Slashdot Mirror
Sony Can Update PS3 Firmware Without Permission
Stoobalou writes "Sony's latest firmware update comes with a revised End User License Agreement which allows the company to change any part of the console's operating system without notification or permission. You might think you own the console you paid for, but Sony has a very different idea."
Shouldn't the EULA that I agreed to when I bought the hardware apply, not a revised one released after the fact? What are the consequences of refusing this firmware update?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Guess that means that hacked firmware is the way to go, and keep your machine offline.
There Can Be Only One...
How is Sony doing this a surprise to anyone?
It is like the iTards whining about the gigatiPod, iPad nano, or the iPad nano phone edition being locked down.
All your PS3s are belong to SONY
Kinda sorta sounds familiar . . . but I dunno . . .
Would a company like Sony rootkit their customers . . .?
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Who else can see all consoles going this way? Part of the appeal to content producers and the console makers themselves is having consistent and complete control over the platform. It's things like this that will hopefully keep the PC relevant as a gaming and entertainment platform
Sounds pretty reasonable. At least there's no mention of rootkits for now.
My work here is dung.
If you're surprised at this. Did any of us really think that Sony would a) roll over and cough up refunds for anyone who sued over the removal of "Install Other OS" or b) reinstate the feature? Corporations. Assume the worst, and you're usually right.
This pretty much disgusts me as a customer, because most likely it means I won't be able to play newer games on my PS3 without worrying that they might be messing around with my system and removing functions I enjoy using on my system. The summary fails to add that Sony also says it's not their fault if they end up bricking your PS3. So, besides having a new flash pushed down your throat, if it fails you have to pay to have it fixed.
No, thanks. I'll stick to my DS Lite and Wii (which is still running System Menu 4.0 and had the IOS files updated using DopIOSMod), where I actually do have enough freedom of what I can or cannot do with my BOUGHT hardware.
EULAs aren't the most legally bind 'agreements' at the best of times. But one that applies retroactively is ridiculous even by EULA standards.
Is anyone really surprised? I don't think so. Sony saying one thing and then doing the complete opposite is nothing new.
I waited a while after the PS3 release for all the stupidity to get worked out, and this is what happens. Sorry guys, its my fault. Though, I haven't updated my firmware since I opened the box at thanksgiving
I can't imagine these fine print piss in the wind eula's that are part of after market updates would hold up at all in court, but I've been wrong before.
Include KY with their products?
actually, I think it's more like the 20mn into the future are now nearly through. Is the domain "Big Time Television.com" already taken?
"DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
Just wait until the first time they accidentally brick some systems.
As far as those companies are concerned, the law is catching up just fine. If anything, the DMCA gave them most of what they wanted even before they needed it. Now ACTA promises to finish the job.
Remember kids: If you think that the government doesn't represent your interests, its just because you don't matter enough.
If I paid money based on the device having a certain functionality and the company takes that functionality away that is fraud. If I sold you an MP3 player and 60 days later it would no longer play MP3s would you say so what?
No, no, Sony, I've used my homebrew to implement a content protection system which prevents my children from copying my musical masterb^Hpieces!
If you update the firmware, you might be breaking the DMCA! You have been warned!
(Welcome to "Illogic in the Courtroom", episode 28)...
Agreed.
And haven't software licences since the beginning of time stated that (I'm paraphrasing) this software is useless, not guaranteed to do anything useful, including function, noones responsible for losses and specifically, YOU DO NOT OWN THE SOFTWARE ?
Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
Why does Sony think they have the right to tamper with the hardware that their customers FUCKING PAID FOR?
I wasn't stupid enough to buy a PS3 or any other Sony product over the past 10+ years. Every time I see one of these stories, it just confirms I made the right choice.
LOL! What are you thinking? This is America, dammit. And in America, corporations are king. Corporations dictate the law. Corporations dictate how you can use their products, even when you've bought them outright. Corporations can change contracts whenever they want, however they want, and you just have to suck it up and enjoy it.
Shit, son, if you're saying that the terms of contracts have to be honored, and can't be changed unilaterally by corporations, then that sounds damn near like SOCIALISM.
It is time for PS3 owners to take SCEA to court over Theft of Services and also over their EULA being a contract of adhesion This has to be illegal, but a class action suite won't do anything, every PS3 owner in America needs to take SECA to small claims court and slowly bleed them.
GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
What a fucking moron you are. I doubt you've ever even seen a copy of 1984, nevermind understanding anything within. This has nothing to do with 1984, you fucking idiotic dipshit retard.
EULAs say all kinds of crazy stuff that never actually get done. I seen ones that border on 'signing' away Constitutional rights. But I've ever heard of a single case of a legitimate, license-holding, console-owning user being forced to do something awful because of EULA verbage. Like buying a house. All real estate loans since forever ago allow the bank to 'call' the entire loan amount at any time for any reason. But they never actually do. They just was you to know they can.
If Sony releases a firmware update that pisses off more than a tiny percentage of users, they will undoubtedly reverse it. And if that tiny percentage of modders/cheaters/hobbyists or whatever else are really hacked off by the update, then they should sell their PS3's on Ebay for 80% of what you paid for it and move on with their lives for God's sake.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
You should get that checked out.
Don't worry, the court has you covered on technical matters...
How many devices are out now that give the manufacturer complete remote control of the device?
A lot, but most of them have an alternative without such a leash. Game consoles have PCs, iPod Touch has the Archos 5, iPhone has phones that run Android OS such as Nexus One, iPad has the Touch Book, and soon handheld game systems will have the Pandora PDA. This leaves cable boxes, but those aren't tied to the manufacturer as much as to the MPAA-puppet cable companies.
Your mom checked it out for me. She said it is refreshing and disease free.
So SONY in their latest ToS has basically admitted that they believe they have carte blanche over hardware you payed between $300-$600 dollars for. Not counting accessories and purchases. Yes. With 3.21 this only affected linux and it was optional (arguably). But from 3.30 forward SONYs stance is they can AUTOMATICALLY and WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION update the console. The updates can add/remove features, capabilities, even content you have bought and paid for and you (in their eyes) can't do a thing about it. GeoHot was right. This isn't about Linux anymore. This is about who owns what you paid for.
This seems like such a huge deal when you put it that way, but really... so what?
Let's see how you feel after Sony's monitoring programs see how good you are at Starfighter and recruit you in their real world war against the Ko-Dan Empire. Meanwhile, your android replacement will be sleeping with your wife.
So what?
So what's next to go!
Are Sony going to remove the ability to play blu-ray movies? Are they going to block any games release over a year ago? Are they going to change the firmware to push advertising on your screen while you're gaming? Is the firmware going to demand you have their latest webcam or other add-on attached in order to boot? Sony can do all of that and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.
Then again; "so what?"
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
I know these recent steps by Sony are done with the aim to prevent modding of PS3s, but these moves will actually drive more PS3 owners to mod or hack their PS3s.
I'm still disappointed over the removal of the OtherOS feature. That being said, this extension to the EULA is neither surprising or actually useful in any way. By limiting my access to the PSN (and the downloadable games and content I have purchased through it) Sony has already basically forced me into updating my PS3 firmware any damn time they feel like it. So to claim they have the right to do so automatically doesn't really have any more of a negative impact beyond what I already suffer.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
It's a dick move for sure. Maybe even a little sneaky, but no, it's not fraud. When you purchased the machine, it came with a EULA that specifically said Sony could update the EULA at anytime for any reason. But most folks don't actually read those. And then they get hacked off and cry foul when Sony exercise its option to use the terms the user agreed to. Kinda like a mortgage agreement that you sign but don't actually read...
Now if Sony had a EULA that said some like 'this EULA is binding in perpetuity and supersedes any future updates', and then made bindign changes, that might be fraud.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
So what?
So what's next to go!
Are Sony going to remove the ability to play blu-ray movies? Are they going to block any games release over a year ago? Are they going to change the firmware to push advertising on your screen while you're gaming? Is the firmware going to demand you have their latest webcam or other add-on attached in order to boot? Sony can do all of that and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.
Then again; "so what?"
I don't play video games.
Last I remember, PS3s were for playing games.
Most PS3 owners won't be hacking their console, I'd imagine.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
I haven't updated to the 3.21 firmware (the one that disables Other OS), and I suspect many others have ignored the update as well. I'm betting Sony sees this and in response has decided the best way to go is to force future updates down our throat, not giving us the option.
DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
+1
Dumbest thread topic I have seen in a long time, and an insult to those who live/have lived under true totalitarian regimes. Waah, my video game system automatically updates! I'm so oppressed!
If Sony wishes to house a device under their control on my premises, I hope they won't mind being invoiced for my (very reasonable, I assure you) colocation fees...
and they have proven time and again that they are not trustworthy.
Such behavior should be punished by the market.
Don't buy from companies you consider not trustworthy.
Not sure why Sony is taking the heat for it more than others. Maybe it's because the good guys like Valve wouldn't pull this crap on us!
http://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/
2.A. License Terms.
Face it, all EULAs are designed so that the seller (ha, I mean licensor of course!) can screw you all they want. You just have to hope they don't do it.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
The thing is that Sony shouldn't get to decide what I do with my hardware. Yeah I'm sure this relates to the linux thing too, but they're telling me "We know we told you you could do it, but now we've changed our minds and if you want to continue using your PS3, you never will be able to install linux in the future." What's next? BluRay movies get disabled? I bet more people would care then, or would we just hear "So what? It's a games machine, not a video player."
Yes, it does. Now crawl back to your cave, troll.
Dilbert RSS feed
I stopped buying games for the PS3 about a year ago, and now I guess I have made up my mind to never purchase another Console (Sony or otherwise).
I like the fact that my PC is MINE. It does what I want it to do, play more and better games than any console, and it also has other purposes (software development, business software, a sandbox for me to mess with whatever I want to).
Thanks Sony! I was on the fence about the "Next Gen" consoles until today.
Then what DO you do with your PS3? Run Linux? ;)
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
As our way of thanking you for your negative contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to discontinue posting. You add nothing to the discussion by calling people names and cussing at them.
This is, after all, the same company that brought you the "we own your PC" DRM rootkit.
Do you hear a whooshing sound all around you?
How is it these guys can get away with this?
Where is the user outrage and class action lawsuits? You sold me X and then you remotely turned it into Y and Y
Sadly this seems to be the trend, we are expected to concedes that all electronic devices we buy (a la iphone, ipad, PS3, Canon DSLR, Nintendo Wii) are no longer ours, and we basically have no rights to their internals. We are willing victims, trading our money for their experience rather than the product.
If I don't agree and stay on my current version, but I still connect to the network, and then a forced upgrade comes out... Will I be force upgraded without every agreeing to that? And then when I sue them they will say, you agreed when the software installed? (by itself) Furthermore, I guess this means no more EULA changes since the upgrades will go on automatically.
Because we need them to espouse Marxist societies and continue to promote the belief that giving away the results of hard work will somehow not result in mass starvation.
A strange maxim to apply: the principles of capitalism say that if Sony decided to discontinue the PS3 and brick every system (say, directly after the release of the PS4), consumers would be free not to purchase Sony products anymore and a competitor would exploit the company's poor behavior and corrective action would naturally result. On the other hand, the principles of jurisprudence over property say that the same action would be trespass to chattels (i.e. something similar to destruction of property) without the normal coupling of aftermark modification. A party cannot interfere with the lawful possession of property by another.
But that argument returns to the client/server nature of the property in question: is it intentional conversion if your wireless company stopped accepting connections from your particular model of phone? The phone is clearly property that you own and free from restriction beyond the federal regulations regarding airborne communication, but so are the towers owned by the service provider.
These questions just go to show that a large portion of property law is theoretical and has not been litigated. Fascinating nonetheless.
An eula that you 'agree to forcefully' to use a device you bought can't overwrite any laws...
I didn't buy a PS3 but I was close to .. if I had, I would totally be getting a full reimbursement over the recent changes.
When the PS4 comes out, don't buy one.
I know, sounds odd, but you can live without it, I swear.
When I decided to buy the PS3, it made that choice based on the fact that I could legally run Linux on it, as well as use it for a game console. What happened to the promise in the commercials that "It does everything?" I refuse to install any update that takes away this important functionality, and will continue to use the system as a computer. I have already filed a complaint against Sony with the Federal Trade Commission. I will never buy any more games for it, and I will never buy another Sony products again. Sony you can stick it to everyone else, but you've lost this customer, and any profit that you will ever gain from me again.
Where is it starting up, because I want onboard.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I haven't updated my firmware in a long time. It makes me wonder - are games labeled with a firmware requirement?
Given that Sony is attaching undesirable terms to their firmware updates, should they be?
I see all this outrage over Sony doing something to a product we bought and our rights to do what we want with it, but I see no outrage against a Government who is taking away our hard earned money and our right of choice... and nobody says a thing. Why is that?
Except that clause is not valid in many countries (at least, all the EU), because the law ensures you have the right to enjoy the features you've paid for and EULAs don't trump the law.
Dilbert RSS feed
But that's not what is happening here.
You are free to continue using your PS3 as it was bought, you just have no right to continued free support from the manufacturer. Sony has changed the conditions of that free support, which you are totally able to reject.
So it's a choice - get something from Sony in exchange for agreeing to let them modify your firmware, or keep full control of the machine yourself and lose out on official Sony support from here on forward.
They aren't taking anything away, they just aren't giving you anything anymore. Only on Slashdot could the two possibly be confused by people who call themselves intelligent.
Huh? How is automatically pushing down firmware updates keeping me from playing MLB 10: The Show, or watching Mad Men blu-rays?
I was just here, where did I go?
Hacking laws? so what if a forced auto update kills Linux can sony go to jail under hacking laws?
Every EULA I've ever read says something like 'if you do not agree with these terms return this to the retailer for a refund'. Remember the A stands for 'agreement'. If you don't agree, then get your money back.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
And haven't software licences since the beginning of time stated that (I'm paraphrasing) ... specifically, YOU DO NOT OWN THE SOFTWARE ?
Software licences can re-state as many lies as they like, still doesn't make it true.
I thought they were here to promote the worship of the Free Market Fairy. Mental eight year olds don't understand Marxism, just look at all the teabaggers who think Obama is a Marxist.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
The law is not catching up quickly enough.
What good is the law when it's not enforced? If you root Sony's computers, you'll go to prison. Nobody went to prison when Sony rooted me and lots of other people. It didn't even cost them much money.
Why haven't those in charge of the mining company that killed all those miners two weeks ago after being cited time after time for safety violations, including their methane detectors and ventilation systems not working properly, been charged with negligent homicide? If you negligently killed two dozen people how long would you be free?
More laws are not the answer until they start enforcing the ones already on the books. A law that isn't being enforced is hardly a law at all, and a law that is selectively enforced is just plain evil.
Free Martian Whores!
Next item to be removed: Software BC for all those "Non Original Launch" Fat PS3's out there.....
You keep buying hardware with built-in DRM. You're the media industry's bitches. Quit whining and pay your dues.
It's a dick move for sure. Maybe even a little sneaky, but no, it's not fraud. When you purchased the machine, it came with a EULA that specifically said Sony could update the EULA at anytime for any reason.
Even though specific, limited and reasonable EULA clauses may be valid in some cases, unlimited EULA clauses of that sort (effectively 'we can do anything we like') would be legally invalid in many/most jurisdictions (most EU countries and some US states), so removal of functionality could be some sort of fraudulent marketing if they remove something which was advertised as part of the original sale.
They want to kill Linux on the PS3. Ever since they found out the NSA and others were buying hundereds to use in encryption cracking they announce EOL on Linux use and now a new policy to erase your firmware for you.
Problem is some enterprising lawyer is going to launch a class action and say Sony is taking away functionality and that functionality is worth $XXXXXXXX.
Those Laws do not apply to corporations, just Citizens. Get with the program.
I decided to read the entirety of the new EULA before the update yesterday, after the whole "Other OS" situation, and the bottom line is that you, as a user of the PS3, are only licensing the software on the system.
You own the plastic and the metal of the console, and can do anything you want with it. You do not own the system software on the machine. This means no reverse engineering the system software, no editing the software, no reselling or redistribution of the software. This includes editing the software to circumvent encryption or DRM on any medium you play on the console, or editing it in any way to use the system software as a gateway to installing another OS or apps. The Other OS hack that is currently out now is in direct violation of the user's licensing agreement.
You can turn your PS3 into a doorstop, or you can run any OS or apps you want on it, AS LONG AS YOU DO NOT MESS WITH THE INCLUDED SYSTEM SOFTWARE. If you can code an entirely new system software to run the PS3 WITHOUT using any preexisting code from the system software included with the PS3, you are welcome to do so, and I encourage someone with the skills to do so to attempt this.
If you have ever pressed "Accept" while updating your system software, then you have agreed to play by Sony's rules, which is just fine for me and the other 95% of the people using the PS3 to play games and watch movies.
EULAs are usually worded differently in different parts of world for that very reason. No contract trumps the law, unless you enter an 'agreement' to allow it beforehand. Which you did by accepting the EULA. Like prenuptial agreements (which override legal obligations for divorcees) or rental agreements (which can override a renters right to privacy (i.e. your landlord gets a key to your place if the agreement says so)).Can you cite a source for that statement the the EU disallows EULAs to be enforceable?
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
If you are on Slashdot, then you are well aware that Sony does these kind of things. If you still bought the PS3, then you expressed your approval to Sony with your $$$. Here is a novel idea...Stop purchasing/consuming products from companies that act this way (Sony, Apple, etc.). Just say no.
I know the problem with this idea, is that these companies have been very successful in convincing the cattle (people) that they must have it, because it is cool and everyone else will have one. When will the cattle wake up and think for themselves?
This is a SCEA EULA, yet still seems to apply to users outside North America? Also, this is NOT related to the firmware update - it is a general EULA for PlayStation products. It seeks to apply whether you install or not...and applies to PSPs. All in all, it's quite worrying - hope it's not a precursor to a paid PSN.
Or otherwise enter into a legally binding and enforceable contract, such as by the exchange of something else of value, such as money?
In the EU at least, this EULA isn't even worth the current to power the pixels it is transiently displayed upon.
http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
As our way of thanking you for your worthless contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to discontinue posting. You add nothing to the discussion by whining and complaining about other ACs.
You may have physical possession of the box but Sony owns the OS/software that runs the box. They are still free to control that. Right or wrong it's the situation.
A console is just a fancy delivery device they can fully control.
EU1999/4, which states that they cannot alter the functionality of the system after purchase for one.
The one that allowed the guy to claim a refund from Amazon recently....
After the RootKits and the spyware and the treatment of so many Sony customers from EverQuest to PlayStation... You buy a Sony product you should expect to have your privacy and your ownership rights trampled on. On day. The CEO's and VP's and the board of directors and the lawyers of these companies will swing in the breeze by their necks.
Thanks to eating disorders most chicks are reasonably good looking these days.
I don't know. Let's ask your parents why they let you on Slashdot today.
They have the right to update their terms and conditions.
I have a right to reject said changes, and have.
Barring any changes to the contrary, they have no right to modify my hardware.
Let's see how you feel after Sony's monitoring programs see how good you are at Starfighter and recruit you in their real world war against the Ko-Dan Empire. Meanwhile, your android replacement will be sleeping with your wife.
Wait a minute! This is Slashdot, what is this "wife" thing you speak of?
Burn the land and boil the sea........
This isn't about linux. It never was. This is about getting what you paid for, and keeping it.
Let's say you bought a fairly expensive item - like a car. Let's also, for the sake of simplicity, say you paid for it in full. You are the owner of the car.
Included in the price you paid, there are a bunch of features - some you'll use, others you won't. Regardless of whether you use them, you paid for them. Moonroof, heated seats, air conditioning, etc...
Let's say one of those features is free maintenance every 6 months, at the manufacturer's dealership. You bring in the car, and they change the oil, fill the fluids, check the air in your tires, replace the windshield wipers, etc...
Now, a year after you bought the car, you bring it in for service. When you get it back, the heated seats have been replaced with physically-identical un-heated seats.
This may not upset you too much if you never actually used the heated seats. However, was it right for the manufacturer to remove them?
The next time you bring it in for maintenance, you ask what they plan to do. In addition to the usual stuff, they tell you they intend to remove your air conditioner - not because there's a problem with it, but because the manufacturer has decided they don't want to support air conditioners anymore. You protest - you paid for the air conditioner, and it's something you use. You don't want to lose it. The dealership says "OK, take the car and leave then. We're not working on it unless you let us remove the air conditioner. Oh, and you won't be able to play any new CDs in your CD player until you let us remove the AC."
This is what Sony's already done. This is what folks are complaining about - and what they have a right and duty to complain about.
What Sony's doing now is equivalent to the dealership saying: "We can come in the middle of the night and remove your AC if we so choose, without telling you or giving you the right to refuse".
Who owns that car again?
Who owns your PS3?
I didn't say the EU banned EULAs, I said it banned that specific clause.
No. See:
http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v10n2/burke102_text.html#Chapter%20Four%20-%20The%20Great%20Schism:%20Reality%20and%20Law_T
As an example, I am sure no (non-consumable) product, like a computer or a TV, can have less than two years of warranty when sold in a country that's part of the EU, regardless of its EULA.
Dilbert RSS feed
Huh?
Directive 1999/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 February 1999 relating to coffee extracts and chicory extracts
Is this the law? Does not seem to apply....
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
Parent, as well as anyone who modded insightful, might want to actually read 1984 sometime. Technology was the key to the government's iron grip of everyone. The one place the main characters thought they were safe from it turned out to not be safe. 1984 is not a good illustration of, say, the current regime in Burma.
They marketed the PS2 as a system that could:
1) Play PS3 games, including games with online functionality.
2) Use linux, and other OSes.
It is a Playstation 3. As such, one has a realistic expectation that "Playstation 3 compatible" software will run on it. Unlike the PC, Sony controls the hardware and licenses the software specifically to ensure such compatibility.
It had Other OS support. It was marketed as supporting it. People (in some cases) bought it specifically as a result of such support.
Here's the crux of the problem: They have made it impossible to actually use the device as it was marketed.
I have games that boast they have online support. Sony says they are PS3-compatible, and support networking (subject to the terms of the Playstation Network). They then use the PSN to force an upgrade which would disable the very functionality they sold me.
So,
"Buy this PS3, get games, online functionality, and linux"
"Lose linux, or lose online functionality"
With forced firmware updates, it can get even worse. Newer PS3 games can require certain firmware versions to run.
"Buy this PS3 to get games, online functionality, and linux"
"Lose linux, or lose games, and online functionality"
Even if you accept the Playstation Network TOS changes, and feel that "it's their network, they can set whatever terms they want" - the PS3 was marketed as a dual-purpose device, and forced firmware changes would literally force you to choose between the two. That would be fine if it was sold that way, but it was not.
Some services may be provided automatically without notice when you are online, and others may be available to you through SCE's online network or authorized channels. Without limitation, services may include the provision of the latest update or download of new release that may include security patches, new technology or revised settings and features which may prevent access to unauthorized or pirated content, or use of unauthorized hardware or software in connection with the PS3 system.
What part of "automatically without notice" do you not understand? This isn't like the OtherOS update where you could choose not to upgrade (and loose access to network service). They are saying that they can update your system remotely whether you choose to allow them or not.
A few months ago, I was actually considering purchasing a second PS3 to perhaps experiment with Linux running on the cell processors.
As a result of the elimination of the 'Other OS' feature, and other various blunders executed by Sony of late, I have entirely abandoned the prospect of purchasing another PS3.
Sony will be lucky if I ever buy another game for the PS3 that I do have. They seem to have quite the affinity for shooting themselves in the foot.
They aren't taking anything away, they just aren't giving you anything anymore. Only on Slashdot could the two possibly be confused by people who call themselves intelligent.
Erm... you are aware it's entirely possible - if not likely - that new games will refuse to function unless you upgrade the firmware?
When you purchased the machine, it came with a EULA that specifically said Sony could update the EULA at anytime for any reason.
I bought my machine used. I never saw an EULA, and I have never been asked to agree to one by the PS3 (even when I did a complete system reset). (Of course, I've never connected to PSN, nor do I have a PSN account.)
What now?
That section of the EULA has not changed. Here it is from December 2006 with identical language: http://web.archive.org/web/20061206023303/http://www.scei.co.jp/ps3-eula/ps3_eula_en.html. You can debate the pros and cons of such language, but this is not some new sneak totalitarian attack.
>If you can code an entirely new system software to run the PS3 WITHOUT using any preexisting code from the system software included with the PS3, you are welcome to do so
Incorrect. Bypassing their code signing is illegal. You cannot (currently) run any software on the PS3 that is not signed by Sony.
A true totalitarian regime? You're right. We really need Hitler's own views on the issue
They aren't taking anything away, they just aren't giving you anything anymore. Only on Slashdot could the two possibly be confused by people who call themselves intelligent.
... Unless they're going to try to ninja-update firmware of PS3s not connected to PSN, regardless of whether they have the latest firmware installed, and just say "we updated the EULA, and that applies to all devices regardless of firmware version". Whether it would hold up in court after the fact is pretty much irrelevant (in the same way that laws against murder are pretty much irrelevant to the murder victim).
Fat, blubbering geeks: WHAAAAA! WHAAAAA!
More laws are not the answer until they start enforcing the ones already on the books. A law that isn't being enforced is hardly a law at all, and a law that is selectively enforced is just plain evil.
It's not selectively enforced. It's quite logical. The company has more money than you do, so they don't get punished. See how easy that was?
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Ever since the rootkit fiasco, which BTW they were very stubborn and arrogant in their response for some time.
This is a company that wants to control the device in your house, the distribution channel, and the content itself (remember they "own" a lot of movies and music).
I won't buy an Xbox 360 either, because Microsoft looks like the example that Sony is trying to follow.
They most certainly are. They sold me a device capable of playing PS3 games, playing games online with friends, downloading movies (it only does EVERYTHING!) and running an alternate OS. I am losing the ability to do ALL of that if I want to keep running an alternate OS.
Stop apologizing for Sony. They are wrong, period.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Looks like they actually are looking at possible criminal charges. The sad part? It's the second time that company would have been prosecuted.
Source: ABC News
meep
Most of this segment of the EULA's been there since the first EULA.
see: http://web.archive.org/web/20061210231357/http://www.scei.co.jp/ps3-eula/ps3_eula_en.html
(Someone at TFA pointed this out.)
except this bit:
Additionally, you may not be able to view your own content if it includes or displays content that is protected by authentication technology. Some services may change your current settings, cause a loss of data or content, or cause some loss of functionality. It is recommended that you regularly back up any data on the hard disk that is of a type that can be backed up.
Basically, if you buy something off of another music, movie or other digital download site, it may not work on the PS3. Also, back up your shit incase it crashes.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
In Soviet Russia you update Sony firmware.
as I remember a time long ago, when manuals actually were the DRM!
Don't you remember having to look up chapter 3, paragraph 4, line 2, word 5, and having to type that word into the game as a code in order to play? Ah good times...
I also remember others would include "code wheels" or other like devices as DRM.
Heck I remember the most DRM part of the original Mech Warrior game was that it came with a keyboard cover and a list of what every key did because the interface was so crazy that every key on your keyboard actually did something for your Mech! I remember trying to use a photocopy that was so frustrating that I eventually gave up.
Perhaps they should drop their online DRM checking servers of FAIL, and bring back some manuals. Might work out better for them. If anything, ditch the in game tutorial...
Now you kids, get the hell off my lawn!
People who have lived under totalitarian governments are speaking up about how parts of the West (esp. the English-speaking parts) have more surveillance than the Eastern Block ever had, and how saddened they are that the War On Drugs and War On Terrorism are being used to promote a cycle of maximum incarceration.
Oh, BTW, welcome to the War On Piracy.
I have read it, as has practically everyone from my generation. Technology was not the key to control everyone. Constant surveillance/removal of all privacy was, which was largely accomplished through technological means.
Autoupdates on your PS3 have nothing to do with this theme, as it does not result in government control via surveillance and a loss of privacy. It sounds like you're the one who has never read the book.
+1 Car analogy
All this complaining ... .. how many of you will line up and buy it.
And when the PS4 comes out
Vote with your $$ people.
People wine and cry about how Sony treats them. Have you ever thought of just not buying anything they make? Sure they treat you like crap, but then you go right back because they have the latest/greatest game?
No one has the right to complain, if they bend-over and take it again and again. Screw you once, shame on you, screw you twice (3, 4, etc.) shame on me. That has a good meaning.
But you know what? People are stupid, so Sony will continue to screw their customers. RIAA, MPAA, Sony. Who cares, as long as I have my fix.
Meanwhile, your android replacement will be sleeping with your wife.
...does it come in black?
You're asking if I'd be willing to trade my beloved wife for my own heavily-armed FTL starship?
That is the difference between a cell phone and a PC. My experience with consoles (going back to Atari) is that the firmware and contract terms do NOT get changed by the manufacturer's whim. What's more, they were considered modifiable by the owner.
OTOH, cell phones are generally regarded as neither owner-modifiable nor stable in terms of firmware and contracts. Because of this its no accident that governments consider cellphones, and not consoles, as an effective means to conduct surveillance. However I see that could be changing...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/sony_rootkit
never forgive, never forget
someone needs to hack the PS3 now. all this rage must end up in something good.
When was the last time a game you bought came with source code. How about never. You NEVER owned the games you paid for. Everybody loves to reminisce about the golden days of the NES. Cartridges were just another form of DRM. It was a very convenient DRM for the consumer, but it was still there to explicitly restrict the copying of the game. If you think that you ever have or possess the fundamental right to "own" the game that you paid $50 for rather than the producer, who could have paid tens of millions for the game, then you seriously have no idea about any of the legal ramifications of what you are talking about.
They have the right to update their terms and conditions.
I have a right to reject said changes, and have.
Barring any changes to the contrary, they have no right to modify my hardware.
Um... they aren't modifying anybody's hardware. It's called a "software update" because it modifies software.
Except, you've opened it and the store/distributor/etc. will not accept a return on an open "copyrighted" product
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
it's funny to me that the sardonic use of '1984' in this matter is being taken so literally that 'of course YOU'VE never been under the thumb of a -completely- totalitarian regime'.
you know what, you're right. it's more of a fascism than a totalitarianism. further to that, does totalitarianism and fascism start in a vacuum from absolutely nothing within a somewhat democratic worldview? or is it more of a creeping thing that we find ourselves a part of long after the pot has boiled?
quite frankly i find your use of ridicule over an obviously sarcastic use of a commonly used noun-as-adjective (in 1984) to be absolutely idiotic given that this is not an isolated incident, and that the law is used unevenly. kinda like a fascist or totalitary regime might make use of law....hmmmm.
As an AC I have no mod points to grant you, so all I can say is double-plus good comment.
Yeah, the tone is pretty dumb alright. But if you think it's an insult to (former?) citizens of totalitarian states, you're missing the big picture: what recourse does a consumer have when a corporation breaks the contract? Currently, none. The corporation is, in fact, in total control of the contract. Think about Yakov Smirnoff's "In Soviet Russia, government controls the commerce."
The US is moving towards a fascist^W corporatist state, where corporations rule the roost, and among them, might makes right. Yes, a video game system being rented instead of purchased isn't the end of the world, but what's to stop phone manufacturers from dictating who you may or may not call, or (in the case of Amazon or Telus) what you may or may not read? Or power companies dictating what machinery you may or may not operate?*
Grow up. Just because video game systems aren't essential doesn't mean there isn't a huge problem.
--
* yeah, a bit of a stretch, but technology does advance. It's a stretch today, but maybe not next year.
If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
It's usually marketed as a "Real Doll"
"I doubt you've ever even seen a copy of 1984, nevermind understanding anything within."
I could say the same for you, fool. 1984 heavily featured technology as holding the reins of control over people.
Shit I've got my copy sitting right next to me, which passages should I start quoting?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
"Technology was not the key to control everyone. Constant surveillance/removal of all privacy was, which was largely accomplished through technological means."
Your statements contradict themselves. If the removal of privacy and constant surveillance was primarily accomplished through technology, then indeed technology was the key to control everyone.
Because I seriously doubt you could get enough people to spy on the citizenry upfront.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Have you read your agreement with the 360? Its makes the sony agreement look like freedom accord.
People listing all the things the PS3 has 'lost' and then then xbots some out and say ooo see 360 is awesome. Except for one thing, the 360 never had (and never will) any of those things.
So yes the PS3 is starting to suck almost as bad as the MS consoles. This is truly a tragedy. However there is no reason at all to think about getting a '260' instead so I can enjoy my freedom rofl.
It's a piece of paper in the box. If you bought used, all bets are off.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
noones responsible for losses
wow, peter's going to be pissed. Why is he responsible for losses?
Free Martian Whores!
What do you mean by "all bets are off"?
This seems like such a huge deal when you put it that way, but really... so what?
Let's see how you feel after Sony's monitoring programs see how good you are at Starfighter and recruit you in their real world war against the Ko-Dan Empire. Meanwhile, your android replacement will be sleeping in your parents basement.
I fixed that for you. This is /. after all.
The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
No no no.. Sony is not removing any hardware here. Your analogy shows the dealership removing physical hardware. To use a car analogy, it's more like buying a car outright and then finding 6 months down the road that the government has rid the entire country of gasoline and that you must switch to diesel. You still have all the hardware you bought, but unless your name is Mad Max, you're not going anywhere.
That's because we don't live in a democratic republic like we were taught in school. We live in a plutocracy. The only way a rich, powerful man goes to prison is if a richer, more powerful man wants him there.
Free Martian Whores!
A purchase of the unit from a retail outlet has limited rights in the EULA. If someone buys it 2nd hand, they has even less. Unless, maybe, there is some 'transfer of ownership' mechanism that gives the new buyer all rights to warrant repair, etc. My 2nd hand hardware firewall had this so I have all the rights as a retail purchaser.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
The last console I owned was a Sega Genesis. And only owned it to play a single game.
Haven't ever been happy with the state of controllers.
Haven't cared for the fact that consoles weren't as flexible as my computer.
And HATED the fact that they wanted you to put the machine on the internet of some of the latest systems.
This is just one more reason for me to stay the fuck away from consoles.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
+1
Dumbest thread topic I have seen in a long time, and an insult to those who live/have lived under true totalitarian regimes. Waah, my video game system automatically updates! I'm so oppressed!
I guess you never heard the story about a boiling pot and a frog
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
And where would these rules be laid out? Sony's PS3 EULA contains no clauses containing the words "sale", "sell", "secondhand", or "used". The only mention of "ownership" is to say that users have no ownership over the system software (which is what allows Sony to update the software on a whim), but nothing about secondhand sales. (I don't really care about the warranty; that's a separate issue entirely.)
Who owns that car again?
Who owns your PS3?
What physical part of the PS3 are they removing?
Giant corporations and the "too big to fail" mentality are the real problems. I loved your rootkit example. A corporation is a legal person who has the same rights as you do. The Supreme Court recently affirmed this with respect to political speech. And yet a corporation can't go to prison, it just pays a fine and continues on its merry way. So in many ways a corporation actually has many more rights than you do. Which is completely backwards. The corporate from was invented to help society. Now it is used to oppress society. All balance and perspective has been lost.
The EU in EULA is 'End User'. That's the person (as far as the seller is concerned) who buys it from a retail outlet. Anyone after that is buying a used product that Sony couldn't care less about. This is why some places brag about being 'authorized resellers'. Of course this is all really moot since a marginally ethical person could buy a new PS3, put the old one in the box, and return to the store as 'defective'. They probably wouldn't get caught.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
"Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
If that's correct, then Sony can't ("legally") remotely update the firmware in arbitrary PS3s, because they have no way of knowing whether the target PS3's owner is bound by an EULA.
(They might not care, but that's beside the point right now.)
If I sold you an MP3 player and 60 days later it would no longer play MP3s would you say so what?
If you were Sony you woudn't sell me an MP3 player, or anything else for that matter. A poster above mentioned that Sony's MP3 players don't, in fact, play MP3s; only media files with Sony's DRM. Honestly, how do these reprobates stay in business? I guess PT Barnum was right. Anybody who gives Sony their money gets what they deserve.
Free Martian Whores!
Oblig bash.org quote:
DmncAtrny> I will write on a huge cement block "by accepting this brick through your window, you accept it as is and agree to my disclaimer all warranties, express or implied, as well as disclaimers of all liability, direct, indirect, consequential or incidental, that may arrive from the installation of this brick into your window"
DmncAtrny> And then hurl it through the window of a Sony officer
DmncAtrny> and run like hell
Awww, you got butthurt at your preferred economic system being the target of a joke...
Fine, so in software, they disable the switch that enables the heated seats/AC. You still can't use the feature you paid for.
Any plan which depends on a fundamental change in human behavior is doomed from the start.
Indeed. Except, from Sony's PoV, the owner is whoever bought it from the store. Those 3rd party sales are kind of like rouge units. Maybe that's why they feel the need to piss of the whole community to reign in the ones that have gone mustang? No idea really...
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
Well if the PS2 could play PS3 games, why would anyone bother with a PS3? I think you have a typo somewhere in there...
Yeah...
I just IM'd my wife to have her cut off power to the PS3 until I get a reply to my inquiry to Sony's customer support. (I asked them to officially confirm that they have no intention of remotely updating the firmware of PS3 consoles without user consent.) I guess I'll see what Sony says.
Aww, can't take a joke back? Poor thing.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Were you intending to rebut me? You supported my position with your logic.
They never promised unconditional lifetime free support. You very clearly realized that. There is nothing "forced" about not providing that. If you somehow inferred you were promised that, you were wrong, plain and simple.
Don't mistake being modded up for being right. Slashdot is the place where people think entertainment wants to be free. People with that mindset aren't thinking very clearly in the first place. Having their support isn't worth very much.
They would first have to push an update which allowed this functionality, so yeah... I'm still right. If you accepted that update without realizing it, that's hardly my fault and still does not contravene my logic.
That's fine. We already have your money. Thanks for buying our console.
--Sony.
I am totally aware. Was there a promise of free unconditional lifetime support somewhere that I missed?
This is have-cake-and-eat-it-too situation. You want to do whatever you want with your PS3, that's cool. Sony is in no way obligated to support you in that endeavor. Taking the position that Sony is required to support you doing whatever you want is interesting, if not particularly realistic.
It's a dick move, but realistically they have no obligation to provide you with free unlimited support just because you want it. You still have the choice to stop using their network and not play new games, and then you can do whatever else you want with the console. Expecting that Sony owes you whatever you want on your terms because you bought the hardware is ridiculous. They owe you nothing, the transaction is complete. If you do want continuing support, they have terms. You are free to reject those terms, but then you don't get support.
It's pretty simple, really. This isn't me apologizing for Sony, this is me explaining reality to a bunch of people who have their fingers stuck in their ears screaming "I WANT I WANT I WANT" over and over and somehow believing that constitutes a realistic position.
Simple, I stopped buying Sony a long time ago. ( with the copy right issue ( Sony BMG CD copy protection scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)) The best way to resist is with your wallet!
what recourse does a consumer have when a corporation breaks the contract?
What is the monetary value of the damage that this breach of contract caused you? Why should you have any recourse if you were not harmed? Because your feelings on the matter are important?
Just sell your console and by an XBox. Or don't. Why should anyone care? It's not like anyone is taking anything from you (except future choices, choices which you have not paid for and are not owed to you by Sony or anyone else).
No, this is people being sold a product that did X, Y and Z, and then retroactively being told that the product can no longer do X if they want to keep doing Z.
When Audi sells you a car, you don't expect them to retroactively come back and say "Well, your car is yours, but your car will stop working as soon as it's raining. If you don't want that, that's fine, but that means you won't be able to fill it with gas ever again, either"
It's bullshit. People are upset because the company is retroactively changing what they sold you.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
How much less could you care? Maybe so much less that you couldn't care less?
HAND.
Interesting. In fact, I'd ask YOU for a citation. For example, in Washington state, RCW 59.18.230, "Waiver of chapter provisions prohibited", specifically prohibits, and voids, any clause in any rental agreement that is an attempt to extend privileges of the landlord over the tenant beyond what is allowed within the Residential Landlord Tenancy Act. For example, Washington requires three days written notice for a landlord to make an inspection. My landlord can't put a clause in my lease that says "24 hours notice required", and even if I sign it, it is unenforceable. Any remedy by the landlord (withholding deposit, assessing a fee, beginning eviction processes) as a result of distress from such is also null and void, and can even be grounds for the tenant to claim damages from the landlord.
When Sony gets rid of a feature I actually want, then I'll get mad. Until then, I just don't care. Everything I've ever done with the PS3 can still be done with it. When they retroactively disable backwards-compatibility on older PS3s, or make them stop playing movies or something, then I'll get mad.
When my Xbox 360 dies, I guess I'm done gaming. I might play some FOSS games on Fedora, but I'm done with this proprietary shit that I have no control over. Oh well, guess I'll have more time to read books.
'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' - Mao Tse-tung
The groundwork to put a camera, microphone and radio transmitter in every viewing screen trivially is now in place. It is becoming very common and accepted for consumer devices to have huge gaping backdoors for the manufacturer to do as he pleases. Telecom privacy is a joke. You dont see how these tools could possibly lead up to a dystopian future? Im not saying its inevitable, or even probable, only becoming more possible. Im not shouting FIRE, Im simply observing the erosion of what we used to think of as privacy and ownership. If I have to invoke a stark image, its only because these incidents are becoming far more frequent, with companies exercising unprecedented control over products you 'own'.
Good-bye
In law, yes. But in fact, not so much. The law almost always sides with the landlord in these cases. The tricky part in that law is this other one that basically nullifies it if they call it a 'lease' instead of 'rent'.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
Admirable.
Alot (more then 9,000) have, for all intensive purposes, a couple brain cells. Their so fick they're brainz haz mad leet skillz at being OMG, like, duh and that.
Whiny American bitches who gave up reading books because something shiny came along should get their fat arses back to school and finish learning to write; hopefully attaining a standard that renders their tripe at the very least legible.
Holy crap, I thought I was the only one who saw that movie.
If you don't think that there are as many retarded conservatives as retarded liberals on Slashdot, you're one of them.
Sony is obligate to offer all the services they want, in unlimited quantities, forever. Sony has no option. In return, gamers are obligated to keep buying a minimum of 7 full-priced ($60) games each year. The customers have no option. (And it's only fair.)
Oh wait. No. I guess gamers have no ongoing obligations. So why should Sony?
If you agree to the EULA, they have permission.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I don't have any US examples, but look up the case of "Irvin Leroux" in Canada. From my understanding of the case, Revenue Canada (Canuckian equivilent to the IRS) screwed up on his taxes and said he owed a whole bunch of back taxes. The bank backing his property panicked and rescinded his mortgage - which he couldn't pay back on an immediate basis - before it became a possible loss to them, and he lost it all.
Here's another case with a car loan.
I've heard of similar issues with renovations that the banks didn't approve of, and believes to be devaluing the property that they have stake in (though in those cases it's often the owner trying to do something dumb like renovations that don't meet code).
Another fun item on a mortgage is an "interest rate differential." The odds are - and always will be - stacked again you in favor of the big corps, but lets hope that Sony will go down for this one.
If you purchase a system with a set feature list you should be confident that it is accurate and you receive exactly what you paid for.
In the case of the original PS3, customer received a machine that had the Install Other OS feature, access to the PSN etc. etc.
However, I couldn't find any guarantee over the longevity of the features. From the looks of it, they could switch off the PSN tomorrow, or perhaps release the PS4 and make your PS3 obsolete, or maybe just stop making compatible games completely.
There seems to be very little appreciation for the fact that they offer a service whereby you have free access to updates to the software, where they continue to offer the free service of the PSN and when new games are continually released for a system that is now several years old.
And if you don't agree to the changes that Sony are offering, you can simply not agree to them. It's well within your right. BUT you will still have exactly what you paid for originally. You can continue to use the Install Other OS feature, you can play all the games you could before and that were stated as being compatible with your system (or more appropriately, the version of system), and you also had access to the PSN for as long as your system was compatible with it - nowhere (that I can see) does it state that you have a right to continued and interrupted access to the PSN for an unlimited amount of time. On the back of every game I own, it clearly states that the PSN is subject to terms and conditions and may not be available.
The reason that these changes are being made is clearly related at least in part to the actions of Geohot. I have no problem with what he has done and he is free to do whatever he pleases. But the issue it raises for Sony and its game developers is whether you want to invest in a multi-million pound/dollar project knowing full well that once your game is released it will be freely available to those that have implemented Geohot's patch or a derivative of that. And the ease to which pirated software can be accessed and the temptation for the customer in terms of money saved (and money lost by them, however true that may be) makes this more of a problem. The removal of the Other OS feature is an attempt to guarantee that future releases will not be affected. And so again we have this element of time and ensuring those that continue to invest in the PS3 are protected, and those that wish to continue to be supported by Sony also do not miss out on future developments.
So, in conclusion, I don't believe Sony is forcing its customers to do anything. Everyone received and has exactly what they paid for originally (all the same games still work, all the features are still there, and Sony continue to offer the PSN to those that accept the agreement), but if you want to be supported by them, use their free services and wish to continue to receive the benefits of future developments and investments in the PS3, then you should do it by the company's terms.
Plus, as a few have said above, the linked article's claims do appear completely false as the quoted lines can be found in the original EULA: http://web.archive.org/web/20061210231357/http://www.scei.co.jp/ps3-eula/ps3_eula_en.html
"Our extensive online searches have failed"...are you kidding me? Dump the current URL into archive.org and you'll find V1.2 of the agreement, from June of 2008. Here is the old text for section 3:
And here's the current one:
The main change made since the version they had years ago was expanding "pirated games" into "unauthorized or pirated content"; everything has been minor wording adjustment.
Sony's portable digital media players DO play MP3's natively without conversion to ATRAC....now. The HD3 was the first model with native support released back in 2005. The Walkman phones have always played MP3 (and never ATRAC). The PSP has also always played MP3.
Because he just up and abandoned the Hermits. Abandoned them!
Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
But what attach rate does Sony need to break even? In other words, how many games, or how many spare controllers, or how many Blu-ray movies (Sony is the founding member of the BDA and holds some of the MPAA), or how many Columbia Pictures movies (Sony owns Columbia, Tristar, Screen Gems, and a few other studios), does it take to recover the loss on a PS3?
Same lost battle, anyway. Not for end user consumers, but for companies. Because who is fool enough to waste money for a thing he can't use correctly and he doesn't fully own? Lambda consumers, wake up!! (Pest anonymously...)
It's a relief to see someone here is sensible enough to drink Kool-Aid whenever they are told to do so.
If nobody's going to stand up for the rights of large international conglomerates to abuse their customers with abandon, then, as a society, we are rightly and truly fucked. Clearly, we should all be thanking our lucky stars that Sony has seen fit to give us the privilege of basking in their glory. We have no right to complain when they treat us badly. It is our duty to be good natured, unquestioning door mats.
I hear cyanide adds a nice piquant to artificially flavored drink mixes.
I've heard of hardware as a service but this is ridiculous!
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Doesn't this just effect the modders hackers, cheaters and pirates? I mean what percentage is weeping at the loss of Linux or that the new CD player visualization comes up now in menu. The point is almost 100% of the time the patches are for your good and if you are not f'in around with yer system then its all roses.
I almost missed the best quote from Sony about this action. From http://www.ps3vault.com/list-of-sonys-greatest-quotes-in-the-past-1659
an open source console already?
I just updated my PS3 and the EULA was dated December 2009. It's the same EULA you had to agree to with each and every firmware update in the past 4 months.
This is not news.
Here is the flaw in your logic.
You took your car in for a free service, completely by choice, and before any work was done you signed paperwork that said "Yes, I agree to have my heated seats replaced with regular seats." You agreed to this because you wanted to continue to get free services in the future. You could have said "No thanks" and left. Your car wouldn't get any worse, it just would never get any better, and you'd no longer have access to future free services.
When you said "Yes, I agree" you agreed to everything. You don't get to pick and choose which parts of the deal you agreed to. Don't like it? You should have said "No thanks" then.
There's no way anyone can claim Other OS was removed from their systems without their knowing or acknowledgment. Sony went out of their way to make sure people understood what they were agreeing to before applying any updates. I typically update my PS3 using the "Auto Update, then shutdown"method, but with this upgrade an additional confirmation screen was added, and the auto-upgrade did not take place until the second confirmation screen was acknowledged. There were also warnings about backing up any Other OS data because it would no longer be accessible. This was not fine print buried in an EULA. These were individual warning screens.
When the first generation PS3 was released, I spent more with the Yellow Dog folks getting up to speed with their Linux then I did on games. What we have there is a company that invested engineering time creating a distro that ran on the PS3 and provided the only moderately priced CELL platform I knew of. So this change not only pisses me off because I spent money to run Linux on my PS3, The Yellow Dogs are more of less out of the business of selling their product. I don't know if they had a contract with Sony allowing them to run their Linux on the platform, but from every angle this change is ugly. I guess I don't need to go on and on about this, but all the time I spent learning about writing Linux based software for the PS3 in hopes of selling it to clients who would also buy PS3's from Sony. I even had a plan to sell a bunch to the government with some special software I have spent serious hours on. This is the problem with writing software products that run on other vendor's hardware. I want to build my own hardware in the future, so if I want, I can screw myself over by making it incompatible with my own products. :-)
It's fine because you agreed to let them do this in return for something else, continued free access to future service at their garage.
You always had the choice of going home and keeping the car exactly as it was, but you chose not to because you want free services in the future.
Rumor just in: Sony hopes to remove support for sound on their PS3-platform by next Christmas, in order to prevent unauthorized copying of content and this way enable Playstation-users to still enjoy the rich catalog of games and entertainment from SCE and its content partners on a more secure platform.
In its continued effort to improve the Playstation-platform, Sony aims to move onto selling only the idea about Playstation3 by the end of 2011, and this way be able to offer a 100% secure platform for its content partners. Sony promises to pass on any production savings to both old and new customers. "By moving on to only selling the idea about Playstation3, we can finally reach our $99 price tag goal," says SCA CEO Kaz Hirai in an interview with Playstation Magazine. "Existing consoles will be upgraded to support the new feature set through a firmware update," according to Mr. Hirai. "We think our customers understand that SCE needs to protect our investment and at the same time be able to guarantee the security of the platform for our content partners."
Reactions from Sony customers are already pouring in: "With a price tag of $99 me and my family can finally afford a Playstation3", says Ben Dover, a resident of Let Pants Fall in California, who have already put in a reservation for the new PS3-model.
You mean the false one?
I bought with my money a PS3 digital prison for 300 €.
Something is not right...
I think there is a certain point when you just make life simpler and say, "Let's stop now".
I used to be a big music purchaser. But I decided to stop when in college I realized that CDs were getting very expensive with less good music on them. I could afford it if I really wanted it, but I just stopped. It was much easier than for someone to quit smoking, a no-brainer really. I had some music lying around, and hear music on the radio, and it was fine. I still buy a CD when I hear a live performance I like though, I buy it from the artist.
I also stopped playing video games. By the time a game console dropped in price to where I thought it was worth it, I wasn't really interested anymore. There were not that many good games too.
Look, all you have to do is stop buying from these companies. You will have more money left over to do fun things. You certainly can do without buying from Sony.
One more thing. The front cover of one of the top business magazines in Japan is "Sony vs. Samsung". It used to be in the U.S. anyway, people would buy Sony because of trust associated with the name. My family did. I no longer trust Sony because of all their underhanded tactics.
It would be very interesting if a smart Korean company like LG or Samsung would realize that if you build trust with the consumer, it pays off. Which is Do No Evil. Imagine what if Google bought a consumer appliance company, or a music publishing firm. How would they run it?
On top of all the other issues, it's worth noting that system updates take a LONG time and don't multitask. Is Sony going to decide to update my system whenever it wants, and lock me out of actually using my PS3? If it's possible to download the update in the background and play games at the same time, why can't I already do that?
His wife may finally smile again, then.
What a depressingly stupid machine.
When GGP complained about a lack of personal and economic freedom, GP answered with an insult-covered version of what is very similar to "You're not stuffed into ovens yet, so shut up."
You could ague about the validity of the slippery slope argument, but unilaterally amendable contracts are in fact an oppressive element. Since freedom was usually not lost in one piece, but in a slow war of attrition, the opinion of GGP deserves more thoughtful arguments than that.
But silencing people that complain about a small loss of their freedom by citing the suffering of people who have lost all of it is dishonest and disgraceful.
Would you tell someone "Stop complaining about your headache, it is an insult to the millions that die of cancer every year."?
You cannot agree to unlimited future amendments. No matter what you say or what button you click, future contract amendments cannot be agreed beforehand.
Example:
EULA 1.0 demanding agreement that future EULAs can be amended in any way they want. You could agree to EULA 1.0 or demand a refund.
EULA 2.0 comes a year later, demands one of your kidneys donated to Sony. You could agree to EULA2.0 or lose your investment in the device.
Would that be fair?
Would it be any fairer if EULA 2.0 only demanded additional payments or only took away some rights you had under EULA 1.0?
Guess what: we have had that for many decades.
From the first gangs of thugs smashing bootleg cinemas in the 1920, the rise of Hollywood accounting up until now, strong arm tactics, legal wrangling and outright deceit are a staple and everyday item of the American way of doing entertainment business.
Trick question: Who owns the CDs you buy? You? Why are you prohibited from playing it in front of a large audience?
How many times do you need to re-buy the White Album when another format comes out?
Why are you allowed to lend your CD to a friend, while you're not allowed to lend your downloaded music?
If most customers accept that and pay outrageous amounts for the latest shiny things without verifying that they indeed own it afterward, no one can help them.
Apple, Sony et al are selling the digital variant of the Brooklyn Bridge and customers are camping for days to pay for it.
This makes sense. I don't even have a PS# and I am outraged.
Waiting for the other shoe to...
To join the class action suit against Sony contact Jerome Noll at (914) 517-5000, extension 221.
I love my PS3! I can't explain why I love Sony. I grew up with it. Sony has innovated so many cool things in my lifetime; that must be part of my affection. My TV's are Bravia's, 1 is connected to a Sony STR-DA4300ES receiver + 5.1 SS via Infinity bookshelf speakers, 1 to a Boston Acoustics sound bar + wireless woofer system. I have a Sony DVD 400 disc carousel. I love the way the hardware works and looks. I love the X-Bar U/I. I bought the PS3 for the simple reason that a 39 year old man/boy wanted to play visually stunning with even better audio type video games. The PS3 is the gaming console for the adult. You can get some of the strangest but compelling titles from the PS store, like a game called 'flower'. The hardware is sleek and cool. I was elated when NETFLIX became available. My expectations about what I was getting for my money were balanced against what I used to find myself spending on constantly updating my PC with RAM, VGA cards, and Mobo's. My 40GB PS3 original fat box cost me $500. But the last AGP VGA card I bought cost me $350 and the spec was soon rendered useless.... I guess with this attitude, I don't care as much what Sony does to the O/S as long as I can still play my games and watch some NETFLIX. Does that make me a pathetic fanboy? If it does, then please say it with a chuckle.
As a geek, I knew the PS3 had OtherOS support.
Can you find me any actual Sony marketing materials that tried to sell the unit as a Linux box though? Because I don't recall a single one.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
A lot of newer eco engines these days have the ability to reduce piston usage. You can also change horsepower and safety margins in the vehicles electronic control unit (ECU).
How would you feel if you bought a car that could switch from 6 to 4 cylinders to economically save gas, and that was a key choice in your buying decision of choosing that vehicle over another? I'm not saying it was THE choice, just in the list of advantages, and one you found useful as you got to use the car over a year.
Then, you went in for an oil change at the dealer, and after the oil change, the dealer announced they removed that feature. They the service manager whispering mentions that he had heard that the next time it goes in for service, they'll detune the engine, without telling you. So your now less efficient vehicle will guzzle gas.
You feeling that's fair, because you signed the paperwork to own your car, which included the firmware on the ECU?
Hey, Intel, please get away from mobile, and come here and kick Sony ass! Please, I know we don't like each other that much, but I respect your technology, just please save us...
Above post is actually serious. I never thought...
I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.