Originally Posted by chemixal
Sony did put up some of the most incredibly strongest security system ever to come up in a video game system. Lasted wha..5 years ?
I understand how pissed the engineers can be right now...but hell... 60 bucks a pop ? Thats allright for a metal gear solid 4 BD-Disc, you know... but how the **** can someone ask 60$ for miniNinjas ......
If the games were priced according to its quality, there would be 3 bucks games all over the counter, let's face it.
I totally agree with you man. Merit, thus pricing, where it is due.
************* [ - Post Merged - ] *************
So now let's ask ourselves, did we buy or lease the PS3? one would think that whatever you do with the PS3, you bought it and if you break it, its your responsibility. if they really don't want people to mod the system, then instead of selling the ps3, rent or lease it. otherwise, let us do what we want with our PS3's and leave us alone.
Sophistry. What could you do with your system anyway if devs like geohot, kmeaw, waninkoko et.al didn't spoon feed everyone with mods? It is not the act of modification of the platform they are concerned about but rather the purpose of the modification and who drives this purpose forward.
Though backup managers couldn't run on geohot's cfw, it was through omission and not commission; in other words, backup managers didn't run because he simply didn't add it in his cfw and not because he wrote code to prevent them from running, two very different things. We saw some of his latter posts stating that he added such blocks but its likely belated if it was true at all. Seeing that there were "fusions" between his cfw and other releases where tutorials on this and other sites recommended installing his cfw as part of the process of enabling b.u.ms to work just underscores the point that at least one of his cfws did not have an active bum block coded in. Furthermore his CFW was extensible and even other devs chose not to springboard off it, it was surely used for review and perhaps for code cannibalization.
What some people on here need to see before calling Sony names is that they're reading only one half of the legal procedure, where the defending lawyers are trying to establish that geohot's work was solely confined to his personal system (contrary to the fact that he personally released his work to the public domain for use in ALL systems
), that he was not in congress with others (like Bushing
) bent on breaking the PS3 system (contrary to all the twitter and other feeds we've witnessed or been privy to in late December), that he was nowhere near California when his acts to "jailbreak" were done to avoid being tried under the California Computer Crime law (California being one of the handful of states that explicitly, meaning in written letter, prohibits the release of malicious software (California Statutes, Title 13 (Penal Code), §§ 502(b)(10) and 502(c)(8))
Albeit, when one thinks of malicious software, trojan horses, computer virii and other forms malware are what come to mind first and not cfw. Sony wishes to establish in its prosecution that cfw is malicious software (who wants to be the first to argue that piracy is not injurious to Sony and application/game developing companies and that newly released cfw allow rampant piracy to ensue?
) and that one the first versions was released by geohot himself (who admitted to its release thus earning the appellation of egohot). Seeing that all current cfw projects are open sourced, a comparison of codes will likely yield interesting genealogies. If any of the new contain pieces of code that trace back to the original geohot cfw then who knows what can be done to make it incriminating evidence of collusion?
So basically, if Sony secures California as stage of trial, the combination of that and geohot's public admissions on breaking the PS3 and releasing his CFW as its product, proving that geohot colluded with other hackers especially the ones that released bum enabling cfw (evidence of which is all over the web), along with finally establishing malicious intent was part of the making of cfw - then Sony does not really have such a weak case. But it all still hinges on California I believe.One has to look at New Jersey Computer Crime Law at a glance to know it has no teeth even if geohot is convicted:
New Jersey Computer Crimes Laws
Code Section 2C:20-23, et seq.
Note: Section does not specifically classify crimes listed as either felony or misdemeanor. Offenses listed in misdemeanor or felony columns are based on the levels of punishments imposed rather than by explicit classification.
Mental State Required for Prosecution
Misdemeanor Computer Crimes
Access; any of the following, causing damages less than $200: access plus scheme to defraud; alter, damage or destroy hard/software
Felony Computer Crimes Access:
any of the following, causing damages greater than $200: access plus scheme to defraud; alter, damage or destroy hard/software
Attempt Considered a Crime?
Civil Lawsuit Permitted?
Call me a Sony fanboy or whatever but I'm not a hypocrite. In fact, it is because I despise hypocrisy that I write pieces like this and not for any love for Sony or hate of piracy. We all know why we love these mods. We all know why we want Sony to lose. A lot of outcry has been made over "I bought this therefore it is mine to do as I wish" but if we sift through everything, not everything on what we bought is ours. The Sony brand name is on the console, does that mean you can take that word and do with it as you wished? What about the OFW in the console? I'm pretty sure the keys, OS, OFW and similar components coded to protect publisher IP did not become yours (or geohot's for that matter) when you bought your PS3. I didn't see anything on this list
on my PS3 packaging allowing me exploit the software internals of the PS3 as I wished. I'm not entirely sure but though one may purchase a copy of Windows 7, he/she is not allowed to modify it in any way and without an opening license, what makes people think that modifying OFW through the discovery of compromised root keys is legal?
Defending counsel wants to make this issue about hardware and the rights of the buyer to it the focal point of the case to obscure the fact that what was compromised here was the proprietary software within the PS3. Last time I checked, proprietary software piracy and/or hacking were illegal. Honestly, Sony didn't do itself a favor with trying to tie in a PSN alias to an actual person and it certainly was used to ridicule them here, reinforcing the fallacy that all who work for Sony are stupid. So they should just stick to their guns on hacked proprietary software and release of malicious software tried in the State of California if they want any hope of winning.
I'd like to apologize if I offended anyone in this forum with what I said. I just strongly believe that we should be content with the benefits of an open system without demeaning the "defeated" ones that made the product we all like to use. Sony does what it needs to do, even if seeming desperate at it, to protect not only its business interests but the interests of all parties involved: the faceless programmers and artists that come up with all the flashes and bangs, the marketing and localization teams that work to make these games an engaging experience wherever they're sent around the world etc. It is because it defends these people rights (albeit, for the love of profit) that I have enough sympathy for Sony to not raise the hand of my written or voiced words to strike against them. Thank you.