PS3 jailbreaker off to prison soon

[DenSweeP]

The thing I find stupid is that the PS3 is slowly approaching it's end and next-gen consoles are on the way. But, I can almost guarantee that Sony had been hoping to save millions by using the same security measures on their next console, but that is now obviously no longer an option. So now Sony is sour grapes and nailing everyone they can. What they hope to achieve is beyond me, because this will not server to deter people from cracking the next console, but merely motivate them even more.

Also, what puzzles me is that the 360 has always been far easier to play pirated games on, yet no one makes a big hullabaloo about that, or is it conveniently overlooked?

Having said all that, these idiots have broken the rules and will have to suffer the consequences.

[shadowfox]

Also, what puzzles me is that the 360 has always been far easier to play pirated games on, yet no one makes a big hullabaloo about that, or is it conveniently overlooked?

Having said all that, these idiots have broken the rules and will have to suffer the consequences.

It probably comes down to Microsoft allowing people to fiddle with the XBox.

You also have to keep in mind that the companies were founded by different nationalities - and their approach to business is of necessity going to be very different. MS is US based, and compared to Japan (where Sony is based) is a lot more liberal in their approach. Japanese, on the other hand, love rules - and can be very inflexible about them.

[TheAvenged87]

The thing is, as soon as you try and classify this into right/wrong (black/white) you're leaving a lot of space for confusion. Is what Sony is currently doing right? From your and my point of view - no. From theirs? Yes.

Is what Egorenkov did wrong? For us? No. For Sony? Yes.

You are, as you say, within your rights to open up and fiddle with your guitar amplifier - but, suppose you break something. Will your warrantee cover it? No. And the funny thing about rights are, they can be restricted. And in the PS3's case - they are restricted, in legal Terms & Conditions that you effectively agree to when you purchase and use their product. If you don't believe in rights being restricted - go take a look at South Africa's very own Constitution - rights may be restricted where they interfere with the rights of another entity. Principle doesn't really enter into it.

It's not like it takes a lot of reading to find the restrictions either - they form part of the second clause in the System Software Licence Agreement - I'll even quote the relevant part -



There it is, in perfect legalese. So, from a legal standpoint, Sony are perfectly within their rights to enforce their terms, or procecute anyone who breaches those terms.

Sony and MS have a different approach - MS allows tinkering, Sony doesn't want you to. Again, these are their creations, so once again, they are executing their right to restrict or not to restrict.

I'm not saying I'm supporting what Sony's doing, guys. Don't get me wrong. I have a PSP, and I would love to run homebrew apps on it, but I'm aware of the fact that in doing so I would be in breach of those T&C's that come with using it. Feel free to disagree with me on this, but just because you or I believe it's right to jailbreak the item, in terms of the law, you're not.

And for a lawyer (and for almost any corporation), the letter of the law is what counts. That's what judgements get based on, not feelings.

You have a fair point there. By using the system, he agreed to those terms and conditions. I actually read all that crap when I buy something (studying commercial law, so I kind of have to). According to the terms of the PS3 and the law, Sony is within their rights to take him on.

[Lycanthrope]

You have a fair point there. By using the system, he agreed to those terms and conditions. I actually read all that crap when I buy something (studying commercial law, so I kind of have to). According to the terms of the PS3 and the law, Sony is within their rights to take him on.

I wonder what precedent that will set for jailbroken phones, custom firmware, etc.

This entire debacle is just ridiculous.

[Tank]

queue alot more court cases soon me thinks. i can see alot of rage when people aren't allowed to jailbreak teh iphonz no more

[TheAvenged87]

I wonder what precedent that will set for jailbroken phones, custom firmware, etc.

This entire debacle is just ridiculous.

Yeah, you have to be pretty careful where terms and conditions are present. Not just for software, but everywhere else too. There was a game retailer who changed their terms and conditions for online game shopping on April Fool's Day last year. Basically, if you read the terms and conditions when agreeing to buy a game from them, you agreed to sell your soul to them in return. Google it. Thousands of people never noticed it and bought games that day.

[TheAvenged87]

Oh, here is the link to the original news article

[Blackhand]

2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions.

You may not and you agree not to, or to enable others to, copy (except as expressly permitted by this License), decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, attempt to derive the source code
of, decrypt, modify, or create derivative works of the iPhone Software or any services provided by the iPhone Software, or any part thereof (except as and only to the extent any foregoing
restriction is prohibited by applicable law or to the extent as may be permitted by licensing terms governing use of open-sourced components included with the iPhone Software). Any attempt to
do so is a violation of the rights of Apple and its licensors of the iPhone Software.

Yet we know the US courts found in the hackers favor. Clearly not everything in a EULA will hold up in court, particularly conditions requiring you to forfeit ownership of your soul

[shadowfox]

I wonder what precedent that will set for jailbroken phones, custom firmware, etc.

This entire debacle is just ridiculous.

I think in most cases the companies just don't really bother doing anything because of the cost involved in pursuing these cases. But this whole issue became pretty widely publicised; I actually have no idea why. Sony may just be looking to make an example, for all I know.

But, if you're taking precedents into account - I don't see any company coming after you for having your phone jail-broken - they'd lose more than they gain since there are millions who have their devices jail-broken. But they can simply refuse to service said device, once again legally. However, coming up with jail-breaking methods (and custom firmware) involves reverse engineering, and there you have a much smaller crowd to target and therefore much easier to prosecute.

Again, here Sony pretty much fits into the whole pattern of how the Japanese choose to do things - because of my coverage of the anime industry, I've become aware of the fact that they make almost no effort to go after people who download uploaded anime (in Japan itself), but if they catch you distributing it you're in for a world of pain.