Gamers Looking to Sue Sony Over Firmware 3.21

Earlier this week, Sony initiated a firmware update that would remove the option of installing your own operating system on your PS3. With some running Linux on their PS3s, this mandatory firmware update angered that audience, but the reason behind the removal of such a feature was to diminish the potential threat of software piracy on the PS3. This forceful action is not sitting well with consumers and now PS3 owners that have been affected by the firmware are firing back at Sony by issuing complaints to the FCC and the BBB.

[LordMarius]

lol, before the update there is a message of what the update does and the terms of service, which in both you have to press Agree or cancel.

This is a lost cause

[Parapraxis]

You got it Marius, it was pretty hard to miss.

[captain-obvious]

good luck with that

[Anorexorcist]

If they don't approve of Sony making changes to the it's videogame system the PS3, with which they hold all exclusive marketing and service marks to it, why don't they forget about wasting time in litigation and go build their own home videogame console that they can hack and exploit at will without any issue?

"...but the reason behind the removal of such a feature was to diminish the potential threat of software piracy on the PS3. This forceful action is not sitting well with consumers"

You mean those same consumers that don't want to pay Sony and all the third-party developers for their products and instead choose to cheat the market by promoting and participating in piracy?

"...now PS3 owners that have been affected by the firmware are firing back at Sony by issuing complaints to the FCC and the BBB."

The Federal Communications Commission and the Better Business Bureau I'm sure are not going to give these pathetic complaints a second thought and are going to support Sony's decision to decrease the possibilities of exploitation for it's product.

It takes all kinds of idiots...A woman once even made a formal complaint to the attorney general towards her doctor for him telling her that she was obese and that she needed to lose weight to improve her health. Idiots get offended for the most asinine reasons these days. These idiots will never be taken seriously.

[commodore64]

I predicted that this would happen...
http://n4g.com/NewsCom-5006...
http://n4g.com/NewsCom-4999...
http://n4g.com/NewsCom-4993...

@ marius

Unfortunately, the disclaimer in the Update doesn't cover the legal matter at hand.

The ps3 fat console was sold with features which were advertised as being a unique selling point, and doubtlessly made the ps3 a more attractive purchase for many gamers, including researchers who used linux/ps3 as a cheap data processor.

The fact that this feature, which was advertised by Sony - and paid - for by consumers, is now being removed is what the lawsuit is about.

The reasons for the removal of the multi OS ability may be valid , but that does not adress the fact that consumers paid for something which has been taken away.

You can harp on about TOU and update disclaimers all you like.
Consumers will be able to argue, in court, that with this update Sony has reduced their ability to take full advantage of the advertised features at point of sale.
Consumers will be able to demonstrate that, install or not, they are left with a reduced function ps3.

Basic consumer laws have been violated and this suit looks like Sony's worst nightmare.
Rightly so, too.

[HolyOrangeCows]

Hey, you hit agree. If you didn't read the details, your loss.

Better a little lawsuit than Ps3 being damned to piracy like the PSP.

[crck]

Only the people that upgraded to 3.21 agreed to the new terms of service which isn't legally binding anyway. The people that haven't upgraded haven't agreed to anything. Now if Sony requires the update to play new games or new blu-ray movies like they do on the PSP then aren't they guilty of false advertising(PSP and 360 games required an update but they never took features away)? Unless they forced people to sign a "terms of service" agreement at point of purchase I think they are legally screwed. Because if people update they lose linx. If they don't update then they lose PSN and maybe blu-ray / game functionality. Either way consumers are left with a device that doesn't do what Sony said it would when they bought it.

[peowpeow]

"lol, before the update there is a message of what the update does and the terms of service, which in both you have to press Agree or cancel.

This is a lost cause"

And if the ability to watch blu-ray movies was removed due to potential 'piracy', would you still argue that point?

[ArcFatalix]

Stop annoying people, Sony cant be sued here, they are within their rights.

[Neo604]

dump broke ass who try to score.

[JL]

This is an absolute lost cause. Seriously, what are people getting so worked up over. First off, 99% of people don't even use this feature. Secondly, as it has posed a threat due to hackers, Sony is entitled to protect their product by removing this feature. Much like how you're allowed to kill somebody (even though murder is against the law) if that person is posing a threat to your existence.

The real nail in the coffin? The terms of agreement. These are the very terms of agreement that EVERY Playstation user automatically agreed to by signing up for PSN or just by buying a Playstation. Learn to read things people.
http://www.scei.co.jp/ps3-e...

Most importantly, this part here:
"...and may include automatic updates or upgrades which may change your current operating system and could cause loss of data or content, or loss of function or utility."

See that? "Loss of function or utility". They made you aware of it from the very beginning that they could do it. You agreed to it. So nothing legal can be done.

[Lionsguard]

"And if the ability to watch blu-ray movies was removed due to potential 'piracy', would you still argue that point? "

LOL Wow man learn your analogies. You CAN'T compare the removal of OtherOS compared to the feature of watching movies. One of the MAIN features of the PS3 is that it was featured as a Blu-Ray movie player, hence why you paid so damn much (up to $600) for one. It was never shoved in your face that the Ps3 was a Linux computer. I'm just gonna go ahead and pull a statistic out of my ass but I'm willing to bet its close and I'm pretty sure 99% of the entire install base never even used OtherOS. The Linux community is tiny itself compared to Windows/Mac users and you think millions out there rushed out to buy a PS3 so they can install Linux? LOL!

Go up to some random PS3 owner and ask them what OtherOS is on the PS3 and it'd be the same as asking them where Sri Lanka is, they wouldn't have a damn clue. Watching Blu-Ray movies, Playing games = MAIN FEATURES, whereas, looking at pictures, listening to music, OtherOS are SUB-FEATURES. They're just in there as icing on the cake. If Sony sees it fit to remove a sub feature because it may potentially affect their asset and profit then they're gonna do it.

Oh and all those researchers, Why would they want to upgrade? they're on their own networks. I bet they haven't upgraded since the first firmware.

[WildArmed]

lol i wouldn't classify them as 'gamers'

[RedDragan]

LOL at some people.

The very first T&Cs you agree to stated Sony retain the right to remove any feature they want.

False advertising? Nope, T&Cs sorted that out... regardless of whether you agreed to the lastest update, because you agree'd when you first created a PSN account.

There is no case.

[vhero]

You cannot sue as they never once advertised otheros as a feature.

[ToothWhiteningFairy]

sony taketh away

gimme your teeth mofo's

[andron]

If they had left the PS3 alone Sony didn't have to make this move.

As gamers we can't have it both ways. Complaining about glitchers and hackers online, and at the same time praising the ones who make it possible is not possible.

Sony had to do this to keep PSN and PS3 functionality from getting compromised. Safe online gaming is really one of the main features I got a PS3, so I'm glad they are taking steps to maintain that...

[gaffyh]

You cannot sue Sony for this, they are within their rights to remove or add features for their console whenever they want. Not to mention the fact that you have to press "Agree" to the terms in order to install it, meaning you pretty much signed a contract saying that you don't care about Linux.

This is an unwinnable case put forward by idiots.

[nveenio]

The complaint is valid. The console was purchased with OtherOS as a feature...ALONG WITH PSN. It's not a far stretch to call this a "bait and switch" maneuver. The truth is that Sony is taking an easy solution. There are other ways to solve the potential of piracy.

That being said, the only reason Sony would have made such a move so quickly (there was really no notice about this even being considered), is if they actually found a way to pirate software by using GeoHot's technique.

THAT being said, I think the complaint about OtherOS is stupid. I have a 60GB, and I had Linux installed on it a long time ago, but not any more. In fact, the only reason I'd put Linux on there was because my computer crashed and I needed something until the new parts arrived. After my comp was back up, everything was fine. Besides piracy, OtherOS was virtually useless. Linux is a pain to set up with 3rd party hardware (like wireless keyboards and mice), and it really doesn't have anything useful on it, anyway. Sure, you could do some word processing, but come on...really?

People are mad because they want the option of "backing up" games if it's ever made possible.

[XRider]

I bought my PS3 two and a half years ago for $599 under the assumption and advertised by Sony that I could install another OS. It was a feature advertized along with backwards compatibility which was also removed after purchase. This is like buying a new car and a year later the dealership comes out to your home and removes the tires saying "sorry, we decided to take that feature away from you" without compensation.

Sony will lose this case and it still wont stop the hacking, piracy or other malicious intent. I supported the lawsuit against Microsoft for the RROD and I support this lawsuit aganst Sony. You core Sony fanboys are so freaking blind it's not even funny.

[Viper7]

//lol, before the update there is a message of what the update does and the terms of service, which in both you have to press Agree or cancel.

This is a lost cause//

Not really, as they will be loosing PSN which is one of the services they paid for when they bough the system.

This somewhat breaks few parts of Eu directive that says

// EU Directive 1999/44/EC:
The goods must
· comply with the description given by the seller and posses the same qualities and characteristics as other similar goods

· be fit for the purpose which the consumer requires them and which was made known to the seller at the time of purchase.

· show the same quality and performance, which are normal in goods of the same type and which consumers can reasonably expect. This will also take into account any public statements made about the specific characteristics of the goods by the producer, seller or in their advertising.//

Now if you cant a) play game or go online and use the promised online features b) use linux on the machine its doesn't really /comply with the description given by the seller and posses the same qualities and characteristics/

[Biggest]

Removing your tires? Really? I'm going out on a very short limb when I say you have no idea what you're saying. Sony said from day one that they can remove or change anything about your PS3. You agreed since the first day. Your bad. Go do something else with your time. I know you won't be a part of the law suit. You're just hear to say random crap. But those that are would be better served buying cans of premium tap water.

[raztad]

Sony does not force you to update, neither the update install by itself w/o permission. If you dont want to install the 3.21 firmware and keep OtherOS functionality you are free to do so. More so even if you decide to download the update there is a second notification warning you about the imminent removal, backup your data if needed and then asks you for confirmation. You can say No, and forget about it.

What Sony is doing is banning every one with no 3.21 and greater from the PSN, and they are absolutely right to do that. It's clear someone with Linux in their PS3 could potentially be hacking their system and playing pirated games.

This Lawsuit is a lost cause.

[skip2mylou]

go ahead and sue sony. because sony makes money off of this since sony can counter sue their asses, just throw the Terms of Service contract in their face in court

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

Well here is the kicker, if I didn't upgrade the firmware (which I haven't) and I decide I want to buy the latest and greatest game, God of War 4 or Uncharted 3, in order to play it I'm forced to upgrade.

Now will it say on the packaging that I'm required to upgrade my firmware and give up my rights to use the "Other OS" feature? It pretty damn clear that PS3 games are to be played on the PS3 console right? Isn't that false advertising to advertise that my PS3 can play all PS3 games?

I predicted this will happen and I hope the consumer win, because next thing I know all the console manufacturers start removing features to fit their own agenda.

I really think Sony has shot themselves in the foot, as you can see the massive 6000 comments on the PS3 blog about this.

http://blog.us.playstation....

They are already known as the one console manufacturer that removes features and now they are making it worse with bad PR for something minuscule. Yes, minuscule because the threat of piracy is non-existent.

Microsoft is dealing with piracy and is far the much easier console to pirate thanks due to the cheap availability of DVD burners and dual layer discs. Heck, just jtag it and you bypass all of it.

Besides, what if Nintendo disabled your cartridge slot on the Nintendo DS since the R4 is a huge piracy problem?

[princejb134]

is there console they can do whatever they want to it

[Anon1974]

So hackers want to pirate games and steal your credit card info, Sony moves to block this and people are going to sue? Whatever.

First off - no one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to update. Keep the old firmware and play on Linux all you want. Just don't expect to be able to partake in anymore updates. Which is more important to you?

Second - Read the terms. You own the system but you don't own the software. Sony can make whatever changes they need to that software.

Thirdly - Look at all the features Sony has added to the system. From Dolby TrueHD support to upscaling, from Divx and Xvid playback to Home - Sony has added dozens of features your PS3 didn't originally have, and now they're removing one widely unused features to protect their system and consumers from criminals.

Run Linux on your PC if you want Linux that bad. I, for one, am thankful that Sony is acting responsibly here and protecting it's consumers from people who have no respect for you, Sony or the hard working people who make the games we all love to play.

What choice did Sony have? Imagine you have a basement window, and thieves keep trying to break into the basement window to ROB YOU. You fix up the window, you put bars on it but they just keep getting in. Sony's tried to fix this issue before, but the hackers just keep trying to get in. Eventually you have to just board up the window to keep them out. Now, who's fault was that, the builder who thought you might like to have some light in the basement or the thieves who keep breaking in through the window in an attempt to steal from you?

Anyone who thinks this is Sony's fault and not direct the fault of the thieves ruining this for everyone needs to have their heads examined.

[jmare]

Are you really that stupid or has your fanboyism completely eaten your brain? Those theoretical games would play on the PS3 after you updated your firmware. How is that false advertising?

[Biggest]

He lost his brain to fanboyism a long time ago. He likes to pretend that he has a PS3 to make it seem better. You can Google everything about this issue and issues like it. You will find out just how silly the "consumers" are. As I said before. . . I hope their plight makes it to an actual court. I also hope they have lawyers good enough to keep it in court for years. I hope that when they lose, the lawyers take every penny those "consumers" have access to. But it won't make it that far. And that makes me sad.

[jadenkorri]

its not our fault some jerk off is hacking Sony's console. Granted I didn't use Linux on my ps3 as I have a computer, why would I need to use that feature, but what if that jerk off hacks his way through some glitch in the backward compatibility of the ps3, and then another update we have to agree with, Sony is forcing you to do an update you don't want, and if you don't you can't play online, let alone some games that check trophy information as soon as you start, guess what, those prob won't work considering the last issue with feb 28/29th. This update may not have affect most users, but what are you going to do when Sony does take away backward compatibility or something you use alot.

[jakethemuss]

Making them buy their overpriced add-ons.

[jakethemuss]

of their services, forcing their customers to upgrade.

EDIT: Man half you guys are dense. If theirs an exploit in part of sony's firmware apps they will fix it. The fact is they can't fix updates for exploits in linux. Thats why it was removed.

[Persistantthug]

I hereby approve of this potential lawsuit.

I'm in.

[commodore64]

Yep, this lawsuit will stick.

I have perused the TOU and I have looked at the consumer laws.
Sony has no defence.

Some are arguing that SOny is merely reacting to a security threat, by removing the OS. Unfortunately this holds no water.

The security concern should be addressed by SOny via software security updates while retaining the features of the original sale.

This will be very interesting!
Lawyers will be swarming in no time.

[Electricear]

I agree that if you refused to accept the new update and every thing worked the way it has in the past with the exception that you were unable to use anything new that comes out, then they would be ok; however, this is not the case. Games like Little Big Planet which functioned fine prior to this patch loose functionality if you do not wish to "downgrade" with this patch. People payed good money for the console and the games, and are now faced with an either or situation. Either I can have my Linux, or I can have my old games, but now I can not have both. That is the problem, because they have removed functionality of peoples systems either way, thus people are not getting what they payed for, and Sony has violated their rights with out their consent and with out them doing anything illegal.

Do I personally think this will go anywhere? Probably not because Sony has enough lawyers to bury this in the courts until the next generation of consoles come out, at which point they may be forced to either re-enable the feature (not a huge loss if there is a new console) or pay a fee to consumers who's rights they violated (you might get a check for $35 if you're lucky). The question one has to ask them selves at the moment is whats more important to each individual. Using the system as a Linux box, and potentially waiting for a positive outcome or playing games. That decision is going to be up to each individual. My sympathy goes out to anyone else who wrote apps for their ps3 or did anything serious with their ps3's in addition to using it as a gaming console.

[phalanx_mark]

with the mountain of ps3 linux users out there sony must be trembling in their boots.

[Serg]

@Commodore64

No, this will not be interesting, it will be boring, if this case even makes it inside a court room the judge will swing his hammer and everything is over.

I would like to make a suggestion to you, never go to lawschool, just a waste of time. Although I doubt that you are even remotely qualified to even apply to one.

When you signed up for PSN you waved the right to initiate legal steps against Sony in any matter regarding the functionality of the PS3.

The thing I don't get is, why is everybody acting like it's the end of the world? OtherOS feature removed, big deal. Seriously I bet most of the people running their mouth can't even spell Linux, probably don't even own a PS3. I use Linux on my PC and I could care less for the OtherOS feature.

[Microsoft Xbox 360]

Wow the xbox fanboys have the worst analogies ever.

Here is what IdleLeeSuingLung said:

"Besides, what if Nintendo disabled your cartridge slot on the Nintendo DS since the R4 is a huge piracy problem?"

Simply moronic. Disabling the cartridge of a DS is like disabling the entire device. This isn't the same case with OtherOS. You can still play ALL your games even with OtherOS out the window.

It's simple, these 360 fanboys are only in here for the sake of taking down Sony.

[SiLeNt KNighT]

It's a simple cut and dry case. Sony can and will be sued unless they provide customers with a suitable alternative. However 'suitable' is left to interpritation. Terms and conditions are for the firmware, networking and USE of software. U can't put limitations on what was already purchased and provided as a feature, regardless of the agree button you push. Even if the most recent terms were accepted it was mandatory to update to play online so to use your ps3 as it was intended when it was purchased you had to update. Who is anybody to say this feature is any less useful as BC or using the psn?? U can't say 'nobody' uses it so it's ok. Legally in the state of California this is a violation of consumers rights. Just because "Sony made it so they can do why they want" or "u clicked accept" doesn't mean Sony can take away features you paid for when u purchased your product. There's so many uneducated statements trying to be passed off as fact. People should become a lawyer or seek legal advice before they attempt to give it. Although somebody can do a search on google for legal matters, it has no relevance if u really don't know what your talking about.

[skip2mylou]

read and weep idiots that want to sue Sony.

11. MAINTENANCE AND UPGRADES
From time to time, it may become necessary for SCEA to provide certain content or services to you to ensure that PSN, content or services offered through PSN, your PlayStation®3 computer entertainment system, the PSP® (PlayStation®Portable) system or other SCEA-authorized hardware is functioning properly in accordance with SCEA guidelines. Some content or services may be provided automatically without notice when you sign into PSN. Such content or service may include automatic updates or upgrades which may change your current operating system, cause a loss of data or content or cause a loss of functionalities or utilities. Such upgrades or updates may be provided for system software for your PlayStation®3 computer entertainment system, the PSP® (PlayStation®Portable) system, or other SCEA-authorized hardware. Access or use to any system software is subject to terms and conditions of a separate end user license agreement found at http://www.us.playstation.c... You authorize SCEA to provide such content and services and agree that SCEA shall not be liable for any damages arising from provision of such content or services or maintenance services. It is recommended that you regularly back up any data located on the hard disk that is of a type that can be backed up.

http://us.playstation.com/s...

[The Lazy One]

Have any of you ever tried law suits where contracts are in question? Sony is well within their stated rights, but it's more than legal to argue that the contract/terms of use aren't legal to begin with, which would nullify the contract.

The biggest argument they have is that sony is removing some features that have no connection to these security concerns if you don't update. For example, removing support for new PS3 games and Blu-Ray disks is completely bull. Removing support for PSN on non-updated systems would be completely within sony's rights though.

My aunt just did this against a company that had an infinite non-competition clause in their terms of use on a software product she used for a year.

I'd also wonder what happens with people who don't have PS3s connected to the internet. They made a sizable investment and won't be able to upgrade their PS3s making them a $600 brick.

[Therealspy03]

any reason to sue these days.

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

Are you really that stupid? Did you even read what I said?

I said, if you choose NOT to update the PS3 the games won't work. Yet, I'm practically forced to upgrade to play the latest games. Now does it say on the game packaging that by using this game that I'm giving up features on this console? There is a warning on the package that clearly states, online experience might vary which is not something Sony can control... What does that tell you?

It's pretty clear Sony is removing a feature for no real good reason blaming it on the non-existant "security" issue. Are you really going to defend that? Smells like fanboyism to me.

Even if you cite piracy (which is non-existant and very unlikely to happen) as the reason, there are plenty of consoles that survived piracy and thrives. Furthermore Sony can close that loophole after the fact and it is only limited to the earlier consoles. Heck, right now both Xbox 360 and Wii survives just fine with piracy affecting them.

It is a non-issue, but Sony chose to take away from their customers instead.

[mastiffchild]

Idle-I don't care if you think Wii and 360 do fine WITH piracy, they shouldn't have to as it's theft. Any moves to prevent theft should be applauded and fact is hardly anyone bothered with the other OS anyway. Before this happened most non Sony gamers ridiculed the feature as pointless but suddenly it's as important in some people's minds as the bloody BR drive!

Sony make far more games for their own platform than either MS or Nintendo so, tell me, how do they NOT stand to lose a great deal more from piracy should it become an issue on the PS3? As such the hack was a direct threat to Sony's business model and one fresh in their mind from the way the PSP was killed for developers by piracy and CFW.

Hardly anyone used the feature because it didn't run perfectly and, being frank, was a bit of a pain to get running to start with. Now, I think it's a shame that those people using it have to change but they shouldn't blame Sony(and I'm no industry apologist, not for anyone-we gamers are always getting shafted) but Geohot. I don't believe, either, for a minute, that he never intended CFW and ultimately to enable piracy from the start(whatever he says) as that's ALWAYS the route these things take. The Slim never had the feature to begin with, few fat owners used it but now it's not there it's important enough to cry to your brief over? Gimme a break!

They have the right to defend their business and remove things as and when they like for their system. Nobody bought their PS3 because it could run Linux. Nobody. It was just something that a tiny minority of PS3 owners found some convenience in and no more. Given Sony have covered themselves both before and after the fact I also fail to see any legal loophole left uncovered but the fact is anyone suing over this might as well wave a banner saying they support piracy. Piracy is a big drain on gaming and steps to halt the greed and selfishness of those perpetuating it should be supported even if they're a little hard to bear.

[Microsoft Xbox 360]

IdleLeeSuingLung said:

"It's pretty clear Sony is removing a feature for no real good reason blaming it on the non-existant "security" issue. Are you really going to defend that? Smells like fanboyism to me."

Here he goes again, spreading his ignorant 2 cents on here. Non existent security issue? Have you been living under a rock recently? Hackers have successfully dumped LV2 GameOS. Is that not a security compromise? This is where reverse engineering starts and exploits start to appear. If you ask me, it's a serious threat not only to piracy but cheating on PSN as well. Let me say this loud and clear, if you can run unsigned code, there will be cheaters. Piracy I don't care about, but a level playing field when I play online is important to me. To make matters worse, the trophy system becomes useless as well since we will be able to use unlimited ammo, health, and such for offline games. Do you want to cripple PSN over OtherOS?

Now you say it doesn't effect the Wii? Please dude, haven't you heard of Ocarina? It's a cheat program much like GameShark but totally stealth and undetectable. Go play some Mario Kart Wii online for example. There is a 50% chance you'll run into a cheater. Not glitchers, but real deal hex/code altering cheaters. Wii online is dead to me because of this.

[Anon1974]

I can't see any way in hell this lawsuit will hold any water. By contrast, Microsoft unleashed a faulty console that they knew was faulty on an unsuspecting market, and then lied about it for well over a year without fixing the problem, sending people refurbished consoles that also died on them. And that's not even touching the disk scratching units which they once again tried to cover up.

So far there hasn't been a successful lawsuit against Microsoft for these blatant transgressions against consumers. If lawyers can't get anything to stick on Microsoft when it's this cut and dry, what are the odds that a lawsuit will stick against Sony when they're simply patching up a security concern, they're fully in their right as outlined by the Terms of Service agreement and 99.5% of PS3 owners really don't care because they bought their consoles to play games and watch movies?

Nothing will come of this. It's just websites making noise about nothing. I can see this court case now.
Judge: "So, let's pretend for a second Sony doesn't reserve the right to update the PS3's software at anytime and consumers aren't notified of this in the agreement they accept when they play their PS3's, were you forced to download the update disabling the Other OS option?"
Lawyer: "Well no, but..."
Judge: "Well don't download the update then. Are you stupid? Thanks for wasting the court's time, numbnuts."

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

Are you for real?

Objecting to a removal of a feature has nothing to do with supporting piracy. If you look back at my comment history you will find that I hate pirates as I'm a software developer myself. Nobody is blaming Sony for protecting their business. However, when in attempt to protect a business from a NON-EXISTANT threat hurts me as a legitimate consumer I will speak up.

When I bought my machine it was implicitly understood that I could:

a) install Linux on it

b) play all future PS3 games released

Now I'm forced to pick one or the other. What if Nintendo decided piracy was a problem with the Zelda: Twilight Princess game (this was one of the earlier methods to mod a Wii) and removed your ability to play it? Would you be upset?

What if MS like Ubisoft decided that since piracy is an issue so now we are requiring all games to be connected to the internet? They are now taking away your ability to play games without an internet connectivity? Would that piss you off?

I don't care, if it only affects 0.0001% of the people as it is Sony's issue to protect their business from pirates and that shouldn't affect me after I purchased their console. To NOT stand against this is to stand for cheating your consumers plain and simple because they are not upholding their side of the bargain.

If it was a service I could choose to continue to use a service or not, but this product that I own. I hope they get sued so they will reverse their stance and set a precedence that stepping on your consumers is NOT fine in the name of protecting a non-existent threat!

It was understood that those features was available when I purchased my console and now it is no longer, no matter how you spin it or how many people actually use it!

[nveenio]

"Not really, as they will be loosing PSN which is one of the services they paid for when they bough the system. "

Actually...PSN is free. I'm sure you know that, but if you DID pay someone...you're stupid.

I imagine that Sony's argument in this case will be this: "The user could have kept OtherOS by not installing the new firmware."

Your argument would be: "But then I can't use PSN...and it was said that I could use it when I bought it."

And Sony would say: "Did you use it?"

You'd say: "Yes. And I'd like to keep using it."

And Sony would say: "As you know, your console is no longer supported. It's not under warranty, and it's not in production. Likewise, the PSN service that was available when you purchased your console is no longer available (like many online services that are now gone, even though you paid for the game (see City of Heroes...it's a ghost town now). We'd be happy to let you use your dated hardware on PSN, but you'll have to upgrade its software...otherwise it is not compatible."

And you'd say: "That's such a crock. You removed services from my console."

And Sony would say: "You didn't file a lawsuit when we ADDED things to your console. Would you prefer we replace your firmware with v1.0?"

And you'd say: "You took away backwards compatibility, too!"

And they'd say: "What? No we didn't. That's still available on your dated system."

And you'd say: "Oh...well, I heard that you took it away...so I assumed.......YOU'RE CHANGING THE SUBJECT!"

And Sony would say: "No...we're not. The subject is that the firmware upgrade is optional. PSN is a free service. You didn't pay for it. We've done nothing wrong. Ask your lawyer...he'll tell you."

And you'd say: "[lawyer's name], is this true?"

And he'd say: "Yeah, it's true... That's why I had you pay me up front."

[The Lazy One]

The lawyer would probably actually say something like, "Man we are going to make so much money it's stupid..."

You guys can really say sony's in the right all you want. The fact of the matter is that even though it might only affect 1% of the PS3 users, those users have every right to sue. They are losing an advertised feature one way or another. That is totally illegal regardless of what crappy contract/EULA/TOS you agree to. Even moreso considering that they are practically forcing you to upgrade less you lose other more important advertised features.

http://www.thebestpageinthe...

[ClownBelt]

Oh goodness...

I wonder how this will turn out. Lmao

[Myze]

"Morons overreacting. News at 11."

[Nitrowolf2]

"Without limitation, services may include the provision of the latest update or download of new release that may include security patches, and new or revised settings and features which may prevent access to pirated games, or use of unauthorized hardware or software in connection with the PS3TM system."

(if i am reading this right)
So technicaly they agreed to this, and Sony claimed that the removal was for security reason, so they wanted to patch it up by removing the feature.

Also they agreed to Download it and Sony told what it does before you accept to download.

[DrWan]

Sony wasn't even being sneaky about it, announced it a week before, and had it on the big print with the update what would happen if you update, and what would happen if you do not update.

The Coffee is hot, don't touch it.

Hacker submerges hand into the coffee and then gets burn.

Hacker sues Coffee for hot coffee.

Coffee sues Hacker for being a dumb ass.

[CimmerianDrake]

Hey, don't be so quick there. Remember, the U.S. is the country where a woman successfully sued McDonald's for millions because she was a dumb twit and didn't realize that, hey, coffee is hot. She won her case because the cup didn't say that the coffee was hot. Now, you and I who have common sense are facepalming when we hear things like that, and obviously she did know that coffee was hot. But, the point is that she sued McDonald's and won, so yeah. Some people will sue for the stupidest reasons.

[ReservoirDog316]

I love when people use that amusing anecdote. I looked that up one time because it just looked too stupid to believe. But, then reading closer, the truth emerges.

The coffee she ordered was unbelievably hot. So hot that when she accidentally spilled it on herself, she got 2nd degree burns I believe. Now I don't know about you, but that sounds justifiable when put in that light. Right? Right.

On topic, if you want to keep linux, don't update. If you wanna play online, you're required to have the latest firmware update. The two cancel each other out and there's no way to argue with a legal contract.

Just face it. There's no reason to fight for something that a) you would never use and b) wasn't even worth using from a gamer's perspective.

[Shadowstar]

Hm. No. If you want a coffee analogy...

The coffee is lukewarm, don't worry about it. Consumer puts hand in coffee because... consumer likes coffeehands, I dunno. Coffee cup can be refilled.

New coffee comes out that is hot. Those who bought the lukewarm coffee say, "we like our lukewarm coffee because our hands don't get burned", seller says, don't worry, you bought your lukewarm coffee, you can keep putting your hand in there.

Jerk figures out a vulnerability in the coffee making process.

Consumer is told that they can only drink hot coffee now. Seller offers to reheat it, but if the coffee is not heated, puts a magical lid on it so that the consumer can only drink old coffee by him/herself. Consumer now has to choose between being able to put their hand in the coffee and drinking the coffee, and getting some new coffee.

Coffeehands consumer sues Coffeemaker because either way, they are losing a feature they paid for.

How will Coffeemaker sue the consumer? Coffeehands is a third party victim of either Coffeemaker or the Jerk, depending on your point of view.

[Biggest]

Wow. Very silly coffee analogy. How about this one.

Seller says here is a product. This is what it has. These are the rules. Consumer like the product. Consumer says they understand the rules. Consumer consumes. Seller says the product needs to be modified in accordance with the rules already established. Consumer says OMG EYE HAYT U! Consumer decides to take the issue to court. Consumer loses money.

I hope that anyone that decides to seriously try a law suit find a lawyer good enough to get the process into an actual court. That way the moron that suits loses more time and money. But unfortunately for my enjoyment, it won't make it past a complaint.

[ReservoirDog316]

"WOMAN SUES MCDONALDS FOR HOT COFFEE:

This regularly rolled-out story is often used by people complaining about frivolous lawsuits in America. It goes, a woman buys a coffee at McDonalds, the lid comes off, it spills all over her and she sues for $2.9m v and wins.

The facts: Actually, the story is kind of true. The woman did sue, but only after she first tried to settle for $10,000. She probably deserved that, since the burns from the coffee actually required skin grafts to correct, forcing her to spend weeks in hospital. With that in mind, a ten grand settlement doesn’t seem so frivolous at all, but McDonald’s refused her request and forced her to seek restitution in court. Once there, the judge awarded her damages of $2.9 million, which was later reduced upon appeal to $480,000. In the end, the woman received even less than that, accepting a settlement offered by the company as being a fair compromise. The warning found on coffee cups is McDonald’s way of avoiding a future screw-up of this nature."

http://www.talkaboutcoffee....

Nice to know the full story I guess...

[Shadowstar]

I agree that the coffee thing is stupid, but... how far does that go?

Let's say Geohot figures out a way to break the console via Bluray playback. Sony says, "disc based games and movies are now a security risk, so all future games must be purchased through PSN and we will disable your BR playback with the next update (don't worry, you can keep BR playing as long as you don't want new games or to play online)," is that ok? I don't think so, but by your argument, I don't see how that would be any different.

Which features are okay to take out, and is that exclusively determined by Sony? Can they remove wireless networking? How about backwards compatibility? Can they make the decision to stop allowing older PS3s to play new games, and the consumer has no recourse? That's a ridiculous argument. I don't like the precedent, so I really hope that if these guys sue, they win.

[GabeTheFatPrincess]

http://www.tobascodagama.co...

[Wardog1368]

I'd like to know the percentage of people who had another OS on their Ps3 on the first place. It ran really slow so I'm not sure why you'd want one anyway. Nothing to complain about here.

[sid4gamerfreak]

Finally, u said something decent for once. I agree with you, this is a lost cause...

Edit: Whats with the disagrees? I didn't say anything wrong, did I?

@Below: Care to explain what i said wrong? I frickin agreed with you...

[LordMarius]

yes, you did

[CimmerianDrake]

For starters, you're a PC fanboy. That pretty much makes everyone hate you, especially since (judging from your comment history) you're just like evrfighter and love having mouth orgasms about your 133t PC 5ki11z and "teh superior hardwarez of teh pc".

Second, you opened with a condescending, sarcastic, what have you tone in addressing Marius.

Third, refer to First and second. And there you go.

[Ninjamonkey82]

Retards the lot of them wtf is the sense in that.

Weirdos.

[Close_Second]

...does gaming have to do with having Linux on your PS3? Which "Gamers" are going to make fools of themselves and sue Sony....ahhh, the pirate ones.

[Gamer7l]

...when that feature, along with the browser, were originally announced...and proudly promoted by Sony...4 years ago.

[Magna Farta]

....even I'll admit I set aside 10GB for Linux when I threw a 320GB HDD in my PS3, but that was over a year ago and I had yet to utilize Linux on it.

I'm not upset by this because this is just one of the many things I had figured I would do at some point and time but never found it important enough to use free time on. I was only gonna use it for emulators anyway, for which I have a gamecube softmod that already serves that purpose.

So....yeah, reclaiming 10GB of HDD space, no skin off my back

[GIJeff]

in order to reclaim the space you partitioned, you have to format your HDD. this sucks and is why i am upset. I want my space back without having to reformat, backup, re-install, etc.

I installed linux just to see how the ps3 handled it, it seemed like fun at the time. this was early 2007. i guess i might as well take this opportunity to install a 500gb HDD...

[saint_john_paul_ii]

so they updated the system without realizing that they agreed to update the system. the update told the user TWICE whether or not they wanted to update it.

[pansenbaer]

'Gamers'...eh? Why do I get a sneaking suspicion that someone that uses their PS3 for games doesn't really give a crap about Linux...

[Gradient]

"Feel free to forward this to anyone that was affected by the 3.21 update. Twittet, Facebook, post it on news sites.

If you have been affected by Sony's 3.21 update file a complaint to the BBB and the FTC and your corresponding Attorney General.

It is very easy and completely online forms. Just go to the respective websites"

LOL, bust out the internet petitions, we MUST get our otherOs feature!

[mrdxpr2]

well i dont use the other os at this moment but i actually was thinking of doing it but never got around 2 cause of time consumption ... but when i bought the ps3 was when it first came it out what really stood out from the other consoles for me was.. backwards compatability, card reader, 4 usb ports, hdd and other os... and now 3 years later the new consoles dont have 4 usb only no backwards compatability and no card readers and now no other os suport so really im left with hdd ... sony has took away the most things i had liked about the ps3 and made it unique and they have just made it plain old dumb

[claney]

If you brought the 'FAT' PS3 then you still have BC, 4 USB's, HDD, Card Reader and if you brought a 'SLIM' then you knew you were not getting 4 USB's or BC or even a Card Reader

[Biggest]

You're right. The PS3 has nothing. You should complain to the president. That or call the amberlamps.

[mrdxpr2]

had it but when i played Uncharted 2 it fried the procesor -_-

[vanmagi]

You can't sell something, and later take it back, without at least some kind of good will gesture of offering something of value

TOS is nonsense, quoting it or talking about it only exposes your ignorance

Defending the move as an "anti-hacker" move is nonsense also, but that would require elaborate discussion, which certainly isn't worth doing here - email me if you really care though ;)

Lastly, it doesn't matter if YOU only use your PS3 for games, that is your own problem if you spent that much money on something that can only play a (limited library of) games and refuse to use the other features it was sold and advertised with. But here's some news for you, some people actually do things differently than you!!

[RedDragan]

LOL!

I see you know nothing about T&Cs. It's best you stay out of this conversation because where you say TOS is nonsense... you fail badly.

The very first T&Cs state Sony retain the right to remove any feature, and that is agree'd to when a user first creates his/her PSN account.

As such, there is no case. That is the law, and not only the law, but INTERNATIONAL LAW. End of discussion.

[ReservoirDog316]

With all do respect, the ToS is a legally binding contract. What does everyone always say? Read the fine print. This is the fine print. And if you read it, sony legally has the authority to do basically anything.

ToS is far from nonsense. Sometimes it might suck but this is a nonissue. Anyway you cut it.

[jerethdagryphon]

its nothing mroe then a software recall, and in honesty you didnt pay for the feature it was an addd bonus

sure ps3 cost 425£ when i bought it but hey lets work out the math 2007 prices

bluray drive retial :100£
ps2 capability :100 (they cost that much still )
ps1 capability :25
60gig laptop hard drive 35£
wifi adaptor 25£
ps3 gameplay cabilility 100.
six axis controller 25
bluetooth reciever 10

on just retial componts if you were gonna frankinstian sometihng together with the same cababilitys your looking at 425

not including sonys software and its suite of features

so no you didnt pay for that

its like going to a car lot and buying a chevy cause it has nice cupholders...

it was a feature in the software suite. it may have been listed but hey

i can name other systems that have lost features too

nds lite lost gb advance capability as did the xl
ms word lost some xml coding, hell windows gains and loses features on a regular basis with updates

other os was a security hole sony patched it thats all

if the wall around a door is cracksed remove door rebuild wall

extreme yes but not impractical

[peowpeow]

I have no knowledge of this sort of thing, but I'll state my opinion anyway.

Some people say Sony are preventing a potential piracy threat, but I say shouldn't removing the linux capabilities be the very last resort? I'd think there are other ways they could prevent or atleast majorly delay this 'exploit', through firmware updates or something.

[PirateThom]

The system was being hacked through Linux, because Sony have no real control over that side it was their only real option, they can patch the game OS with no issues, but hardware hacks combined with Linux is something they can't patch.

[jerethdagryphon]

heres the thing, geohots exploit ustilises software and hardware,

the software is kernal level code that overlap memory witout releasing it

the hardware is a point where he physically shorts it out while its running

sony can try to revise later mainboards to cover this problems physically but the only way to patch software is by removing it

because its linux if they patched the hole by, auto releasing meory then anyone can undo that.

so to save the leg they take off the foot if you get my meaning

[ALFAxD_CENTAURO]

They are WASTING time from Sony.

Because if you buy a PS3, you are agree with the Terms of Agreement.

If you read the whole article of the agreement, you can see, Sony can change or remove anything whatever they want.

That is why the agreement stand for. They are protected by the agreement.

[Gradient]

Shhhhhhh, don't bring common sense in here.

[vanmagi]

A TOS does not supercede law, its a contract between SONY and the user (and in this case, its basically a contract that says Sony can do what they want and the user can do nothing) - it has absolutely nothing to do with whether what SONY did was illegal or not. I suppose SONY might say that the update is optional, and one could simply not install it, but the fact that future bluray/games and online use are castrated might make that claim difficult - the lawsuit should settle that. Waving around a TOS is pointless though, the question is did Sony break the law or just walk close to the line

[Sarick]

You think people are wasting their time. Some also think Sony had a right to do what they did.

here's how I see it.

Sony gave 2 options.

Upgrade and keep, blu-ray, games and ps3, but lose Other OS.
Don't upgrade keep Other OS and lose PSN, Blu-ray and all future new features which will be taken away if you choose not to upgrade.

Where I come from there is a saying.

"Damned if you do damned if you don't"

This is what options they played out for the customers. It's not really an optional update if you plan on using the system for any new games. So even if you decide not to update you're still losing the ability to utilize advertised features. So which choice did you make because either way you've lost or will be something?

As for terms, Terms or not the changes where put in place knowing some people would be affected more harshly then others.

What get's me is when Sony choose April 1st. That's known as April Fools day. Why would they put such a destructive update on April fools day? It may just be my intuition but it sees like that date had an underlying innuendo. In my book it feels as though the update is mocking phat ps3 owners who use other OS when they choose this date.

Despite the defensive nature of some comments in this section we can't deny that this forced patch does upset people. Question is, does mocking upset people improve on the situation or make it worse. Think carefully, whos intentions are worse the upset and angered person or the person mocking the person who is upset?

[Biggest]

Maybe some of you should read more books and less internet. The Terms of Service doesn't have to supersede anything. It is law. The reason FOR a Terms of Service is law. They lay everything out in front of you. If you want to use a feature that has a Terms of Service, you abide by the terms. If you have a problem with the Terms of Service, you don't use the service. If you have a problem with the Terms of Service and choose to use the service anyway, you get to enjoy a large cup of STFU whenever it presents itself.

[biggame901]

This won't even get off the ground. The TOS clearly state what it does, and Sony indicates what the update does before you download it, nullifying any grounds for a lawsuit, as the client is aware of what will happen.

Like said, this is a waste of time. Idiots suing over something they were aware of, and agreed to. Gotta love society.

[Sarick]

Then, they'll be losing features that where advertised at the point of sale. At which point the contract they make clicking accept wouldn't be valid because they declined it. At this point they'd still be losing key advertised features in the future for hitting the decline button.

The decline is an opt out, it's your right to decline the updates but you aren't really given a choice when your system will be bricked from new games or other features if you choose not to update.

Just to make things clear I'm not sueing, I'm also not updating just yet. I want to first see how things play out.

[desean101101]

2. RESTRICTIONS

You may not lease, rent, sublicense, publish, modify, adapt, or translate any portion of the System Software. To the fullest extent permitted by law, you may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble any portion of the System Software, or create any derivative works, or otherwise attempt to create System Software source code from its object code. You may not (i) use any unauthorized, illegal, counterfeit, or modified hardware or software in connection with the System Software, including use of tools to bypass, disable, or circumvent any encryption, security, or authentication mechanism for the PS3TM system; (ii) violate any laws, regulations or statutes, or rights of SCE, its affiliated companies, or third parties in connection with your access to or use of the System Software, including the access, use, or distribution of any software or hardware that you know or should have known to be infringing or pirated; (iii) use any hardware or software to cause the System Software to accept or use unauthorized, illegal, or pirated software or hardware; (iv) obtain the System Software in any manner other than through SCE's authorized distribution methods; or (v) exploit the System Software in any manner other than to use it in your PS3TM system in accordance with the accompanying documentation and with authorized software or hardware, including use of the System Software to design, develop, update, or distribute unauthorized software or hardware for use in connection with the PS3TM system for any reason. Any violation of these restrictions will void the PS3TM system's warranty and affect your ability to obtain warranty services and repair services from SCE or its affiliated companies.

This TOS Is From When You First Set up Your PSN account fools not from the Update. The Update just reminds you of what is about to happen and warns you but as soon as you got a PSN account you became legally Bound by the TOS and its conditions.

[Sarick]

I don't think you're looking outside the box. Laws and contracts are put in place to protect people. It doesn't make it right in a moral sense to abuse the legal system. There are laws in place that can rip away possessions you have and the persons taking them are protected. Just because one law protects an entity doesn't mean there are ways around them with another.

For instance as an example if a minor enters a contract the law doesn't allow minors to enter contracts and a minor clicking accepting such would be invalid it. Let's put it softly,If they have lawyers on their side they can look into the users rights as well. It's not like they can do all the legal work without going through proper channels. Look at Sony & Microsoft, how many times have they been successfully sued even though they had contracts and lawyers protecting their interest. I bet those entities also thought they could win in the cases they lost.

I'm not saying it's possible or impossible to succeed lets just let the lawyers do law and leave the internet people comment on boards. Even if one lawyer looks at something as impossible it doesn't mean another won't find a way around it. The only only law I think is reliable is the one that states nothing is 100%.

[ALFAxD_CENTAURO]

People are agree with the Terms of Agreement. If you are agree, and of course upgrade, you just can't sue a company.

Terms of Agreement is the protection from Companies. But hell, no one read whole article of the agreement, just skip and ''I agree'' then install/download whatever the option is.

Wasting time from Sony, that's all.

[avengers1978]

Good Luck with that law suit, but before anyone thinks about spending money on a lawyer, maybe read your service agreements.

[Brklynty1]

Your suing Sony because YOU updated to 3.21.....First off before you can even download it, a big freakin terms of agreement page is on the screen and you have to press accept to get it. Second, no judge will take this seriously, I can just see it now; "All rise for the case of Innocent Gamers vs Sony Computer Entertainment. *SLAM* Case closed"

[Colonel-Killzone]

Sony told everybody about this if they love linux so badly they didn't have to download the firmware but seriously which is better linux or new and up coming features from firmware updates in the future.

[alphakennybody]

I'm speechless... Epic fail! faith in humanity has reached a new low.

[John_Dylan]

If matters like this makes you lose faith in humanity, then you honestly havent seen enough of the world my friend.

[evilmonkey501]

Id rather not see the ps3 go the way of the psp, thank you. I don't care if linux is on my ps3. I have another pc running mint.

[jerethdagryphon]

is mint flavur linux any good ive really only used ubuntu

[Figboy]

and they will LOSE.

i'm all for taking it to the big evil corporation, but only when they've actually done something WRONG.

besides the TOS, which grants Sony the rights to do whatever the f*ck they want with their product, the REAL culprit of this situation is GeoHotz.

SUE HIM.

he's the very reason why consumers are having Other OS removed. at least, he's part of it.

it could also very well be that whatever agreements Sony made concerning Linux support have expired.

we don't know the full story, but we can only guess that, given the timing of GeoHotz boasting about the PS3 being hackable, and the removal of the Other OS function, which is what enabled the PS3 to be hacked in the first place, is the main reason behind it.

i think the gaming media, and gamers, are aiming their anger in the wrong direction.

in this instance, i think Sony is well within their rights, and ACTUALLY right, about removing this feature. in the long run, it protects the PS3, and, believe it or not, the gamers that game on it, because it means that developers have a more secure platform to develop games on, and that instills confidence in developing more games for that platform.

the 360, Wii, and PC are hacked. the DS and PSP are hacked. so far, the PS3 is the ONLY gaming console out there right now that hasn't been hacked.

if i was a developer deciding which platform to develop my game for, at least i'd know with the PS3, there'd be a chance that i'd actually be able to sell some units and MAKE A PROFIT, and not worry about my game being up on torrent sites a week before release because somebody pirated it.

also, the people supporting the PS3 hack and custom firmware for it: LOOK AT THE PSP.

do you REALLY think that people WOULDN'T PIRATE PS3 games if they could? REALLY?? or that GeoHotz was only doing it for altruistic, "noble" reasons? Do you HONESTLY believe that? if you do, you are more naive than i thought.

this would have opened the door for the PS3 to suffer an even grislier fate than the PSP. i LOVE my PSP to death, but it's software lineup, outside of first party games, is dwindling. not many 3rd party developers are willing to develop for it.

considering the quality of HD games compared to handheld games, i'd imagine that being able to pirate PS3 games would be quite a sought after position. ESPECIALLY considering the fact that, to hack the PS3 wouldn't require you to alter the actual internal parts of the console like with the 360.

GeoHotz will get what he deserves, but Sony shouldn't be demonized for protecting their investment with the PS3. the PSP has been a wake up call and a cautionary tale for game piracy.

in the end, these asshole pirates are making it worse for ALL of us, and this will in turn cause MORE developers/publishers/console manufacturers to take even more extreme measures to try and circumvent piracy.

how would ANY of you like to be forced to enter in a one time serial code/proof of purchase in order to play your games? and i mean ONE TIME. meaning used games are out of the question? meaning that you'd not only have to buy every game you own, but register them with the company that published it before you could play it. what about people with no internet connection?

that kind of sh*t could happen if pirates continue to f*ck things up. it's an extreme example, but it's certainly withing the realm of possibility, and i could see developers/publishers taking such measures, even it costs them some money, just to have that security that their game can't be pirated.

a small few can really screw things up for the majority. if these folks suing Sony had proper legal council, they'd probably see that suing Sony isn't the correct course of action here, and that it's a lost cause. i personally think GeoHotz is a more credible and potentially winnable lawsuit.

[Prototype]

I agree 100%, I'd rather have a legit ps3 than a hacked one that's very limited because someone wants to challenge a company. One thing I learned from all this Intelligence =/= Common Sense.

Quick tip though, try compressing your point a bit some people don't like reading wall of text, but good points though.

[Shadowstar]

... how the hell are consumers supposed to sue Geohotz? The only one that can do that is Sony. Geohotz hasn't directly done anything to PS3 owners. There's no business relationship, and he didn't remove the feature. We all know he's responsible, but what exactly would they sue him for?

[ballsofsteel]

this is pretty stupid it's most likely written in the terms of service that sony can do what they want and you agreed to it

[MysticStrummer]

I hope their lawyers drag it out as long as possible so these fools are forced to pay some major legal fees.

[XabiTheHumble]

You want to have the option to use a OS? Get a PC.

[MaximusPrime]

IMO Sony is doing the right thing. I'm sure they have thought long and hard about it. Then came to an agreement, to remove OS.

Prior to firmware update downloads, there is a terms and conditions that needs to be read. Whoever accepted that terms and conditions means that they read it and agreed.

Now some idiot decided to sue Sony after updating firmware. It's a waste of money because you will not win. You FAILED to read terms and conditions...

[TheMART]

So....

What if they removed the internet browser because of security reasons?

You Sony droids would still all say yes, they're allowed to do that, too bad.

What if they removed the BluRay movie feature due to possible exploits into the system?

You would still say yes, they have to and they're allowed to?

It doesn't matter that maybe just 100.000 people used this feature and not 35 million. Fact is, Sony advertised and sold about 30 mln. Fat PS3's like this. If they decide to take it away for whatever reason, I'd say you pay those people that bought it because of this back their PS3 price. Case closed.

[RedDragan]

I see you know nothing about T&Cs.

It's best you don't post in this topic again, because you are talking bull****

[SSCOOLCHEA]

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH

GO BUY A PS3 YOU CAN AFFORD IT NOW

[irepbtown]

I dont think sony will be that stupid, BLU-RAY... i dont think so.
I support sony, WHY? Because im a gamer, i use the PS3 for games, not for linux or w.e the other stuff there are.

[You Noob]

@TheFart at XFagKings

"Fact is, Sony advertised and sold about 30 mln. Fat PS3's like this."

Sony NEVER advertised Linux. (I mean on a large scale of course)

[Marty8370]

2. RESTRICTIONS

You may not lease, rent, sublicense, publish, modify, adapt, or translate any portion of the System Software. To the fullest extent permitted by law, you may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble any portion of the System Software, or create any derivative works, or otherwise attempt to create System Software source code from its object code. You may not (i) use any unauthorized, illegal, counterfeit, or modified hardware or software in connection with the System Software, including use of tools to bypass, disable, or circumvent any encryption, security, or authentication mechanism for the PS3TM system; (ii) violate any laws, regulations or statutes, or rights of SCE, its affiliated companies, or third parties in connection with your access to or use of the System Software, including the access, use, or distribution of any software or hardware that you know or should have known to be infringing or pirated; (iii) use any hardware or software to cause the System Software to accept or use unauthorized, illegal, or pirated software or hardware; (iv) obtain the System Software in any manner other than through SCE's authorized distribution methods; or (v) exploit the System Software in any manner other than to use it in your PS3TM system in accordance with the accompanying documentation and with authorized software or hardware, including use of the System Software to design, develop, update, or distribute unauthorized software or hardware for use in connection with the PS3TM system for any reason. Any violation of these restrictions will void the PS3TM system's warranty and affect your ability to obtain warranty services and repair services from SCE or its affiliated companies.

Sonys covered ther ass throughly.

(Geohot has broken about a dozen of the restrictions already)

Try and sue and get laughed out of court.

[RedDragan]

They would be better off suing Geo.

[irepbtown]

I never read Terms and agreements on PS3, as long as i can play games and play online, Im fine.

[Chucky2003]

i'm tired with this 3.21 firmware,big deal that they took that feature out,PS3 is a gaming console,you want to install another OS use you damn PC,the truth is Linux was a weak link for PS3's anti-piracy,i bet 98% of the owners didn't even know they could install Linux,this is some internet bullshit

[xg-ei8ht]

Right that does it.

I'm sueing Nintendo for making my arms hurt.

I'm sueing Microsoft for ramming fake footage of Final Fantasy down my throat.

I'm sueing Religion, because it sucks a$$ and everyone believes in something they've never seen, and will never see.

Ahh maybe SONY is god.

Sony Giveth/Sony Taketh Away

[jerethdagryphon]

you prorobly could sue ms over advertiseing 360 game using ps3 footage unless it says this is ps3 footage

othersies even 'images representitive of aactual gameplay might not do it

[tudors]

Linux was always a bonus, at the end of the day these are games consoles we are talking about, I was browsing some stuff on Xbox-live yesterday and remember thinking to myself WOW at all the stuff we have since it's launch, same goes for the PS3, they have evolved way beyond what you would class as a box standard console and yet still people moan, suing for somthing like this should not be allowed.

[Armsgraph]

I don't see the point in installing your own os on a ps3. what are pros and cons i just use my ps3 for games,music,internet(only if my computer is down for some reason) and movies what other use can a ps3 have?

[TheMART]

"
PM
Track
Ignore
3 -
@TheFart at XFagKings

"Fact is, Sony advertised and sold about 30 mln. Fat PS3's like this."

Sony NEVER advertised Linux. (I mean on a large scale of course)"

Eh? They DID advertise with Linux. You say never, but they did. It doesn't matter if its on a large scale or not, they used it as a selling point. So you're a real n00b with a sh!tty arguement.

They never really advertised with the web browser either. So what if they took that from you because of security reasons? You like it that Sony takes you from behind now don't you? Jees.

"RedDragan - 4 hours ago

PM
Track
Ignore
2.1 -
I see you know nothing about T&Cs. "

I don't care about T&C's. They could write in that whatever they want. Like they are allowed to take away PSN totally, who the fack cares? Fact is, they take away stuff, while they should just have patched their errors. Its like this: if the web browser would have an security problem, is it logical to patch it or take it away totally? What if Apple did this to Safari on the iPhone when it would be hacked through that?

And if they couldn't fix it, it would not be a problem on the Slim anymore, so just their loss that 30 mln. PS3's would be vulnerable to this exploit. Its not even said that all PS3 owners suddenly would hack their PS3's, would they?

Because they take away OtherOS from my PS3, I'll hack the sh!t out of it now, because I keep it offline and use the superior XBL anyways for online gaming. So good thing Sony, you just made someone pissed off that won't buy the exclusives anymore. Now I think about it, let me buy some other Fats that are still in shops, hack them as soon as its possible and sell them for a lot of monnies. You just made me some good monnies Sony. Thanks for removing this feature!

Last but not least, with doing this, they just pissed the hackers community off even more, so they will try harder to hack the system now. Even Geohot jumps on it back again, searching for releasing his CFW now to keep OtherOS and more.

Way to go Slowny, way to go!

"Armsgraph - 57 minutes ago

PM
Track
Ignore
6 -
I don't see the point in installing your own os on a ps3. what are pros and cons i just use my ps3 for games,music,internet(only if my computer is down for some reason) and movies what other use can a ps3 have?"

It doesn't matter if you see the point or not. To those people that did use it, they take away that possibility. There are people that for example thought it would be a cheap way to also have (although limited) some sort of PC use. There are people that emulated some old consoles through linux, like a SNES emu. There are students that use the PS3 for calculating stuff, heck university's even bought some for that. They paid for the machine to do that. And I don't care whats said in T&C's, this is just a wrong way for a company to fight security problems. Every fat owner should punish them for this and don't update and hack the sh!t out of their consoles.

[kagon01]

I bought my gaming console(PS3) for the purpose of gaming only, not to use it as a sub-par PC. If I want to use Linux so badly I use my PC instead of a gaming console that lacks physical ram to run it...

[tiamat5]

It's a waste of time. Just play your PS3s and give it up. Sony is well within their rights to do what is necessary to protect their investment. People are just mad because Sony didn't just take it up the tailpipe like Nintendo and Microsoft did, allowing pirates to hack their systems without so much as a blink of an eyelash. Stop encouraging hackers to continue this nonsense. You are ruining it for us honest law abiding PS3 owners

[cooldog999]

this makes no sense on suing sony like there going to lose.. before u update there should be a msg sayin r u sure u want to update... well i hope those kids lose

[Scary69]

@commodore64 Have you actually read the TOS that you agreed to? Sony has every right to add or remove anything they like you agreed to it when you got your PS3. To be honest I don't even see the big deal about Linux you want to use it get a PC and use it away.
@vanmagi Dude seriously you sound as ignorant as a 4 year old. If you don't give a sh*t about TOS then wtf did you agree to them? Linux is a priveledge not a right.
For those who are whining about it then why did you agree to install the patch? You do get an option, morons. Another fail lawsuit attempt which I hope the judge just laugh at these fools for thinking they are smarter then Sony. LMAO

[pwneddemocrat]

traitors !

[joker2k8]

you cant sue sony no one was forced to update and if you did update then that was at your own risk. they told you what the update was for. also when did this feature become so popular all of the sudden. for the last four years no one even talked about or really used it.

[sam2236]

They removed the card readers. They removed PS2 BC. They removed two USB ports. Now they remove OtherOS?

What'll they remove next? DVD playback?

PLAYSTATION 3: It Barely Does Anything!

[Biggest]

They removed all of those things yet it still has more features than the other two consoles. How does that even work? Someone is getting shafted and it doesn't look like the PS3 owners.

[sam2236]

@Biggest: Why did you bring up the other two consoles? This clearly has nothing got to do with them.

But if you insist please tell me, excluding free online, Blu-ray playback and web browsing, what features does the PS3 have that the other two consoles don't?

[aaronisbla]

if you own a 60gb system, then your features are still there, so STFU and play ur games

[Biggest]

I brought it up because of your 100% fanboy comment. Me being a PS3 fanboy means that I get to make fun of you. It's how the whole fanboy thing works.

WOW! I am trying sooooooo hard not to call you a complete moron right here. Did you just say "Taking away the extra things that the PS3 has over the other consoles, what extra things does the PS3 have over the other consoles?" Did you seriously just say that?

[hill71]

it says on the back of the ps3 box sony has the right to change specs when they like look at the box

[blackblades]

People are just stupid,stupid,stupid, they ain't going to win anyway.

[irepbtown]

I agree with you, We wont win, sony will have some proof that they have the right to change what they want.

it must say somewhere in the terms and agreement that sony can change any specs etc they like.

[Hotel_Moscow]

sony wins this due to the fact that it was never advertised i heard about this pother os feature through word of mouth

[Exquisik]

'It was a feature advertized along with backwards compatibility which was also removed after purchase.'

Really?! But my first generation PS3 (60gb) still plays PS2 games...*GASP* Shocking! They did not remove the features to play PS2 games. It's still there if you bought the first (20/60gb) or second (80gb)generation PS3. They have never advertised the newer models as backward compatibility with PS2 games so they never did removed the features. You were given options to either pick up the older models to play PS2 games or pick up the newer models which does not have the capability to pay PS2 games. I honestly do not see anything wrong with that. In fact the backward compatibility is still there because it can play PSOne games! *GASP* Another shocking!

Seriously, it seems like the daily IQ of human beings are dropping every second and at this rate we'll hit the ice age sooner than we'd think.

[keysy420]

you cant sue over that.

[knightoftears]

ToS and explaination of changes prior to updating kills these whiney little maggot's hopes of trying to be somebody in the gaming realm. That's why you have to AGREE to the update before it installs on YOUR machine. Why not sue for the countless times they've smashed their controllers on the floor when they died over and over on a game, or maybe for the PS3 being black means Sony is racist....yeah, that's it!!! GET THE #$%^ OUTTA HERE WITH THIS $h!+!!!!!!!!!

[sikbeta]

Pffft... This is Not Going Anywhere, way to waste your time sue-happy people... Sony will wait for you with:

http://i42.tinypic.com/2zge...
http://i39.tinypic.com/k1z0...

[TheObserver]

Losing OtherOS feature? Nothing of value was lost.

[Jeppe]

They probably should sue the guys using linux as a base camp to hack the PS3 instead. They drew first blood, not Sony. And i'm not so sure they are gamers as the title says. Linux is really cool but it's not a gaming OS yet.

[baodeus]

hum, but these features are what u guys were proud of having on the PS3 when it was put on the market. These features give much more value to the PS3 weren't they? I heard it all the time on N4G about these features and how great they were, but now, you guys said no one is using them? What about the people that bought PS3 for scientific research like protein folding, mathematical calculation, etc....using 3rd party OS?

Instead of removing these features, can Sony create patches to detect or block tinkered hardware or pirated software like MS did? It might be a better approach in a sense.

Well let see, how things going? people can be sue for all kinda of stupid things. A robber can trips and falls in front of your house then sue you and win (this is a real case by the way).

[Surt]

I want to know the REAL reason for suing. No I don't buy that Linux crap. Cause well that's what it is.. crap.
"But they are the BIG COMPANYS!"
"I'm poor I want money!"

I'm all about the little guy, but not when the little guy is an idiot. Just because you can sue for any stupid crap doesn't mean you should.

The village idiots of this world will say they got hit by a PARKED car and that they want to sue. Give me a break.

[Finalfantasykid]

Maybe someone has already said this, but isn't there something in the TOS that says that Sony can add/remove features from the system at anytime?

[SkolarVisari]

However that does not necessarily mean that what Sony did with this update is legal. EULAs can and have been invalidated before.

[mittwaffen]

People are just trying to get money.

I didnt read the article, is this American's suing? If so, im not surprised, everyone down there sues everyone for anything.

[SkolarVisari]

Well all I can say is that I have never heard of any electronic device losing features over time because of an exploit that has to be executed with a user's consent and/or knowledge. Nor have I heard of this being done after the fact because someone might choose to do things someone else doesn't like. Microsoft hasn't removed nic card driver support from their OS just because some people do bad things with the internet.

[Surt]

The guy was rushing to get on the train, and in trying to get into the train pushed his wife out of his way. She fell. My friend told the guy he should say sorry, but the guy decided to be an ass. My buddy showed him that for every action there is reaction and belted him one. Just one. Believe it or not, my buddy got sued!

When did this happen? when did people think that somehow they "deserve" something in life, or that they are above getting their ass kicked? I'm not above it and neither is anyone else.

[The_Zeitgeist]

I say go for it even if you know it is pointless. At the very least it can call media attention to what Sony did. Even if you didn't use it just imagine all the people that did and are now screwed because they were using the PS3 as their PC too. Not mention all the people that paid for windows on PS3.

[Shendow]

1. Dumb to try to sue Sony over something that was going to keep you save from getting hack.

2. The only people that cry about it are those ones that want something to cry about or it is the 360 users (That think they can fool people by saying it is mess up)

I don't care, I use it once an Lunix needed code to make it do most things. Plus it takes up 10GB that could be use for games.

[viohazardz]

@baodeus

"Instead of removing these features, can Sony create patches to detect or block tinkered hardware or pirated software like MS did? It might be a better approach in a sense"

yeah right, follow the MS way. piracy is so rampant on demobox360, and the only way to slow it, NOT STOPPING it is to disconnect them online and still they failed to solve piracy. how about the offline pirates, what did MS done about that????? and you expect Sony to follow their path?????

play with your toy, i'll play on mine

[baodeus]

yes, pirating is not a good thing, but u know, people will find ways to pirated if it worth the effort. Why do u think people hack PC but not apple (cause apple just isn't as popular). You just can't stop piracy. It is not gonna end.

What MS did was ruin all those people that pirated the game. They can't play online anymore. So yeah, they can keep playing single player game, but what r they gonna do about online? It sure make them think twice about it since most populars games now a days are played on line (co-op, multiplayer, etc.....).

What Sony gonna do, keep removing features? And are you sure piracy will stop once they remove these features? What about the people that bought the PS3 in the first place for those features that Sony ADVERTISES? Wouldn't it be false advertisement? You would be ok if you buy a product that doesn't do what it said it would do? You may not used these features, but doesn't mean other people don't used them. Just read on N4G of how useful those features were, they can surf the web, watching youtube, use linux, protein folding, install emulators for old games, etc....These are the things the Sony fan said so themselves, it is not like i made it up.

MS way might not be too bad cause they didn't violate anything (given that piracy will prevail in either case for both ms and sony), but removing features, which Sony ADVERTISEd, violate a pretty critical law in the business industry. Did you hear people tell you to always read the fine print when buying something? Hey false advertisement is a big problem.

[MetalFreakMike]

...Sony's disclaimers has this all covered. Also I really do not think this will hold up in court at all. When I had my 80 gig before it died on me, I never used the OtherOS feature. I even read on the forums that it was slow and you were locked out of the gpu. So, pretty much anyone complaining about this is most likely a hacker or someone waiting for a hack so they can play free games.

[DigitalRaptor]

Why are these gamers complaining in the first place? The firmware has already been bypassed. I did it earlier today!

[Marty8370]

You miss out on all future update including 3D, just for OTHER OS.

Are U MAD.....

[zeddy]

are we still on this? install other OS is for hardcore nerds who have nothing better to do.

[ReBurn]

I think it's funny how many people think it's Sony's right to remove whatever functionality they want to after they sell the console. Obviously Sony believes that they have that right, because they did it. And I'm sure their legal department believes that they can defend the decision.

I think that a lawsuit is extreme, but if it ever goes to court the terms and conditions might not hold up. I've been working in software development for 14 years and I can tell you from experience that TOS and TOU are not necessarily legally binding if a court of law decides that they infringe upon the rights of a consumer. I have testified in two separate cases, one of which my company lost.

I'll tell you why this might be successfully challenged. By not installing this update or subsequent updates people can lose their ability to play new games and watch new Blu-ray movies. It could be interpreted that Sony is using coercion to get people to install this update by threatening to deny access to other features that were advertised to consumers. Unless there's an explicit contract at the point of sale that expressly gives Sony the right to alter the console at will, or unless they agree to take it back and provide a full refund to the consumer if they do make substantial changes after sale, they could be liable. Consumers have rights, too. You might not agree that this is substantial, but it could be to someone. Even if it is one person, that person has rights.

[taga7a]

What happens if suddenly they disable the blu-ray drive to the PS3? What if they decided they remove the PS2 function to the older PS3 's? Will the TOS be justifiable then? Or PlayStation network, what if one day in the next couple of months they decided to shut down the servers. Isn't that a feature too?

That's is a good reason to sue Sony.

They should FIX the problem not take it out of the whole equation and expect to get the right positive answer for 90% of the people; while 10% of people HAS FIGURE OUT THAT IT WAS WRONG.

Of course (another example) if you take in account Microsoft a OS, they remove features too. But it's different. Take Windows XP, Windows Vista. OK we are removing support for these HP printers when you install vista (A.K.A. PS3 SLIM) but hey while we are at it lets disable these HP drivers on XP via a update because there is a stupid potential of a trojan to spread. (PS3 FAT) And don't forget that only 5% of people that have HP Printers are affected while the 95% don't give a $%*T.

You can't just take out a feature out a product has been suggested by a friend who thought it was cool/ or that HAD BEEB SUPPORTED ON THEIR WEB SITE firmware or no firmware.

[dredgewalker]

I didn't buy my PS3 so i can install Linux on it. Everyone who buys a console buys it simply for the games. If you want Linux then install it for the pc, too many haters here are just looking at a tiny crack and making a ravine out of it. As long as the updates don't affect my gaming life then im cool with this.

[dkgshiz]

People actually care about this? Linux on the PS3 was terrible. This feature was useless.