Slashdot Mirror
Sony Sued Over PS3 "Other OS" Removal
Stoobalou writes "A Californian Playstation 3 user has filed the first class action lawsuit against Sony over removal of the 'Install Other OS' function from the Playstation 3. The action seeks to redress Sony's 'intentional disablement of the valuable functionalities originally advertised as available with the Sony Playstation 3 video game console.' The suit claims that the disablement breaches the sales contract between Sony and its customers and constitutes 'an unfair and deceptive business practice perpetrated on millions of unsuspecting customers.'"
So how is that ribbon interface working out for you on your widescreen? Miss the space to actually see what your typing? I thought that Microsoft Office was a "What you see is what you get" editor.
And how are all those malware virusses and nasty shit affecting your Windows install? You can't detect a rootkit if you got 'em!
If you got a virus scanner of some sort it will eat more CPU and more importantly HDD access time. Not to mention all the time and money due to power consumption by which you unnessecairily polute our planet with that takes up your life. Also the defragmentations and whatnot... Go no suspend to RAM with you driver? AAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaahw that sucks... nobody will fix this for you in your binary blob. Aaaaawh too bad...
And all this reduced CPU time due to the DRM and whatever Windows is 'doing'...
Your window management SUCKS. You get no free of charge video editor that kicks the shit out of iMovie and Sony Vegas (KDenLive, yes Linux has the best video editing for a long while...)
Etc, etc, etc...
By using a free of charge, documented OS I am actually able to do a lot and fullfill all of my needs. You on the other hand are the retart in this case.
Okey thanks bye. Oh and please die from something very soon, or opt out for the castration clause, because if you reproduce you will statistically lower the entire worlds IQ avarage.
Oh and BTW, that comment of yours was processed by freedom and gratis software... :)
Here be signatures
It will teach Sony a lesson too.
This comment makes me feel like your whole reasoning behind this was to "teach the store a lesson." But what I'm guessing the way it turned out, you were just a complete jackass that felt like he was in-the-know causing trouble just for the sake of it.
You know they can't "restore the Other OS function" any better than you can. What lesson are you trying to teach them? "Don't do it again?" Don't do what, sell anything that connects to the internet?
If the point was getting your money back because Other OS was your deciding factor on the purchase, good for you. But urging everyone to go pull your shenanigans is a waste of time since the overwhelming majority of people buying this video game console are doing it to play video games.
Whale
You do realize that leaving a huge gaping security hole open would hurt their pocket book a lot more, right? Closing the loophole and keeping all those game licensees coming is much more important.
If you can't understand that, you forget they're selling a game console.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Yes, I know it's not the best comparison in the world
Dang skippin' it's not the best comparison; it's neither a car analogy nor a pizza analogy.
If any human being came back to a buyer post-sale and changed the purchased product without consent from the buyer,
Oh, you see, you bought the hardware, but you just LICENSED the software. SCE isn't modifying the hardware, just the software which they still own and you use only at their sufferance. First sale ("you bought it, you own it") doesn't apply.
At least, that's the stand SCE and most other system providers take. If you buy hardware, that's yours. But you didn't buy the copyrighted software embedded in the device. You licensed it. (Hence, "End User License Agreement".) They (the copyright holder, the only true owner of the software) can change that software any time they please, because they own it. If the EULA includes language that says they can change the capabilities of the software at any time without notice or recourse, copyright doesn't forbid it. And the only recourse you would have is something much like the lawsuits you see here: "The hardware you sold me depends on a certain capability set provided by the software. You have a legal obligation to provide basic capabilities in order to render the hardware fit for the purposes it was sold for."
And because "legal obligation" and "basic capabilities" are debatable, that's why it pretty much has to be a lawsuit. For instance, is "Other OS" a "basic capability"? Does its removal render the hardware unfit for its purposes? SCE has already stated they don't think so. The plaintiffs appear to disagree. We shall see how it goes.
No, IANAL. But this is how it smells to me.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.