And you wonder why everyone hates Sony

Very, very true. They can still decide whether or not to pull out of the video games race. As far as their electronics go, w/e, that's fine, those are alright products too.

edited 19th Jun '11 11:32:52 AM by Schitzo

ALL CREATURE WILL DIE AND ALL THE THINGS WILL BE BROKEN. THAT'S THE LAW OF SAMURAI.

> Aminatep that's a joke right?

Which one of?

I've had enough experience with hacker crowd, myself. Or, hell, general IT crowd. It is extremely hard to find a single sane person here.

Apparently, assuming that corporations don't use my firewall to track everything I do on my computer is slave mentality. So there's that.

edited 19th Jun '11 11:45:45 AM by Aminatep

   I will consume not only your flesh, but your very soul.   

No comment.

@Topic: As I see it, everyone is a total dick in this case. No reason to demonize Sony. At least not more than any other corporation.

People aren't as awful as the internet makes them out to be.

Aminatep, chevrons don't work like that outside /v/. Anyway, to explain why one might think that statement a joke:

We have no sources or information on anything like that. Do not make assumptions. He obviously paid for his PS 3, his computer hardware, and his internet service. How can he hate his lifebloods? All he did was break the PS 3 so someone might use Linux on it.

He is absolutely correct. Read the article.

He's German. He might be a first-generation immigrant, but I know Hispanic people over here named things like Jesus Martinez whose families have been here as far back as the history goes. Don't assume things and stop being racist.

edited 20th Jun '11 12:13:11 AM by Canondorf

Just to give a different perspective on the situation (I googled the actual (German) decision of the court.

The problem is there was a preliminary injunction*

from the German court, forbidding the guy from spreading his data further. He violated it. As a result he either has to pay a fine or if he can't, go to prison. It's not like he got fucked up just because Sony sued, but because he tried to ignore court decisions.
Source: Preliminary injunction, especially I.1.
Decision for a fine after violating the preliminary injunction

Another thing is, the court of Hamburg is infamous for being pro-corporation/pro-copyright, sometimes getting their decisions handed to them with quite impolite comments from higher courts.

edited 20th Jun '11 2:41:08 AM by Uchuujinsan

Pour y voir clair, il suffit souvent de changer la direction de son regard www.xkcd.com/386/

But that injunction is censorship. There was no personal or credit card info in there.

And of course, that injunction was the result of Sony's legal attack.

edited 20th Jun '11 12:31:55 PM by Medinoc

"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."

Well, it certainly wasn't censorship, because that data wasn't an oppinion.

The problem here is, that any legal success Sony might have in court would be irrelevant once the data is out there, it's supposedly uncontrollable. That's why preliminary injunctions exist - to prevent one party from creating facts that the court can't change anymore. That the guy ignored that is somehow like spitting in the face of the court, and the fine won't disappear even if he actually wins this case. He didn't get the fine yet because he did something Sony didn't like, but because he did something the court explicitly forbid beforehand. If the court decides for his side he will be able to freely distribute the data again.

Don't misunderstand - I'm not in favor of Sony, neither do I like the law that brought the guy in this situation (I don't know whether jailbreaking is legal in Germany, though I think it should be), but it's not like the justice system in Germany somehow failed completely. There are actually fairly reasonable arguments for many parts of the decisions that were made. If a court says "Don't do X - for now" and you proceed to do X you are in most cases just stupid and don't get to complain if you are punished for it.

Pour y voir clair, il suffit souvent de changer la direction de son regard www.xkcd.com/386/

Um, when didn't politics and lawsuits play some role in video games? This kind of crap has been going on for a long time.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_City_Studios,_Inc._v._Nintendo_Co.,_Ltd.
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc.
• http://digital-law-online.info/cases/24PQ2D1015.htm
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre#Video_games

Edit: I can't get the first two to link right, so you'll have to copy/paste to look at them.

edited 21st Jun '11 8:33:29 PM by Driscoll

WHAT A HORRIBLE NIGHT TO HAVE A DIALOG BOX INTERRUPT GAMEPLAY.

Honestly, he brought it on himself by releasing the data.

And I find the picture of a scene of Braveheart at the top of the article to be rather tasteless. Yeah this programmer stooge is fighting to liberate his people from being bent over a fence by another group.

In my opinion, he's an idiot. Ignore a court decision, and you get fined/prison time.

edited 21st Jun '11 8:29:53 PM by MarkVonLewis

Are "his people" are one of the following groups: Hackers in general; people seeking the free flowing of all information; and/or people who wish the ability to modify anything they purchase at their own whim?

If so, then I would say the Braveheart comparison is accurate... He wishes to liberate one of those groups from being bent over a fence by Sony.

edited 21st Jun '11 8:34:04 PM by Swish

I think what the English were doing to the Scots in Wallace's time does not compare at all to this scuffle over the PS 3.

Whatever, I don't have a PS 3 so I'm largely apathetic to this whole mess.

Same here.

Usually here.

> -looks in thread-

> " I would say the Braveheart comparison is accurate... He wishes to liberate one of those groups from being bent over a fence by Sony."

> ... -leaves thread-

There are too many toasters in my chimney!

I personally don't like Sony because they upmarket a tad too much.

Which is how I feel about a lot of major electronics firms as well.

While I don't read much into news of this subject any longer, some details did catch my attention. The guy was, IMHO, completely right and reasonable at the beginning, up to and including when he disregarded the gag order to avoid publication of the data. The problem was that when Sony strengthened their assholery, he reciprocated the same way.

Like it or not, disregarding the the gag order was most probably necessary. Big corporations have enough of a good lobby behind them, but add that if you listen to a judge who most likely does not udnerstand how technology works, ten minutes later a black party van stops by your house and they take everything you possess, not only that which pertains to the case, and from there it's only loss after loss, not only for you but for anyone involved with you in any way. With the data revealed, the rest of the consumers can at least restitute the damage Sony caused.

Also couldn't avoid laughing my ass off at this comment:

Because, you know... the Sony Rootkit? That actually destroyed hardware?

Fanfic Recs orwellianretcon'd: cutlocked for committee or for Google?

Oh, and Sony Vegas, which costs like $500.

"Hipsters: the most dangerous gang in the US." - Pacific Mackerel

Um, sorry...?

Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.

There apparently was a Sony DRM that presented a massive security risk to any computer that had Sony software installed on it. It acted like a Rootkit and might have been related to SecuROM.

EDIT: This Wikipedia article says that Sony made SecuROM.

EDIT 2: And here is an article about the rootkit itself.

edited 21st Jun '11 10:43:07 PM by RocketDude

"Hipsters: the most dangerous gang in the US." - Pacific Mackerel