Welcome to PS3Hax, your official PS3 hacks, PS3 Homebrew, and PS3 Downloads scene. Check back daily to keep up with the latest PS3 Hacks and drop by our forums for more PS3 Hacks discussions.
  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 18/01/2014 , @ 09:21am

     

    A couple of years ago, i posted this article, which talked about Sony winning the OtherOS lawsuit’s that were taken against them, well it seems the appeals panel has partially reversed the decision, here is a quote from the source:

    Law360, Los Angeles (January 06, 2014, 5:36 PM ET) — A Ninth Circuit panel on Monday partially reversed a lower court decision squashing a putative class action accusing Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC of reneging on its promise to let users run alternative operating systems on their PlayStation 3s.

    In an unpublished, memorandum opinion, the appeals panel ruled that the district court erred in dismissing all of the plaintiffs’ 15 claims, including violations of California’s unfair competition and false advertising laws, because they properly alleged the public was likely to be deceived by Sony’s promotional statements….

    Source

    UPDATE

    Here is some more information:

    The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday reversed a 2011 dismissal of a class action lawsuit accusing Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC of issuing a firmware update that disabled other operating systems from being able to run on its PlayStation 3 console — a key feature that was promised in ads for the PS3.

    In its Jan. 6 decision, the three-judge panel at the federal appellate court in San Francisco said the district court was wrong to dismiss five of the 15 claims against Sony.

    They said that the plaintiffs provided “sufficient facts” when they alleged that the public was likely to be deceived by the statements made by Sony that the PlayStation 3 would have dual functionality, allowing users to use two different operating systems on the one machine.

    “They allege that Sony’s misrepresentations at the time of the sale mischaracterized the dual functionality of the PS3 — and were likely to deceive members of the public — because Sony later restricted users to using either the other OS feature or accessing the PlayStation Network feature, but not both,” the panel wrote.

    Source/More Info

    PlayStation®3 (“PS3”) owners won a significant appeal that will allow consumers to pursue their claims that Sony caused damages by disabling the heavily advertised ability to run another operating system and use the PS3 as a computer. In an unpublished decision issued on January 6, 2014, the Ninth Circuit found that Plaintiffs had pled valid claims for violations of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and California’s False Advertising and Unfair Competition Laws.

    The Ninth Circuit reversed in part the District Court’s dismissal of the complaint and remanded for further proceedings. Specifically, the Ninth Circuit held that the plaintiffs “adequately have alleged that members of the public were likely to be deceived by Sony’s advertising and promotional statements about the PS3[],” and “sufficiently [have] allege[d] that Sony caused them substantial injury by charging a premium for the PS3’s dual functionality and then discontinuing access.” Our firm serves as one of the Interim Co-Lead Counsel for the plaintiffs and the class.

    Source/One Of The Plaintiffs Lawyers

    Plaintiffs sufficiently allege that Sony caused them substantial injury by
    charging a premium for the PS3’s dual functionality and then discontinuing access
    to both the Other OS and PSN features.

    Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that (1) they
    lost money because they would not have purchased or would have paid less for the
    PS3 if they had known that Sony would disable or remove one or both of these
    advertised features; (2) they could not have reasonably avoided this injury because
    they would have lost access to the PSN if they chose not to download the update
    which disabled the Other OS feature; and (3) there are no countervailing benefits to
    consumers or competition that outweigh the substantial injury to consumers.

    Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal of this claim.

    Source(Court Document, Click To Download)


  • Posted by Simonbuck , on 29/08/2013 , @ 03:53pm

     

     

     

    A High price and 15-month gap between Xbox 360 to blame, Say’s Sony UK MD.

     

    PlayStation 3 “didn’t do quite as well as it should have” in the UK, Fergal Gara has told VideoGamer.com, explaining that the high price and 15-month gap between the launch of PS3 and Xbox 360 may have impacted the console’s chances of success.

    Asked during Gamescom whether he thought Sony could reclaim market share in the UK with the arrival of PlayStation 4, Gara said, “If it was all about day one then the answer would probably be yes.

    “The truth is it’s a long game. Let’s not forget that PS3 launched a long time after Xbox 360 and didn’t do quite as well as it should have done. But from being so far behind on timing and on pricing it’s delivered quite respectably despite all of that.”

    PS3 launched in the UK on March 23, 2007 for £425, four months after its initial Japanese launch and fifteen months after the Xbox 360 arrived in the UK.

    PlayStation 3 hardware and software has been consistently outsold by the Xbox 360 equivalent in the UK. However, it was reported by MCV earlier this month that PS3 hardware had been outselling Xbox 360 over the course of the summer – largely down to the launch of The Last of Us.

    Nevertheless, Gara seems confident that PS4 will go some way to boosting Sony’s slice of the UK market.

    “We’re very conscious that it’s a long game,” he continues, “we’re very satisfied that we’re doing very, very well right now, but we’re also not getting carried away with ourselves, not getting in any way over-excited. It is a several year project. It doesn’t start and finish on November 29. That’s an important date but it is the start date.”

    PlayStation 4 launches in the UK on November 29. The console has already reached over 1 million pre-orders.

     

    Source

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 16/08/2013 , @ 07:48am

     

    PlayStation Access have posted a video, showing the graphical journey between the PlayStation 1 and the PlayStation 4:

    Source

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 19/04/2013 , @ 02:49am

     

    Back in May 2011 a Canadian by the name of Natasha Maksimovic took Sony Canada to court over the PSN breach, in her claim she suggested that Sony pay $1 Billion in damages, you can read about the lawsuit here:

    Canadian PSN Users Sues Sony Worldwide On Behalf Of Canada

    On the 17th of this month(April 2013) an agreement was reached and those of you from Canada are eligible to some free games, here is a quote from the official source:

    A settlement has been reached with the Sony Entities in a class action lawsuit about the illegal and unauthorized attacks in April of 2011 on the computer network systems used to provide the PlayStation Network (“PSN”), Qriocity, and Sony Online Entertainment (“SOE”) services (the “Intrusions”). The settlement provides benefits to eligible Canadian consumers who file a valid claim.

    The Ontario Superior Court of Justice will have a hearing to decide whether to give final approval to the settlement, so that the benefits can be issued. The included consumers have legal rights and options, such as excluding themselves from the settlement, or alternatively, objecting to and/or submitting a claim for benefits from the settlement.

    The Sony Entities deny any claims of wrongdoing in this case, and the settlement does not mean that the Sony Entities violated any laws or did anything wrong.

    WHO’S INCLUDED?
    The Class includes everyone who resides in Canada who had a PSN account, a Qriocity account, or an SOE account at any time prior to May 15, 2011.

    WHAT DOES THE SETTLEMENT PROVIDE?
    There are various benefits, depending in part on what type of account(s) you had:

    Inactive PlayStation Network Accountholders:
    If you used any of your PSN accounts any time from January 1, 2011 through May 14, 2011, but you did not use them after that through January 24, 2013 because of the Intrusions, you can get a payment equal to any balance of paid virtual currency in your account wallet if that balance is at least U.S. $2.

    Active PlayStation Network Accountholders:
    a) If you paid other companies for certain media services that you could not access through the PSN during the PSN outage from April 20 through May 14, 2011, you can get 3 free PS3 themes or a 50% discount on PlayStation Plus for 3 months. Up to U.S. $100,000 in total benefits will be available, on a first-come, first-served basis.

    b) If you participated in the PSN “Welcome Back” program that followed the April 2011 service outage, you can get either a free game for your PS3 or PSP, 3 free PS3 themes, or a 50% discount on PlayStation Plus for 3 months. If you did not participate in the PSN “Welcome Back” program, you can submit a claim for two of the above benefits. Up to U.S. $1 million in these benefits will be available, on a first-come, first-served basis; claimants who file claims thereafter can get a 50% discount on PlayStation Plus for one month. Qriocity Accountholders:
    If you were not a PSN accountholder but you had a Qriocity account at the time of the April 2011 service outage, you can get one free month of Music Unlimited.

    Inactive Sony Online Entertainment Accountholders:
    If you used any of your SOE accounts at any time from January 1 through May 14, 2011, but you did not use them after that through January 24, 2013 because of the Intrusions, you can get a payment equal to any balance of paid virtual currency in your account wallet if that balance is at least U.S. $2.

    Active Sony Online Entertainment Accountholders:
    You can get a deposit of U.S. $4.50 in “Station Cash” into that account, usable for SOE digital products and services. Deposits will be reduced proportionally if total deposits exceed U.S. $240,000 in benefits.

    Identity Theft Reimbursement Claims:
    If you incurred out-of-pocket charges due to actual identity theft and submit documentation proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the intrusion(s) directly and proximately caused the identity theft, you can submit a claim for reimbursement up to $2,500. Reimbursements will be reduced proportionally if the amount payable on all valid claims exceeds U.S. $90,000.

    TLDR; ?
    Sony lost, you will get a couple of free games or half price PS+

    Download Court Documents

    Official Source
    Via

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 09/04/2013 , @ 01:25pm

     

    szczuru has updated PSP2PS3 to version 1.7.3, here is a quote from the change log:

    v1.7.3
    -MAKE_EDATS_CEX:
    —FIXED: Starting EDAT Tool when user chooses to unpack iso
    -MAKE_PACKAGE:
    —FIXED: Issue when function sleep doesn’t exist in system - pause will be used insted of it.
    -ISO2EBOOT:
    —Extension in output filename is now required
    —DONOR.PBP isn’t required anymore. Replaced fake_np with one which doesn’t need DONOR //thanks to Aldo (aka aldostools)

    Source
    Download

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 24/01/2013 , @ 05:56am

     

    A while ago the PlayStation Network was hacked, im sure you all know about it, several people took their cases to court in America, but as always, Sony is invulnerable in America, as the always went unpunished for their crimes.
    But not in Europe, the EU has no problem fining companies it deems to have done wrong and have imposed a fine on Sony Computer Entertainment Europe for the whole PSN ordeal, here is a quote from the source:

    The entertainment company Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Limited has received a monetary penalty of £250,000 from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) following a serious breach of the Data Protection Act.

    The penalty comes after the Sony PlayStation Network Platform was hacked in April 2011, compromising the personal information of millions of customers, including their names, addresses, email addresses, dates of birth and account passwords. Customers’ payment card details were also at risk.

    An ICO investigation found that the attack could have been prevented if the software had been up-to-date, while technical developments also meant passwords were not secure.

    David Smith, Deputy Commissioner and Director of Data Protection, said:

    “If you are responsible for so many payment card details and log-in details then keeping that personal data secure has to be your priority. In this case that just didn’t happen, and when the database was targeted – albeit in a determined criminal attack – the security measures in place were simply not good enough.

    “There’s no disguising that this is a business that should have known better. It is a company that trades on its technical expertise, and there’s no doubt in my mind that they had access to both the technical knowledge and the resources to keep this information safe.

    “The penalty we’ve issued today is clearly substantial, but we make no apologies for that. The case is one of the most serious ever reported to us. It directly affected a huge number of consumers, and at the very least put them at risk of identity theft.

    “If there’s any bright side to this it’s that a PR Week poll shortly after the breach found the case had left 77 per cent of consumers more cautious about giving their personal details to other websites. Companies certainly need to get their act together but we all need to be careful about who we disclose our personal information to.”

    Following the breach, Sony has rebuilt its Network Platform to ensure that the personal information it processes is kept secure.

    Source ICO
    Via BBC
    Via Ebuyer Twitter

    Personally i think this is a very small fine and i think it should have been more, but i am glad Sony has finally been punished, what do you think ?
    Vote in the discussion thread :)

    UPDATE

    It seems Sony is not happy about this fine and is going to appeal, in a statement to MVC, they gave their reasons for disputing the fine being that there is no evidence that encrypted payment card details were accessed, here is a quote from the source:

    The statement says:

    “SCEE notes, however, that the ICO recognises Sony was the victim of “a focused and determined criminal attack,” that “there is no evidence that encrypted payment card details were accessed,” and that “personal data is unlikely to have been used for fraudulent purposes” following the attack on the PlayStation Network.

    “Criminal attacks on electronic networks are a real and growing aspect of 21st century life and Sony continually works to strengthen our systems, building in multiple layers of defence and working to make our networks safe, secure and resilient.

    “The reliability of our network services and the security of our consumers’ information are of the utmost importance to us, and we are appreciative that our network services are used by even more people around the world today than at the time of the criminal attack.

    Source

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 23/10/2012 , @ 04:43am

     

    Well it seems that  Sony are untouchable, they keep getting sued and keep winning,  the latest case they won is “The people Vs Sony” in regards to PSN being hacked, here are a couple of quotes from the final court document:

     

    In re:
    SONY GAMING NETWORKS AND CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION

    BACKGROUND
    I. Factual Background
    This action arises out of a criminal intrusion into the computer network system used to provide
    PlayStation Network (“PSN”) services. Plaintiffs, a putative consumer class, allege that Sony Computer
    Entertainment America, LLC (“SCEA”), Sony Network Entertainment International, LLC and Sony
    Network Entertainment America, Inc. (collectively, “SNE”), Sony Online Entertainment, LLC (“SOE”),
    and Sony Corporation of America (“SCA”) (collectively, “Sony” or “Defendants”) failed to follow basic
    industry-standard protocols to safeguard its customers personal and financial information, thereby
    creating foreseeable harm and injury to the Plaintiff class.
    Sony develops and markets the PlayStation Portable (“PSP”) hand-held device and the
    PlayStation 3 (“PSP”) console (collectively, “consoles”)
    Among their key features are their ability to let users play games, connect to the Internet, access the PlayStation Network
    (“PSN”), Qriocity, and Sony Online Entertainment (“SOE”) (collectively, “Sony Online Services” or
    “SOS”), . For additional fees, the PSN also allows access to various third party
    services such as Netflix, MLB.TV, and NHL Gamecenter LIVE (“Third Party Services”).
    These additional fees are paid to the source of the service rather than to Sony. Many who subscribe to
    these Third Party Services can only access them through their PSN account.  As of
    January 25, 2011, PSN had over 69 million users worldwide,[Id], and SOE had over 24.6 million users
    worldwide, .
    When establishing accounts with PSN, Qriocity, and SOE, Plaintiffs and other Class members
    were required to provide personally identifying information to Sony, including their names, mailing
    addresses, email addresses, birth dates, credit and debit card information (card numbers, expiration dates
    and security codes) and login credentials (“Personal Information”), which Sony stores and maintains on
    its Network. Sony continually monitors and records users’ PSN activities, purchases and
    usage, and maintains this usage data on its Network.3
    Plaintiffs allege that on April 16 or 17, 2011, hackers accessed Sony’s Network, stealing the
    Personal Information of millions of Sony customers, including Plaintiffs and the other Class members
    (the “Data Breach”).  On April 17, 2011, Sony discovered that PSN and Qriocity user data
    had been stolen. Three days later, Sony took the PSN and Qriocity offline, stating that
    “[w]e’re aware certain functions of PlayStation Network are down. We will report back here as soon as
    we can with more information.”  As a result of the Data Breach, Sony was forced to shut
    down the PSN and Qriocity for almost a month while it conducted a systems audit to determine the
    cause of the data breach. Meanwhile, SOE remained offline for more than two weeks.
    During this prolonged downtime, Plaintiffs and the other Class members were unable to access PSN,
    Qriocity, and SOE, unable to play multi-player online games with others, and unable to use online
    services available through the PSN, Qriocity or SOE. Plaintiffs and the other Class members were also
    unable to access and use prepaid Third Party Services.

     

     

     

    CONCLUSION
    For the reasons set forth above, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants’
    motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs have until November 9, 2012 to file an amended Consolidated Complaint.
    Specifically, the Court makes the following findings with respect to Defendants’ instant motion:
    1. GRANTS Defendants’ supplemental request for judicial notice as to all documents, but
    not as to the contents of the Privacy Protection Guidelines;
    2. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of Article III standing as to Defendants
    SOE and SCA with leave to amend;
    3. DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of Article III standing as to the
    remaining Sony Defendants;
    4. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Sixth Cause of Action for negligence
    with leave to amend;
    5. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the First, Second, and Third Causes of
    Action under the UCL, FAL, and CLRA with prejudice as to non-resident Plaintiffs and
    Plaintiffs claims for restitution, and with leave to amend with respect to the remaining
    claims;
    6. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Fourth Cause of Action under the
    Breach Act with prejudice as to non-resident Plaintiffs, and with leave to amend as to
    resident Plaintiffs and all remaining claims;
    7. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Fifth Cause of Action alleging unjust
    enrichment with prejudice;
    8. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Seventh Cause of Action alleging
    bailment with prejudice.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    DATED: October 11, 2012

    To read the full document, download it here.

    Source

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 06/10/2012 , @ 07:40am

     

    Now im not going to deny that i find any court dealing involving SCEA/SCE exciting, i have looked at 98% of court cases involving the company, since the OtherOS court cases and when PSX-Scene posted the PDF’s/files in regards to Sony suing certain Mod Chip sites over the original PS Jailbreak and the numerous case since then, so here is a new one, there isn’t a lot known about it and and i did want to post about it when it was first opened in court, back on the 11th Of September 2012, but there was even less known about it then, anyhow, im just going to leave this Rar with the two PDF Court filings and links to view those files if you don’t have a PDF reader.

     

     

     

     

    Download Court case Rar

    Link to court filing #1

    Link to court filing #2

    Source

     

    I will keep PS3HaX members informed of the proceedings :)

    UPDATE

    gary or /Griffin from PS3Crunch tweeted me and said this is what the court case is regarding:
    ‘Kevin Butler’ appears on a Wii advert, gets completely removed from it soon after

     

    UPDATE 2

    Here is some more info thanks to NeoGaf

     

    Original Post:
    Jerry Lambert, the actor who plays the Kevin Butler character began appearing in Bridgestone Tire commercials a few months ago. More recently the company began running a Game On promotion where purchasing a new set of tires nets you a $70 American Express card or a Nintendo Wii.

    September 3, 2012 - SkiesofWonder posts a screenshot of Bridgestone’s Game On promotion featuring Jerry Lambert egging on some of his Bridgestone friends while playing Mario Kart Wii. Jerry’s been doing Bridgestone commercials for a few months now, but this one was for a promotion regarding tire purchases leading to a free Nintendo Wii. A few hours later the promotion’s website reveals Jerry with the group playing Mario Kart.

    September 4, 2012 - Videoman discovers video of the ad on Facebook, I upload it to Youtube. Video goes viral with stories posted by major sites mocking the fact that the actor formerly known for hawking PlayStation products is indirectly helping the other team.

    September 11, 2012 - Sony Computer Entertainment America files a lawsuit against both Bridgestone, and Wildcat Creek. Wildcat Creek is a company Jerry Lambert is president of, presumably to look over his acting duties. gumby_trucker discovers the lawsuit today (October 6) and posts it on GAF.

    September 14, 2012 - Bridgestone removes the video from Youtube with a copyright notice. Presumably this is when Bridgestone put their own upload of the video on private, and removed Jerry from their Game On site. Google cache shows he was removed from the site by September 27. The image with Jerry is still hosted on their site.

    September 21, 2012 - alr1ght posts about an alternate version of the ad circulating that no longer features Jerry at all. Drago posts this alternate version on Youtube.

    September 26, 2012 - Courtroom deputy receives phone call from SCEA’s lawyer stating they had either resolved, or were close to resolving the issue.

    September 30, 2012 - The Game On campaign concludes.

    October 12, 2012 - The motion for expedited discovery will be announced as either settled or ongoing by then.

     

    UPDATE 3

    GamesBeat contacted Sony about the court case and this was the response:

    Sony Computer Entertainment America filed a lawsuit against Bridgestone and Wildcat Creek, Inc. on September 11. The claims are based on violations of the Lanham Act, misappropriation, breach of contract and tortious interference with a contractual relationship. We invested significant resources in bringing the Kevin Butler character to life and he’s become an iconic personality directly associated with PlayStation products over the years. Use of the Kevin Butler character to sell products other than those from PlayStation misappropriates Sony’s intellectual property, creates confusion in the market, and causes damage to Sony.

     

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 20/04/2012 , @ 05:18am

     

    For a few days, the PS3 Dev Wiki was down due to hosting problems and a lot of information seemed to be lost, but thanks to the hard work of the Wiki’s admin defyboy and a backup from a member called TMAnd, only a couple of days work was lost, you can read about it on this thread.

    So thank you defyboy and TMAnd for rescuing all those precious edits :)

    I would like to point out, that the PS3 Dev Wiki is a community effort, without the work and dedication of a lot of developers and PS3 enthusiasts, the wiki would be quite empty, so if you are doing work on the PS3, keep it documented on the Wiki :)

    You can visit the Wiki here:
    PS3 Dev Wiki

    I would like to give thanks to euss, deroad, defyboy, Lady Anne Blunt, sandungas and the many other editors who keep the Wiki alive.

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 06/04/2012 , @ 06:08am

     

    Last September, Sony made a controversial change to their T.O.S, implementing an Individual Binding Arbitration, which meant, that once you agreed to those T.O.S, you could no longer take Sony to court, over any wrong doing or mistake caused by them on the PSN service.

    On November last year, a PS3 owner filled a lawsuit against Sony, stating that the company engaged in unfair and tortious conduct when they required PS3 owners to agree to a new T.O.S, here is a small quote from the court document:

    The imposition of the Agreement was unfair, plaintiff argues, because without
    any consideration the Agreement altered the parties’ contractual relationship and imposed for the first
    time requirements that PSN users agree to submit disputes between the user and Sony to arbitration and
    waive their right to resolve disputes through a class action. Id. Users had to accept the terms of the
    Agreement in order to continue accessing the PSN. Id., ¶ 2. Users were able to opt out of the arbitration
    clause and class action waiver provisions, after they agreed to the Agreement. Id., ¶ 18. However,
    plaintiff alleges that defendants put up barriers and discouraged users from opting out by imposing
    onerous requirements, including requiring opt outs to be submitted in a written notice by mail. Id.
    Defendants move to dismiss the complaint, arguing that plaintiff does not have standing under
    the UCL – which requires a showing that plaintiff lost “money or property” as “a result” of defendants’
    conduct – and because no cause of action for tortious breach of the implied covenant of good faith and
    fair dealing exists under California law outside of insurance coverage disputes. Plaintiff opposes that
    motion and the matter is now before the Court.

    Now im sure you wont be surprised that the court dismissed this case, just like they dismissed the OtherOS lawsuit, so it seems that Sony are allowed to do what ever they want, you spend hundreds of pounds on PSN content, only to be told that you have to get rid of OtherOS in order to keep access to all that content you bought, only for a year year later you must go through the same type of decision again.

    Source

    Court Document

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 05/04/2012 , @ 06:12pm

     

    The government and it seems to be mainly the US government wants to spy on and censor everything we do, for the internet they try and enforce such things as P.I.P.A and A.C.T.A, not content in trying to stop us enjoying the internet we use, the US government, specifically the Department of Homeland Security, want tools to basically “hack” into our games consoles and check to see if we are terrorist’s or paedophiles, here are a few snippets from the source:

    Government researchers say that hacking into consoles will allow police to catch pedophiles and terrorists.

    At the cutting edge of this development is Obscure Technologies, a small San Francisco-based company that performs computer forensics and which has just been awarded a $177,237 sole-source research contract to develop “hardware and software tools that can be used for extracting data from video game systems,” and “a collection of data (disk images; flash memory dumps; configuration settings) extracted from new video game systems and used game systems purchased on the secondary market,” according to the contract award from the U.S. Navy.

    Thing about it: Your Nintendo Wii might tell government investigators when you were connected to the Internet, who you were talking to, what you were saying, and what you were playing. “Taken in context, it could end up revealing more than you expect,” Higgins warns.

    For the full story, visit the source here.

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 31/03/2012 , @ 07:55am

     

    Benjamin Grobler a South African inventor, along with his attorneys Christopher Banys and Richard C. Lin from the The Lanier Law Firm, have filled a lawsuite against both Sony and Apple for infringing patent laws, here is a quote from the source for a better understanding than i can explain:

    The inventor of technology used in data vending systems such as the iTunes and Playstation Network systems has sued Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple Inc. (NYSE: APPL) and Foster City, Calif.-based Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC (NYSE: SNE) for patent infringement.

    Inventor Benjamin Grobler is represented by intellectual property attorneys Christopher Banys and Richard C. Lin from the Palo Alto, Calif., office of The Lanier Law Firm. The lawsuits filed March on 27, 2012, allege that Apple and Sony are infringing U.S. Patent No. 6,799,084.

    The United States Patent and Trademark Office issued the ‘084 patent to Mr. Grobler in 2004. The patent covers data vending systems that allow users to store and manage digital music, video, software and other items on a variety of electronic devices.

    According to the lawsuit, Apple and Sony have infringed the patent by making and offering infringing data vending systems such as iTunes and the Playstation Network, and that the companies are inducing their customers’ infringement by using these systems.

    “You would be hard pressed to find someone who hasn’t listened to music or watched a video through iTunes or the Playstation Network,” says Mr. Banys, head of the nationwide intellectual property practice at The Lanier Law Firm. “Tech giants can’t just take an inventor’s work and use it as their own. This lawsuit represents our client’s effort to bring some accountability to the system.”

    The cases are Benjamin Grobler v. Apple Inc., No. CV-12-1534, and Benjamin Grobler v. Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC, No. CV-12-1526. Both are pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

    Source

    Im wondering why it has taken this inventor so long to take action against both these companies.

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 05/12/2011 , @ 09:29am

     

    It has been quite a while since we spoke of the OtherOS lawsuit, i wrote here of how Sony were planing to dismiss the case, then in July 2011 the court case continued, with that hearing just recently being brought to light by the awesome Groklaw,here is a part of that hearing:

    THE COURT:
    - the big difference between the last complaint and this one, in terms of an item that is being
    presented as a basis for these claims, particularly the express warranty claim, is the statements by Mr. — I think his name is
    “Harai” — about the life cycle, if you will, of the PS3. And I suppose my question is: Aren’t you expecting
    that statement to carry an awful lot of water here, in terms of providing any kind of warranty that the Other OS function is
    going to be maintained in seeming perpetuity, and in no way will be affected going forward; at least, with respect to this ten-year period that you’re identifying? It’s a very general statement about the market cycle of a product. And to transform that into the flagship of your warranty claim seems
    to be expecting a lot out of that statement.

    MR. QUADRA:
    Well, your Honor, let me at least clarify one point. Our allegation is not that it is a market-cycle statement; that, in fact, it refers to the life of
    the product, itself. When it was first made, that specific statement in its entirety, which I believe — the defense counsel sort of cut part of the quote — goes on to say that they’re not envisioning putting out a new product, because they purposely make their products to last this period of time.

    You can read the full article at the source here.

    Or you can download the PDF here at PS3HaX.

  • Posted by PS3Hax Member News , on 07/10/2011 , @ 11:24am

     

    A group of gamers have set up a website, and are offering to send Opt-Out letters to either Sony Or EA, which will break the mandatory binding arbitration, imposed on you by these two companies, here is a quote from the source:

    Gamers Opt Out is a collective of gamers who are sick of absurd EULAs from game companies. These EULAs have clauses preventing class-action lawsuits, though you can opt out of the clauses by sending a letter. We want to make it easier for everyone to opt out because Sony, EA, et al, believe most people won’t bother to. Let’s show them they’re wrong.

    We will make it easy for you to create the letter needed to send to these companies and can even send the letter on your behalf at no cost. All we ask is that if you like what we are doing, spread the word or donate to help with the cost of paper and postage.

    Source

    Whilst we do think that this is a good idea, we have to warn you, that you will have to fill in your personal details, such as PSN username and home address, if you are not comfortable with this DO NOT use the service, also we are no way affiliated with them.

    Thanks to both Alycan and Mr.Goodfrag for the news.


  • Posted by PS3Hax Member News , on 24/09/2011 , @ 08:04am

     

    The recent ToS change for the PS3, makes you waive your legal rights, has a 30 day Opt Out clause, You must send Sony a letter within 30 days of agreeing to the ToS

    Washington attorney Thomas Buscaglia, who specializes in games

    States “”This really sort of sucks because it is doubtful that any individual could afford to sue them,” explained Washington attorney Thomas Buscaglia, who specializes in games. “Not sure how enforceable it will be, but I think it it would be really cool if gamers started to circulate a form opt out rejection of these terms and mailed them in.”

    “If you do not wish to be bound by the binding arbitration and class action waiver in this Section 15,” reads the Terms of Service, “you must notify SNEI [Sony Network Entertainment] in writing within 30 days of the date that you accept this agreement.”

    “This is certainly not standard practice by any standards…in fact it may well not be enforceable,” said Buscaglia. “Time will tell on that one. The US Federal Trade Commission and various state consumer protection agencies could have a problem with it. Also, some courts might not allow it to be enforced due to existing state court precedent.”

    SOURCE

    The source also confirms , at the moment, this ToS solely applies to US and does not affect EU/Australia yet.

    I suspect they are trying to live up to their slogan, “It only does everything”…

    Now screw’s you in the a$$

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 15/09/2011 , @ 11:27am

     

    Recently Sony went through some changes, regarding the naming of some of it services, it has renamed its Qriocity service to S.E.N(Sony Entertainment Network), with that name change and its restructuring of the S.N.E.A/S.N.E.I services, came a some what Controversial New T.O.S, i wont use shocking as nothing that Sony does in regards to its loyal customers is a shock anymore, not that i will be getting into the root kits and removal of OtherOS, i will stay with the subject at hand, the new T.O.S:

    Throughout most of the T.O.S, you will see loads of red text and red lines running through text, one thing that caught my eye was the striking out of key words like purchasing and owning, that were replaced with “licensing”, so what that basically means, that any product you “buy”, is no longer yours as you are only licensing it, or in other words renting it, until such times Sony removes that service/feature, a quote from article #4:

    Your existing PSN wallet will be used forto purchase of content licenses or services offered on QriocitySEN. You must transition your QriocitySEN account to a PSN account for purchase ofto license content or purchase services available on PSN.

    Now whilst that is quite bad in itself, the main reason for this article, which was brought to my attention, by PS3/aMSN Developer KaKaRoTo via Twitter, is chapter 15 of the T.O.S, which is an Individual Binding Arbitration, which with it being a PSN T.O.S, means it is an mandatory binding arbitration, as you HAVE to agree to it in order to use the service, here is a quote of what a binding arbitration means, pay close attention to the part i have highlighted in red and underlined:

    What is arbitration?
    Arbitration is an alternative method of resolving disputes in which two parties present their individual sides of a complaint to a arbitrator or panel of arbitrators. The arbitrator, who is supposed to be neutral, then weighs the facts and arguments of both parties and decides the dispute. Arbitration may be voluntary or mandatory.

    What is mandatory binding arbitration?
    In mandatory binding arbitration, a company requires a consumer to agree to submit any dispute that may arise to binding arbitration prior to completing a transaction with the company. The consumer is required to waive their right to sue, to participate in a class action lawsuit, or to appeal.

    Why are so many consumer groups opposing mandatory arbitration in automotive transactions?
    Many mandatory binding arbitration agreements are written to protect the dealer.

    Read more about arbitration here.
    (more…)

  • Posted by GregoryRasputin , on 11/08/2011 , @ 09:59am

     

    During February and March of this year, we reported on Sony and LG going through a court case, it got serious when LG had manged through the courts to get an injunction against the sale of PS3′s, many consoles were seized by customs officers in the Netherlands, after almost two weeks, Sony managed to get this injunction lifted and PS3′s were allowed to cary on their normal journey, but the dispute between the two companies was far from over, until today, where the have signed an agreement, here is a quote from the source:

    (Reuters) - LG Electronics and Sony said on Thursday that they have resolved patent disputes between the two firms spanning smartphones, TVs and Blu-ray technology, with LG adding that they have signed a cross-licensing deal.

    “LG and Sony recently agreed to drop patent infringement lawsuits against each other,” a spokeswoman at South Korea’s LG Electronics said. Sony confirmed this, but declined to comment further.

    LG shares were up 1.3 percent, outperforming the Korea Composite Stock Price Index’s (KOSPI) 1.7 percent fall, while Sony shares were down 2.7 percent, hitting a 2-1/2 year low, against a 1.5 percent drop in the benchmark Nikkei average.

    Sony and LG have been embroiled in a string of bitter lawsuits on a wide range of products in Europe and the United States since the two technology giants failed to renew a technology sharing agreement that expired three years ago, a person familiar with the matter said.

    Sony had filed a complaint against LG with the U.S. International Trade Commission, seeking to block LG from shipping its Rumor Touch and several other smartphones to the United States.

    LG also told the commission that Sony’s PlayStation 3 infringed its Blu-ray video technology.

    The patent spat culminated in the seizure of PlayStation 3 game consoles by customs officers in the Netherlands following a court injunction by LG in March.

    Source Reuters

    So those of you looking to buy PS3′s in the future, need worry no more about them being seized.

  • Posted by PS3Hax Member News , on 06/07/2011 , @ 05:23pm

     

    Remember the guy that made Server Mapper…goes by the name: “cotojestwtf“. Well various sources are reporting that he was recently raided by Polish police which resulted in the closure of his youtube account, along with no longer being able to work on the PS3Linked project.

    He most likely got in trouble for Server Mapper which was used in conjunction with f*ck PSN (falsifying SSL/certs) to bypass PSN restrictions on CFW. For those who don’t know the PS3Linked project was a way for CFW and OFW to connect to each other to play”online”…similar to XlinkKai but able to play with a wider array of PS3 consoles.

    The admin over at a Polish PS3 site has posted the following (translated):

    At the beginning i want to apologize all people that waiting for an aplication Ps3Linked. Well known is that we want a public test, but he doesnt start. why ? i explain . Unexpectedly one of my familiar people has brought on me to police that i pirate/hack Playstation 3. For proof, he indicated my youtube channel. Day 30.06.2011, the two policeman in the morning, has confiscated my PC and i go with them to police station. It has managed to reach an agreement ultimately, that I will receive no punishment for my YT channel, but they find other things.

    I have obtained my PC 2.07.2011, but all empty. Aplication PS3Linked is still in WIP 90% [work in progress] but im no longer to work on that, but There let’s be certain to see this application daylight soon. After this , i understand many dewelopers about next CFW , you should them understand too, because , you dont know when the law is going to kick in your face. What with me ? I dont create any ,,tutorials” YT channel with ,,dark side”, but i still will be watching ps3 sites less throwing for eyes categories.

    [Source PS3-Hack, VIA PS3Crunch]