Judge Says No Anonymity For Anyone Who Visited GeoHot's PS3 Hacking Website Or Watched YouTube Video

from the dangerous-ruling dept

Fri, Mar 4th 2011 5:22pm — Mike Masnick

In what seems like a very dangerous ruling, antithetical to basic anonymity rights, a magistrate judge has ruled that Sony can unmask anyone who visited GeoHot's website where he had posted the jailbreak data or who viewed the YouTube video that demonstrated the jailbreak for the PS3 that allowed PS3 owners to bring back a feature that Sony had killed off. This seems pretty extreme. Why is it okay to identify people just because they visited a website or watched a video? As the EFF noted, these subpoenas seem extremely broad, and it's disappointing that the judge signed off on them.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: anonymity, first amendment, jailbreak, privacy, ps3, visits
Companies: sony

139 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:24pm

Good on them! When the veil of anonymous is pulled away from these people, they might think twice about breaking the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Poster, 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:34pm
  
  Re:
  Yeah, who needs anonymity!
  
  Let's make whistleblowers have to reveal their names, too, while we're at it!
  
  You are an ass.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Spaceman Spiff (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:35pm
  
  Re:
  Speaking with tongue in cheek? My sarcasm meter just pegged...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:58pm
  
  Re:
  Irony alert.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:22pm
  
  Re:
  Right, presuming people watching videos constituting a crime. Maybe you should talk to MiniTrue or the Thought Police about your incredulous stance.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Bmoney, 22 Mar 2011 @ 12:51pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Then everyone who watches youtube should receive the same fate I suppose , millions of law breaking crimes are uploaded and watched by everyone all day every day :-\
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:23pm
  
  Re:
  Why is it OK for Sony to break the law by fraudulently advertising a product with a feature and then removing the feature later on? Breaking laws is only OK for big corporations?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:28pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Which law did they break, exactly, by moving to secure their systems to limit cheaters and pirated?
    
    Which law, exactly?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:59pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Isn't fraud against the law? Isn't false advertising against the law? They sold the product advertising its Linux capabilities and later revoked those capabilities. That's fraud and fraud is illegal last time I checked.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:30am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      In the UK they have broken the Trades Description Act.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 6:35am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        In the UK they have broken the Trades Description Act.
        
        Let me know when someone alleges that in a competent court. M'kay?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        The eejit (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 12:06pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You heard of the UK Gamers Forum? Yeah, they're abig deal, console wise. They're challenging this in court as a class action.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Tony, 6 Mar 2011 @ 4:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You need to learn something. Anything will do. Just stop bleating until you've actually learnt something.
        
        "Sony has been sued for removing Linux support from the PS3. Norway�s Consumer Ombudsmen has recently found (Norwegian) that Sony�s removal of �Other OS� support from the PS3 violates Norway�s Marketing Act"
        
        They broke the law in several countries. Just because you are ignorant of that doesn't make in not so.
        
        Douche.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Eugene (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 11:36am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Which law did the users break, exactly, by returning a feature to their systems which was advertised to be on that system?
      
      Which law, exactly, removes the right of the consumer to do whatever the fuck they want with something they bought fair and square?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Sean T Henry (profile), 7 Mar 2011 @ 11:31am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        This is not even about adding the feature back but exposing those who have looked at the information on doing it. I would have looked at the info even thought I do not own a PS# nor do I own any S0ny junk.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Eugene (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 11:36am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Which law did the users break, exactly, by returning a feature to their systems which was advertised to be on that system?
      
      Which law, exactly, removes the right of the consumer to do whatever the fuck they want with something they bought fair and square?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Kent, 6 Mar 2011 @ 10:31am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Removing otherOS should be found to be illegal. It doesn't matter if the reason was to reduce cheating and alleged piracy (which really wasn't possible until the system was cracked many months after they removed otherOS capabilities).
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Richard (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:56am
    
    Re: Re:
    Breaking laws is only OK for big corporations?
    
    Yeah - that's how they think.
    
    I was at the SIGGRAPH panel discussion in 2006 which raised the issue of the Sony rootkit.
    
    When a questioner mentioned Sony's GPL violation the Sony spokesman pooh-poohed it - saying "oh it was only a little be of code" hypocrisy much!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:38pm
  
  Re:
  Fear my roar for I posted first.
  
  Fear my bridge for it is tall and I live under it with my mother.
  
  Fear my breath for I now live in my mothers basement after my job at the label has gone away.
  
  I am eternal
  I am ever present
  I am troll
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- G Thompson (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 1:22am
  
  Re:
  Really?
  
  well you might like to know that I am one of the people whom Sony in their infinite stupidity will find out viewed this video, as well as downloading all of the code et.al
  
  In fact I dislike the action by SCEA so much I am submitting to the Federal Court of Australia an application for an injunction to stop Youtube, SCEA and others from accessing the information if it pertains to persons outside the continental USA.
  
  And if you have just insinuated that I am a criminal, maybe I should also join you as a party to the other actions that are being initiated against SCEA due to all this.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - mike allen (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:38am
    
    Re: Re:
    I looked at I do not own a PS3 or 2 or 1 why well i am a reporter. that is part of my job so Sony and any court can go shove it where the sun don't shine.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:59am
  
  Re:
  Good on them! When the veil of anonymous is pulled away from these people, they might think twice about breaking the law.
  Says the anonymous coward.
  
  Also when did it become against the law to simply view a video on Youtube??
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Kenny, 5 Mar 2011 @ 2:17pm
  
  Re:
  Couldn't but help notice that you posted as an "Anonymous Coward" there. Perhaps you value YOUR privacy above everyone else's?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:08pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Woosh?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Sean T Henry (profile), 7 Mar 2011 @ 11:26am
  
  Re:
  Good on them! When the veil of anonymous is pulled away from these people, they might think twice about PURCHASING SONY PRODUCTS.
  
  There I fixed it for the anonymous hypocrite.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:26pm

troll elsewhere
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sean Flaim, 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:33pm

Incredible
The worst part is that these are ex-parte subpoenas, meaning those whose names are being turned over are being stripped of due process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spaceman Spiff (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:34pm

Only one thing to say
WHAT MORONS! Speaking of Sony and their hired goons... Well, here is one person who will NEVER purchase another Sony product, ever! Time to organize a world-wide Sony boycott, IMO. No $$ == no lawyers == no problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PRMan, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:25pm
  
  Re: Only one thing to say
  Way ahead of you...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Tony, 6 Mar 2011 @ 4:10am
  
  Re: Only one thing to say
  Facebook: "Why? Because f*@k Sony, that's why."
  
  Join us!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 7 Mar 2011 @ 12:24am
  
  Re: Only one thing to say
  +1 Never again. Sony has been doing a lot of horse $#%@ lately and is yet to realize that it is ruining their reputation. Suing someone for giving your product the same value that was promised in the beginning and now going after the millions that actually want the full value is just retarded.
  
  Although Apple does not condone jailbreaking, it is possible on iDevices and look how much more sales this generates.
  
  Sony, you made me cry. I will not longer give you my money.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:34pm

Watching a video and/or reading an article is not against the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Poster, 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:37pm
  
  Re:
  To Sony, it is.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Trails (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:48pm
    
    Re: Re:
    What's more concerning is a magistrate judge apparently agrees with them.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 7:20pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What's more concerning...
      
      That doesn't concern you. You don't pay the magistrate's salary. Sony pays for the magistrate. So it's none of your business.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:19pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        What?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:21pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Well the magistrate sure isn't working for the republic.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PRMan, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:26pm
  
  Re:
  We'll see.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:37pm

come at me bro
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
androidhelpersdotcom (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 5:51pm

Sony Boycott
Click my name for our SONY boycott.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Greevar (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:05pm

I am so sick of this. What is a person supposed to do? We get shit on every day by people that make laws for the highest bidder and play morality wars to get in office. The wipe their asses with our Constitution. What chance do we have of getting any real justice in this country?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:08pm
  
  Re:
  What chance do we have of getting any real justice in this country?
  
  None.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PRMan, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:26pm
  
  Re:
  I have heard that there are 4 boxes..... It's up to you to determine which box you need.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - AC, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:24am
    
    Re: Re: 4 boxes
    no, there are 2 pills... (matrix reference lol)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - A Dan (profile), 7 Mar 2011 @ 10:29am
    
    Re: Re:
    For those who don't know what he's talking about:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_boxes_of_liberty
    "There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order."
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- monkyyy, 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:45pm
  
  Re:
  justice is not in the scope of human ability, in the end we fear what we dont understand, and treat anyone who dont understand as sub-human, and very few people apply ""innocent then proven guilty" to the sub-humans
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- A. Realist, 5 Mar 2011 @ 12:58pm
  
  Re: What chance for justice?
  None.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:07pm

Good corporate citizens deserve rights
...antithetical to basic anonymity rights...

Only good corporate citizens �like Sony� deserve their rights.

Judges don't need to stop to consider employee's rights. Employees are taken of by their corporations. And as for you unemployed criminals.... you'll get what's coming to you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
autobug, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:07pm

scary
I modify my car, does that mean I can get sued by the auto manufacturer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:11pm
  
  Re: scary
  ...does that mean I can get sued ...?
  
  You can be sued at any time, for anything, by anyone.
  
  Unless you're a government official�in which case you have qualified immunity. Or if you're a judge, and have absolute immunity.
  
  Or if you're really, really rich, and can hire goons to take out anyone who bothers you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jim Bob, 4 Mar 2011 @ 7:02pm
  
  Re: scary
  Only if the way that you modify your car affects, generally negatively, every other person who drives that model of car. Hackers jailbreak the PS3 and then hack the games that are played. I have had my user account wiped remotely twice by people who have hacked MW2. While I don't agree with the judge's ruling, hackers have ruined online gaming on the PS3 and so its expected that Sony will use everything in their power, including favorable court rulings, to stop any future jailbreaking.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 7:23pm
    
    They had it coming.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JEDIDIAH, 4 Mar 2011 @ 7:25pm
    
    They had it coming.
    Sony had it coming.
    
    They stripped a feature out of their product.
    
    So the Hackers put it back.
    
    Unfortunately, that opened Pandora's box. All of the stuff that you are now whining about would have happened if Sony just honored it's obligations and treated the customer fairly to begin with.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:25pm
      
      Re: They had it coming.
      This will only lead people to have less confidence in our system. If I can't buy something with the confidence that it's features will not later be secretly stripped away, with no prior disclosure, and that the court systems will not protect me if such features are suddenly stripped away unannounced, then I will be less likely to buy products based on their advertised features. I will automatically calculate the risk of having features randomly removed before I buy a product and that will deter me from buying anything.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:26pm
        
        Re: Re: They had it coming.
        (I'm not sure what our legal system is doing, but they sure are facilitating a system of distrust and I think if they continue down this road it will backfire on the corporations and it will not be good for business in the long term. This sets a bad precedent).
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: They had it coming.
        What Sony was doing was trying to ensure trust in the their systems, by taking action to block pirates and preserve the quality of the online gaming systems they provide. The people creating distrust are those who are willing to break the law "for fun", and in turn cause other people to suffer as a result of their reckless actions.
        
        Sorry, but this is one of those areas where we should stand up and applaud Sony for having the balls to stand up to the punk idiots who would ruin things for everyone else by their own personal greed.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:55pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: They had it coming.
        No.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 10:02pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: They had it coming.
        You must be trolling. Are you serious? Sony sold their product and advertised its Linux capabilities as a selling point. Then, without warning, they later took away a feature that was advertised as a selling point, and you're defending them? You must be kidding, right?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Chris Rhodes (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 10:39pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: They had it coming.
        preserve the quality of the online gaming systems they provid
        
        I don't think most people have a problem with Sony banning modded consoles from the PSN (I know I don't; it's their network, after all), but I draw the line at suing people for modding the physical property they own.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        The eejit (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 3:14am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: They had it coming.
        Um, no. I sent my PS3 back to sony, and got a partial refund over the OtherOS removal. IT said on the box in bold lettering "Linux-capable". If they remotely remove that software by forcing you to update just to play new games, then that's not only an anticompetitive measure, but false advertising AND obtaining monies by deception. And seeing as Sony isn't the government...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 11:59am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: They had it coming.
        u mad, bro?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        B, 5 Mar 2011 @ 1:19pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: They had it coming.
        Maybe you can explain to me how modifying my own property is breaking the law?
        
        Sony (and other AC's) need to realize that there are completely legitimate purposes for modifying the PS3 software. It is rather unfortunate that the conversation typically steers in the direction of "well people are pirating software." OK, can you show me those figures? Seems an awful lot of foot-stamping is being had w/o any notion of actual damages.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 1:35pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: They had it coming.
        Maybe you can explain to me how modifying my own property is breaking the law?
        
        Because Sony said so. Because the politicians listen to Sony's lobbyists. Not to you. And because the politicians appoint the judges. So it's because Sony said so. And because Sony has the power to make its say-so stick.
        
        Never mistake this fact: Political power flows from the barrel of a gun.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - William, 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:13pm
    
    Re: Re: scary
    Then blame sony for creating a shitty product.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:34pm
    
    Re: Re: scary
    Every time ANY new peice of tech, comes out, hackers will hack. It's what they DO. But Geohot is not a "bad" hacker, per se. He made this hack so people who had another OS installed could still use that. I hate, and I mean HATE, the fuckers who ruin the game for everyone else. But Geohot isn't doing that. Not in this case, at least.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - cc (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:36pm
    
    Re: Re: scary
    Sorry, no. Sony is totally within its rights to ban cheaters/hackers/whatever from the PSN, but it's NOT alright to use the courts to ruin peoples' lives.
    
    That copyright law allows it to pull off things like this simply shows how much copyright is at odds with the speech, privacy and property rights of the public. #DMCASNAFU
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Jay (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 10:49pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: scary
      But there's a bigger problem...
      
      Now hackers can unban themselves and ban others
      
      Not the fault of Geohot. He just unlocked Pandora.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - cc (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 11:38pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: scary
        Ha!! The last time we had a discussion about this topic I suggested that was possible and the usual cowards called me crazy. Now I feel vindicated.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 4:40am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: scary
        Is there a Metasploit yet?
        
        LoL
        
        I was watching Hack5 and they had this hack challenge one of the competitors was using Metasploit to hack the others and delete the files needed to complete the test LoL
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Richard (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 6:02am
    
    Re: Re: scary
    hackers have ruined online gaming on the PS3
    
    Technical laziness by Sony is the root cause of the problem.
    
    There are perfectly viable online games that run on open platforms.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Spectere (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 12:12pm
    
    Re: Re: scary
    The fact of the matter is that Sony appears to have a poor understanding of system security. Furthermore, Sony put so much much trust in their "secure" console that they didn't even consider what to do when (not "if") the system was cracked wide open. Finally, rather than working to fix it or make the issue better for the benefit of their customers, they lashed out and started suing.
    
    As for the stat resets, that's all Infinity Ward's fault and, apparently, MW1 is vulnerable as well. For reasons unknown to anyone who has even the slightest grasp of security, IW decided to solely trust the server software to award experience for kills and match wins (servers with the exploit do nothing fancier than sending large, negative amounts of experience to the client). I don't think I need to explain why doing it like that was a terrible idea.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- anonymous wuss, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:02pm
  
  Re: scary
  Using the same logic you would think that car companies would sue any one that did so much as replaced their tires with 22's. Why is it ok that one company does and the other one doesn't?
  How can the a hole at the top (you know who Im referring to) applaud the decision to unmask someone for watching a yutube video. Only in America can people root against their own interest and stand up for corporations over citizen rights.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
TechnoMage (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:44pm

Anon will not be pleased
I wonder if Anonymous will decide to target this judge... (I'm not in favor of it actually happening, but... it would be funny to watch{as long as you aren't the one who pissed them off in the first place})

As they say... "It's all for the Lulz"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:33pm
  
  Re: Anon will not be pleased
  anonymous is never for the lulz. They are all about the adolescent muscle flexing of the kids who get picked last for the games at school, nothing more. As soon as various governments started knocking on their doors, the children (and most of them were children) got put to bed without dinner, and have stopped being "l33t hax0rz" because Mommy took away their computers.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:56pm
    
    Re: Re: Anon will not be pleased
    It's funny watching you flail around desperately, TAM. Thanks for the free (oh no!) amusement.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Richard (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 6:04am
    
    Re: Re: Anon will not be pleased
    You have no way of knowing whether any of what you say is even vaguely true so why do you post it?.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 1:29pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Anon will not be pleased
      The evidence suggests he's stupid.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:55pm

Hotspots
Time to start filling those server logs with IP addys from McDonald's free wifi.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- anonymous wuss, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:04pm
  
  Re: Hotspots
  yup, easy enough
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
telnetdoogie (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 6:57pm

Ooh!
Maybe they'll subpoena me. That'd be entertaining. I think I probably did both of these things (visited his site, and watched the video) - but I don't own a PS3 nor have I ever actually physically touched one! (although I did walk dangerously close to one at Best Buy one time, I hope my proximity didn't damage the unit)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:30pm
  
  Re: Ooh!
  I don't own a PS3 and I never modded one either. I was thinking of visiting that site just so they can subpoena me too. Perhaps everyone should visit the site through proxies and TOR browsers just to exhaust the courts ability to subpoena all the IP addresses and give them a hard time. Then again, the site is probably down by now I'm sure.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 8:39pm
  
  Re: Ooh!
  Ha! Seriously, our brains and the information contained therein are now weapons of mass destruction! In certain sections of Best Buy, et al. anyway.
  
  I've never visited the page or watched his particular video, but I've seen those codes in nearly every comment section of every article at several different sites where I've read about this case, and I'd wager I could find alternative places where the same information and instructional video are available with little effort.
  
  With the fractal way of information dissemination on the web, I imagine the entire internet will need to be supoena'd.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- cc (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 9:24pm
  
  Re: Ooh!
  Yeah, they'll subpoena you and about 30,000 other hoodlums who wandered there after following the links on Slashdot.
  
  Except it's probably too late for that now. I bet they were planning on using the logs as an intimidation tactic to stop the info from spreading -- so whatever they do now, there's no chance of containment and intimidation is pointless.
  
  Will they really try to sue half the internet as a show of revenge? I'd like to see them try!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 11:00pm
    
    Re: Re: Ooh!
    Feel the wrath of the Streisand Effect. The harder you try to contain something, the harder it is to contain. Heck, if the government can't even contain the information from Wikileaks (which originated from the government), how the heck does Sony expect to contain this code?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- hah, 5 Mar 2011 @ 9:07am
  
  Re: Ooh!
  I say we upload the video and watch it like 1000,000,000 times
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
velox (profile), 4 Mar 2011 @ 7:18pm

How soon can we start adding IP addresses to the Index Librorum Prohibitorum?

Those who read the sacred but forever forbidden texts shall be excommunicated and banned for all eternity from SOE.com

The sooner we have more men of fortitude such as Magistrate Joseph Spero who will issue potent Writs of Inquisition... er... subpoenas, the sooner we will have the fuel we need to scorch and burn the likes of GeoHot at the ..... suit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 7:51pm

If I get a tattoo or a piercing, can God sue me? Wait, isn't Sony a Japanese company?
See, America?
The American Way is now, "Bomb the shit out of somebody, build them back up, then wait for them to shit on us and let them wipe all our collective asses with our own constitution."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mIKE, 4 Mar 2011 @ 10:02pm

It just boggles
Watching a video or stumbling upon a blog can get you into trouble now huh?? Might as well just start following my old neighbor's advice about rude people. Boycott anyone that has dealings with the individual and let anyone in on the scam. A roofing contractor was rude to her while her husband was at work. She never said word one to anybody that he had but she compiled a list of every store and business he frequented and told every one of those establishments she would no longer frequent them until they stopped associating with that person. All of her friends got a copy of the list and soon we all had copies. It wasn't long before that contractor couldn't buy a beer in town and he decided to move along because he didn't have the guts to apologize. It seems to me that the same principal would work in this case. Stop spending money anywhere Sony products are sold. If a retailer knows that carrying Sony products means you won't buy anything from them they will react more quickly and cutting Sony of from their revenue stream will make them much more responsive. They can't sue us for treating them like dog-doo on our feet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 3:34am
  
  Re: It just boggles
  Watching a video or stumbling upon a blog can get you into trouble now huh?
  
  Yes.
  
  Boycott...
  
  Boycotts don't work unless you have a lot of people. And face it, most of your neighbors don't know and don't care. Heck, most of them don't want to know.
  
  Most of your neighbors understand that reading the wrong blogs, watching the wrong videos, thinking the wrong thoughts�all those things can get you into trouble.
  
  Better to stay out of trouble.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 4:35am
    
    Re: Re: It just boggles
    That is simple to remedy, lets just talk about it every chance we get.
    
    I have been boycotting Sony for 10 years now LoL
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:19am
      
      Re: Re: Re: It just boggles
      I have been boycotting Sony for 10 years now
      
      Your boycott has obviously been very effective. Super effective. Ultra effective.
      
      In fact, your boycott has been even more effective than the boycott over Sony's rootkit.
      
      �
      
      Longer-lasting is more effective.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 9:31am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: It just boggles
        More longer-lasting then I never buying anything from them again?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous & Under Your Bed, 6 Mar 2011 @ 12:58am
  
  Re: It just boggles
  mIKE said: "Boycott anyone that has dealings with the individual and let anyone in on the scam."
  
  I live in a small city, which means a very large segment of society works for one of the two big employers here. I've seen a number of small businesses go under rather quickly when bad word of mouth spread about them. That is what happens when so many people have a common connection with each other. For example, one was a restaurant owner who had friends in high places. This allowed the owner to avoid paying taxes. It amazed me how fast his business went under when word about his activities began to spread (too bad too, I liked the food there). Another was the owner of a popular car repair franchise, whose mechanics were under suspicion of creating problems for car owners in order to ensure repeat business. So your idea isn't far fetched at all and can definitely succeed in locations where the conditions are just right.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Mar 2011 @ 11:54pm

What is interesting is that the government is trying to say what people should watch or not watch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sam sin, 5 Mar 2011 @ 3:30am

Sony are still clutching at straws over this. trouble is, the USA legal representatives are bending over backwards to help it, whilst stomping the ordinary citizens and their rights, into the mud. i wonder how much this judge was 'encouraged' to make this decision? why was their no such assistance given to the people that had bought the PS3 because it had the 'other os' option, only to see Sony remove it? yes, it is Sony's console; yes they can add or remove features; yes they can enable or disable functions when they like, but not when a particular function or feature was used to help sell the thing in the first place. that is mis-selling!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 4:51am

Well I guess Sony will have a long road ahead.
Nintendo 3DS took 24 hours to be hacked.

That is what you get when you tell people your system is unhackable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michial Thompson, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:58am

No right violated and whys it a big deal
Come on little mikee, noone's rights are being violated here. Remember an IP address doesn't identify a person at all remember??? You are so quick to point this out time and time again when supporting the theft of potential revenue via priracy...

So why's it a big deal at all getting a list of IP addresses. An IP Address has no rights, an IP Address is nothing important remember????????
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 12:11pm
  
  Re: No right violated and whys it a big deal
  It's a big deal because, and this may not sink in right away, is invades the privacy of those who viewed it more for curiosity's sake.
  
  IF it's illegal, make it illegal across the board; if not, don't. Just don't have this shitty system where jailbreaking your Wii or Xbox is fine, but the PS3 jailbreak isn't.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Michial Thompson, 6 Mar 2011 @ 5:27am
    
    Re: Re: No right violated and whys it a big deal
    According to little mikee an IP Address does not identify a person, so again not even those viewing it have a privacy invasion issue because they haven't been identified.
    
    It's little mikee's cake that he wants to look at and eat at the same time, not mine.
    
    But like with most of little mikee's crap, his controdictions in stance are probably more to gain fools to click on banners and sell ads than to really try to make a difference.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - fattyboombatty, 6 Mar 2011 @ 6:57pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: No right violated and whys it a big deal
      I understand you don't agree with Techdirt's point of view on pretty much every subject.
      
      Can I ask why you resort to name calling and what appears to be condescending speech when trying to make your points? It seems counter-productive.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mike Masnick (profile), 6 Mar 2011 @ 9:52pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: No right violated and whys it a big deal
      According to little mikee an IP Address does not identify a person, so again not even those viewing it have a privacy invasion issue because they haven't been identified.
      
      Michial, of course I have never said that. What I have said is that it does not accurately identify who was sitting at a computer doing stuff. I have not said that revealing it does not identify someone. The question is whether or not that's really the person who did the activity. That is the problem as I have clearly explained.
      
      It's little mikee's cake that he wants to look at and eat at the same time, not mine.
      
      Um. No. Try again, and next time, try it without the baseless insults.
      
      But like with most of little mikee's crap, his controdictions in stance are probably more to gain fools to click on banners and sell ads than to really try to make a difference
      
      What "contradiction"? It's already been explained to you there is none. Will you admit you were wrong? Doubtful.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 2:47pm
  
  Re: No right violated and whys it a big deal
  IP addresses could identify the wrong person and this judge might be facilitating such a process. IP addresses usually identify someone, but that doesn't mean they identify the right person.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 10:24pm
    
    Re: Re: No right violated and whys it a big deal
    For example, perhaps while my IP address was visiting that site I had a friend over my house, using the Internet, and it was my friend that was visiting the site through my computer/IP address. Now my privacy is being invaded because of something a friend of mine did. Perhaps I often have friends over my house and they frequently use my Internet connection while over for various reasons.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- vivaelamor (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 3:27pm
  
  Re: No right violated and whys it a big deal
  "So why's it a big deal at all getting a list of IP addresses. An IP Address has no rights, an IP Address is nothing important remember????????"
  
  All the more reason not to allow the invasion of privacy, if the information isn't useful anyway.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 10:25pm
    
    Re: Re: No right violated and whys it a big deal
    Exactly, by revealing someones IP address you're invading someones privacy, but not necessarily the right persons privacy.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shon Gale (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 6:08am

Frak the judge. He's not the final word. It's a well known fact that American Judges interpret the law the way they feel that day. So Frak 'em. There's no justice in amerika. If you try to use the courts you are not only stupid but you are now broke.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Thomas (profile), 6 Mar 2011 @ 7:15am
  
  Re:
  People slip fat envelopes under the table to the judge and then the judge rules in their favor. This is the new American version of "justice", which really means "justice for the rich and powerful". Woe betide any poor people who get caught in this machine.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 6 Mar 2011 @ 10:09am
    
    Re: Re:
    People slip fat envelopes under the table to the judge and then the judge rules in their favor. This is the new American version...
    
    Grow up, kid. Nothing new about it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dohn Joe, 5 Mar 2011 @ 6:26am

Sony has Deep Pockets!
"This seems pretty extreme. Why is it okay to identify people just because they visited a website or watched a video? As the EFF noted, these subpoenas seem extremely broad, and it's disappointing that the judge signed off on them."

Disappointing or predictable? When "paid off" judges will "sign off"!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 6:56am

this is crazy. judge must have never read the Constitution before. i just dont understand how judges get so much power they can just ignore the constitution like this. i know this is already corporate america corps are first american people are last. think they forget that its people thats building/working doing there job. im going to help rack there bill i dont own a ps3. but now im going on a quest to find this video and text. i will be hitting this video and text with every free wi-fi that i find. This is a BIG F U to the american people. some sheep are starting to wake up. they keep this up and the entire herd is going to be awake and they not going to be happy when they find out. i recommend everyone do the same just give them so many addresses to look up they will be busy for long time.
had a boycott on Sony for long time. ever sense they installed viruses on music cds that killed everybody's dvd drive. its ok for them to hack my pc? but not allowed to watch a video or read something?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Billy Bob Big-Johnson (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 7:41am

We all should go there
What if everyone that read this article visited the website?

I wonder how many subpoenas are too many?

Could the court issue 1 million?

What effect would the fact that a visitor doesn't even own a

Play Station have on the process?

Is it simply illegal to visit a website with illegal content, or does there have to be intent on the part of the visitor?

Just questions... Big Brother is coming back into to your lives!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Howard, 5 Mar 2011 @ 8:16am

note to self, never buy a sony product again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mickie Muose, 5 Mar 2011 @ 9:48am

PS3 Hack
Where is the web site? I want to get on the list. I have never owned a PS3 and never will. Sony, you can keep your BS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thomas (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 10:09am

My My...
I never thought you'd get in trouble for viewing YouTube unless it was kiddie porn or something. How in the heck can you get in trouble just looking at a YouTube video of someone hacking their own computer? Is it possible that Sony slipped the judge a fat envelope?

When it comes to anything the Entertainment industry thinks is wrong, the government tends to agree since they get enough money in "election campaign contributions" and they need to pay back with votes and court decisions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thomas (profile), 5 Mar 2011 @ 10:10am

Also means..
you can be in trouble if you mis-type the web address and go to something you didn't want to? So the judge wants to punish people for mis-typing too? This sounds so much like a judge in Sony's pockets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
theskyrider, 5 Mar 2011 @ 11:43am

sony already has my name and address
filed under 'here is what you can do with your suck-ass info-lithium battery camcorder.'

Free from SONY since July 2001.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sherwin Flight, 5 Mar 2011 @ 12:19pm

To the Anonymous COWARD that said "Good on them! When the veil of anonymous is pulled away from these people, they might think twice about breaking the law."

I would be very interested in knowing if you would have the same opinion if it were something you were involved in. It's people like you that make this world what it is. I guess you also agree with Yahoo when they gave the Chinese Government info that landed an activist in jail.

Senior citizens should keep their opinions to themselves if they are misinformed on the situation. When you agree that a private company should be able to find the identities of someone just for watching a video, and then probably try to get them to settle for a ridiculously high amount, then you obviously have your head in your ass, or work for the **AA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 6:00pm
  
  Re:
  Your sarcasm detector is on the fritz.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 1:13pm

Why it's ok
Why is it okay to identify people just because they visited a website or watched a video?

Fwiw, I honestly can't recall whether I'm personally affected by this or not. I might have visited the website after the news of the suit first broke. I just can't remember.

Anyhow, this just goes to show that we're all idiots. Or we don't really care about letting third parties poke their noses into our reading habits. One of the two�or both.

If we wanted privacy more than speed and convenience, then we'd be browsing with Tor. That's all there is to it. 'Cause we sure can't count on the court system to watch out for the public interest. The courts have no regard for citizens. We've seen that over and over again.

Right now, people don't have the political power to get new magistrates appointed. The lobbyists run Capitol Hill and the judges come with (D) and (R) after their names. And both the (D)'s and the (R)'s are in hock to the banksters�pawns for the multi-nationals.

I'm guilty of not using Tor myself right now. Shame on me. I should know better. I do know better.

Bottom line: It's time to either browse with Tor�or to just shut up about any �right� to read in peace.

Ok?

�
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
skrea, 5 Mar 2011 @ 4:01pm

Sony subpoenas YouTube and Geohot...
If forced to comply, they should deliver the IP logs in hardcopy form. Thousands of pages of IP addresses, and be sure to charge them for the shipping and handling charges...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:06pm

Is it a pure coincidence that Spero's first name is also Joseph?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
anonymous wuss, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:12pm

this is pointless
are they gonna subpoena the entire internet? There are several sites that have the same vid with the code posted in nearly every comment on the video. This is laughable and Im enjoying the laugh. They're loosing money from this code and loosing even more money trying to seek cash they not gonna get.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Mar 2011 @ 5:50pm

Wow sony, you sure do know how to keep and make new customers. I have never owned a PS3, but i am certainly thinking about owning one now. You handle your PR so well, you dont come across at all as a spoiled little brat, nor as a grumpy old man. Neither of those apply.

Stay classy sony, i am sure there is a bright future shitting on your customers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thomas (profile), 6 Mar 2011 @ 7:12am

So if..
you don't even own a PS3 and just go to the website to see what it is all about, then you are being sued? How can they sue you if you don't even own a PS3 and have never even owned any PS devices?

I think they must have slipped a fat envelope to the judge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Mar 2011 @ 9:41am
  
  Re: So if..
  That's another problem - Sony is trying to collect these IPs to try to make their case in California and not NJ where Hotz is located (and not necessarily to target those who looked at a web page). I guess if Sony can show a preponderance of IPs in CA, they can use that to prove the case should be tried in CA, or that's the theory anyway.
  
  However it all means a whole lotta nothing in scenarios like the one you suggested, and IPs are not indicative of intent anyway. It's a waste of time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Recent Blu Ray Player Buyer, 6 Mar 2011 @ 9:28am

Removal of Other OS = No More Sony Product Purchases
I recently purchased a Samsung Blu Ray player. I boycotted Sony, and deprived them of around $100 of revenue. How long can Sony play silly legal word games with EULAs and the law and still not piss off shareholders or more importantly the majority of their consumer base?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ntlgnce, 6 Mar 2011 @ 9:48am

Well I visisted the website, and watched the video, but I do not own a PS3. I would really like to see them sue me, or send a threatening letter to me.. That would be KOOL..

Something that would be cooler, is if someone used the PS3's as a botnet to attack Sony, with a message that says We baught the PS3 from you we OWN them now, and will do as we wish with them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DLCL, 6 Mar 2011 @ 10:13am

I hope to God I get one. I visited the site and watched the video, and I don't even own a PS3 or care to at this point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Noel Coward, 6 Mar 2011 @ 5:21pm

Modding Illegal?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Noel Coward, 6 Mar 2011 @ 5:53pm

Modding Illegal?
When I was a kid, even before attending college for Electronic Engineering. We as children were always encouraged to take apart equipment and find new uses or add new features ..... or unlock some ;)
To find kids being punished for exploring and being creative seems deplorable. Hasn't Sony made enough from the sale?

Seems Sony insists on its LONG HISTORICAL bad bay corporate ways. Though to be fair, they're not the only ones. However, many of todays corporates have followed their lead in strategies they devised and perfected.

Watching a video or visiting a site cannot be illegal, and you'd have to download the said instructions, then intent would have to be proved. The ruling only referred to those sites. So, no doubt when it goes global and they distribute it via internet forums his ruling will mean ZERO ...

In my books you can mod all you like, but should you try to sell it or profit from it, then then the law should apply. Any serious business person would reinvent and innovate a better product.

Most engineers have prospered from reverse engineering and many new innovations have occurred through this practice. In fact, so has Sony as a company, how ironic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Mar 2011 @ 7:23pm

I Really see this better phrased as...
Knowing how to make a bomb is not illegal. Building one is.
Thinking thoughts about Murder is not illegal. Committing it is.

Now if Yoda (name used withouth license to describe the small green wizened Jedi (also used without license to describe a master of the Force (also also used without license to describe the power generated by mitochlor.... oh fluck it.))) was to mangle those sentances Sony may just have a point.

I was really tempted to see just how far I could nest those references but I was too lazy to lookup the spelling for the... um... mitocloridian-thingies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Noel Coward, 6 Mar 2011 @ 7:30pm

PS3 Product or Service
Is the PS3 a product or a service?

Sounds to me like their not selling a console product, but a license to a service. I think companies are misleading customers into believing they've bought a product. When legally they seem to view it as a license & service.

So, if I buy a car and mod it, or PC and upgrade it with generic parts and code, or use my old fridge and mod it out as a beer cooler, I'm in contravention of the law. Gee better come and get me then.

Seems to me the laws are terribly inept and out of date. Sony inc are trying to redefine the laws in their favor.
If they do this for Sony, then they should apply this stupid logic to all products. In which case I'd imagine the greedy corporates would receive a consumer backlash and laws applying to products would need be revised.

Consumers should vote with their pockets, you'd soon see their attitudes change. Sony by selling this product and reserving ALL RIGHTS to modify it after the fact and NOT DISCLOSING IN FULL their INTENT is a contravention of the law.

So in effect, the PS3 might as well be one BIG SOFTWARE DONGLE. Which is fine if they had of told customers that in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Mar 2011 @ 7:36pm
  
  Re: PS3 Product or Service
  UM - I was thinking you can actually mod fridges etc legally.
  
  The better point would be to say that if your software dongle stops working.... gets to scratched....ever - they have to replace it at their cost as you still have a valid license to access their service :)
  
  Either you *own* it or they do - personally either way works just a little consitency would be nice.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Noel Coward, 6 Mar 2011 @ 9:52pm

PS3 Product or Service
I think Sony's problem is how they market their products, which can be construed as misleading at best.

If it were JUST a software dongle, then Sony should not venture to make it a hub for entertainment.

Is it a PC, as in computing and computer games?
Or is it a Console Game, come glorified dongle?

As soon as it does more than just play SONY copyrighted games,it gets ugly.

Let's not forget, Sony heavily subsidized PS3 with Blu-Ray to the tune of billions, simply to sink the better Toshiba HD-DVD disc product. Why? ... To corner the Entertainment Market. This strategy was a complete reversal of their Betamax debacle.

If Sony feels out of pocket and desperate, this is what you get for HIGH RISK destructive strategy. They succeeded in decimating Toshiba's HD-DVD, and in China ... China Blu will destroy Sony's dreams of Global domination.

For the record, I couldn't careless for PS3, never touched it. Come to think of it, I haven't bought any Sony products now for more than 10 years, with the unfortunate exception of having a Sony Ericsson phone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Clark Cox (profile), 6 Mar 2011 @ 11:59pm

There really is only one thing to say to this:

erk: C0 CE FE 84 C2 27 F7 5B D0 7A 7E B8 46 50 9F 93 B2 38 E7 70 DA CB 9F F4 A3 88 F8 12 48 2B E2 1B riv: 47 EE 74 54 E4 77 4C C9 B8 96 0C 7B 59 F4 C1 4D pub: C2 D4 AA F3 19 35 50 19 AF 99 D4 4E 2B 58 CA 29 25 2C 89 12 3D 11 D6 21 8F 40 B1 38 CA B2 9B 71 01 F3 AE B7 2A 97 50 19 R: 80 6E 07 8F A1 52 97 90 CE 1A AE 02 BA DD 6F AA A6 AF 74 17 n: E1 3A 7E BC 3A CC EB 1C B5 6C C8 60 FC AB DB 6A 04 8C 55 E1 K: BA 90 55 91 68 61 B9 77 ED CB ED 92 00 50 92 F6 6C 7A 3D 8D Da: C5 B2 BF A1 A4 13 DD 16 F2 6D 31 C0 F2 ED 47 20 DC FB 06 70
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Noel Coward, 7 Mar 2011 @ 4:06am

PS3 Dongle
It would seem the legal authorities see the modification to the firmware as a software modification. So, clearly this carries more weight than a hardware modification. When you look at the fine print, the PS3 is more of a VERY EXPENSIVE Security device or dongle. Though this is a little gray, by virtue of its feature set extension into other areas.

So, hardware analogy doesn't wash and they are within their rights to ban a user from a network service. Though I don't agree any company has the right to modify a product after the fact without fully informing or a full disclosure. When Microsoft offers a security patch, it needs to disclose the details and I can refuse to apply it should I so wish to. If they force it and break features or functionality, they have a responsibility.

I think Sony's ruling elite have made a bad call on this. Given that they broke a feature that was a point of sale to LINUX users. Last I checked, the count for ALL versions of LINUX accounted for no more than 2% of the global user base.
How many of those were Sony PS3 users? NOT MANY!

Not only has this killed the second hand PS3 market dead. Because buyers don't know if they're banned consoles or not. Traders won't touch them with a 10ft barge pole now.
This has started to affect sales and is set to cost them far more than it was worth.

What was a storm in a tea cup, has now become a Tsunami of bad PR and REAL LOSS in SALES, not virtual. Revoking a Linux user feature was dumb, though I don't agree with what some users did on their network. Two wrongs don't make it right.

Personally,if I was in the legal hot seat over this. My question would be, "Where is the proof I agreed to this so called LICENSE agreement? Do they force you to register your PS3 serial & MAC ID, then force you to agree to those terms and conditions?" If not, I'd like to see you waste time & money in court over that one.

Where is Sony's return program for users affected by its decision to revoke this feature that was a point of sale.
I believe the law stipulates a refund is in order. So to if I refuse to accept some idiotic invasive attempt to erode consumer rights via an agreement that wasn't made clear enough prior to sale.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Daemon_ZOGG (profile), 7 Mar 2011 @ 11:51am

"Sony can unmask anyone who visited GeoHot's website"
We're tired of being strong-armed by over-bloated companies for using their(OUR!) products as we see fit. I haven't bought ANY $ony products or a music cd/dvd movie in many years because of crap like this. My message to everyone is: "Do as you please with what you buy". And if you have to buy $ony products, buy them from a pawn shop, second-hand resale, yard-sale, used/refurb sites. That way, $ony doesn't get anymore of YOUR money for THEIR crappy, proprietary products. };P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
chris, 8 Mar 2011 @ 5:29am

I'm more worried about this case than ever. It seems like this judge has been bought and paid for. I don't see how GeoHat can get a fair trial with this guy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Murdoch, 9 Mar 2011 @ 6:03am

Important Information
Hello friends.
It has come to my attention that a certain Nigerian Prince would like to offer you a rather wealthy sum in exchange for some favors that we ask of you. All we need is for you to look over a few items of interest...

erk: C0 CE FE 84 C2 27 F7 5B D0 7A 7E B8 46 50 9F 93 B2 38 E7 70 DA CB 9F F4 A3 88 F8 12 48 2B E2 1B
riv: 47 EE 74 54 E4 77 4C C9 B8 96 0C 7B 59 F4 C1 4D
pub: C2 D4 AA F3 19 35 50 19 AF 99 D4 4E 2B 58 CA 29 25 2C 89 12 3D 11 D6 21 8F 40 B1 38 CA B2 9B 71 01 F3 AE B7 2A 97 50 19
R: 80 6E 07 8F A1 52 97 90 CE 1A AE 02 BA DD 6F AA A6 AF 74 17
n: E1 3A 7E BC 3A CC EB 1C B5 6C C8 60 FC AB DB 6A 04 8C 55 E1
K: BA 90 55 91 68 61 B9 77 ED CB ED 92 00 50 92 F6 6C 7A 3D 8D
Da: C5 B2 BF A1 A4 13 DD 16 F2 6D 31 C0 F2 ED 47 20 DC FB 06 70
[ link to this | view in chronology ]