" article makes me want to go and throttle the editor.

 

I'm being serious. He broke the terms of use therefore is liable.

 

Yes, he broke the terms of service so he is liable to something. But what exactly? Removal from use of the PSN service? Yes, fair enough, that is a service Sony provides. But handing over his computers? That is just ridiculous. Next a company could seize your house because you lived there when you jailbroke some device of yours...

 

This is exactly the type of dangerous precedent a victory by Sony could form the basis for.

The really sickening thing is the corruption of the California municipality in which Sony is trying to try this case. In the TOS users must now agree to settling any and all "disputes" within San Mateo County, California - home of SCEA. The only upshot is that Sony's influence in that area - as a major employer and source of tax revenue - is probably very negligable, so that is surely the most objective and unbiased forum for any and all litigation involving SCEA.

For everyone who's argument is "its just piracy," or anything to that effect, you are wrong. GeoHot never pirated anything. If someone uses his exploit for piracy, this is still not his fault. Colt Firearms doesn't have to deal with legal fallout anytime someone uses one of their products in commission of a crime, and its ridiculous to even consider it. This would be like me using this exploit to pirate Uncharted 2 to my PS3 which I then use to assassinate the President, and GeoHot being brought up on capital murder charges as a result. Garbage.

Sony's case is bogus, but its scary as hell that litigation in a rotten venue and a pile of cash might very well legitimize this insanity.