PS3 Owner Refunded For Missing "Other OS"

Toxicgonzo writes "Amazon has given a European PS3 owner a 20% refund for removal of the PS3's OtherOS feature. (We recently discussed hacker Geohot's efforts to restore this feature.) The owner cited European law Directive 1999/44/EC — which states that goods must (1) comply with the description given by the seller and possess the same qualities and characteristics as other similar goods, and (2) be fit for the purpose which the consumer requires them and which was made known to the seller at the time of purchase. How many other European PS3 owners will follow suit? If Amazon forwards the bill to Sony, how will Sony respond?"

Comments

Justice

[headkase]

This is justice for anyone who was actually affected by the removal. And feedback for Sony for future decisions.

Re:Justice

[theaveng]

Questions about the EU:

- How come the customer was not required to go to court *first* before getting his refund?

- What if the retailer had simply said, "No."
- What would have happened next?

Re:Justice

[Zerth]

Speaking of European sales, I wonder if any of the European countries will go after Sony for additional VAT and tariffs because the PS3 is now just a gameplaying machine instead of a "freely programmable general purpose computer".

Re:Justice

[Vanderhoth]

I'd like to see that. I've read in several places they only allowed Linux for the EU tax break. I'd like to see Sony have to pay retroactively seeing as how they retroactively removed the feature.

Re:Justice

[stonewallred]

In my state you can only file a small claims case in the county which the principle you are suing resides. I was served papers (the sheriff dept called me and I stopped by to pick them up)for a dentist bill my insurance failed to pay, and they sued me in the county which I worked, not where I lived. The lawyer was a bitch, so after about 15 minutes of bantering back and forth, the judge asked if there was anything I wished to add. I asked that the case be dismissed since I lived in a different county, showed my DL and he dismissed it. Lawyer was not happy, as she filed in the wrong venue and would not get paid most likely.

Re:Heh

[kramerd]

Actually, as a PS3 owner who chooses to use the included OS, I am still angry at functionality that was included with purchase being removed. This affects the potential resale value. Or perhaps I want to play my old PS2 games without buying a PS2, since I sold mine when I bought a PS3 to offset the then $600 price tag. I'm sure the majority of complaints stem from actual issues that vary based on how people use their respective consoles.

Re:It means that eventually you'll agree to a EULA

[TubeSteak]

No EULA will override basic legal principles.
Judges are rather consistent about the fact some rights just cannot be signed away.

Trying this in Norway

[juletre]

A friend of mine sent a letter to Sony Norway telling them how his PS3 stopped working as advertised. In Norway any consumer electronics should be expected to work in 5 years. As it stands his PS3 just stopped working well short of the five years.
No reply as of yet, but should be fun.

Re:Trying this in Norway

[jbssm]

I believe in this case it's not even a warranty problem. In Portugal, the warranty is 2 years. But they cannot remove functionality just because the warranty is over. Even if it had passed 4 years I would still be entitled to compensation in this case.

Re:Heh

[Pojut]

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are a LOT of people out there who were using this capability...I just mean the people who had no idea they could even do this suddenly demanding a refund.

Has anyone in the US tried this?

[Jck_Strw]

With Amazon, Sony, Target, whomever.