Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sony Lawsuits Target PS3 Jailbreak Authors

Posted by Soulskill on from the sounds-more-expensive-than-admitting-they-were-stupid dept.

StikyPad writes "PS3News is reporting that Sony's latest legal salvo is targeting the creators of PS JailBreak, PSFreedom and PSGroove-related PS3 hacks, citing numerous court documents for those interested. From one of the documents: 'Having considered the Motion for Expedited Discovery of Plaintiff Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC (oeSCEA) [...] the Court hereby grants SCEA's Motion. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that [...] SCEA has leave to serve similarly targeted subpoenas or deposition notices to any other third party who SCEA learns may be involved in the distribution or sale of the oePS Jailbreak software, known as, for example, "PSGroove," "OpenPSJailbreak," and "PSFreedom," or who may have knowledge of the distribution or sale of this software.'"

49 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. Sony should have lost this already. by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm under the impression Sony has already lost this case. Very recently it was decided that you CAN hack your own phones. I don't see what would make the PS3 so special that Sony can declare they can police what you can do with hardware you yourself have purchased and is in your own living room, especially since phone manufacturers have been told they don't have the power Sony is claiming to have. Granted the PS3 is not a mobile phone, but take away that particular radio I don't see what differentiates it from a mobile phone in those same regards.

    But the Copyright Office concluded that, “while a copyright owner might try to restrict the programs that can be run on a particular operating system, copyright law is not the vehicle for imposition of such restrictions.”

    I think the Wired article the previous and next quotes come from address this case almost as well as the article covered in the parent.

    A federal appeals court came to the same conclusion last week in an unrelated dispute about “dongles,” or keys that grant access to software. “The owner’s technological measure must protect the copyrighted material against an infringement of a right that the Copyright Act protects, not from mere use or viewing,” the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a case concerning a software licensing flap between MGE UPS Systems and GE Consumer and Industrial.

    I hope Sony gets shot down. The PS3, and for that matter the PSP are both incredibly powerful systems with so much to offer but with a big dolt called Sony sitting on them saying you can't use them for that. This attitude is why I ditched my iPhone, which I refused to hack even though I could, for an Android phone - which I wound up hacking - but to keep it from doing what I didn't want to instead of making it do what I thought it should. My PSP is hacked and I like it that way, the battery last much longer and I don't have to carry all those UMD's with me. For that matter I can buy my UMD's at fair market price at a store instead of having to buy them from a website that has Sony setting an outrageous price for them that has nothing to do with what they're worth on the market.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Kenja · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is a difference, even if its only a minor one. The decision on phones was so that consumers where not stuck with carrier lock ins. The intent was so you could take your phone to a competing carrier. There is no such issue with game consoles. Its not like you can "jail break" your PS3 and hook it up to XBOX live.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by marcansoft · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The DMCA exceptions are revised every 3 years and the recent phone jailbreaking exception singles out phones and does not apply to consoles. The primary purpose of the device (the PSJailbreak) that started this is piracy, and this is what the vast majority of people using the device and its clones are doing. Even though the homebrew clones are trying to move away from it, currently, they still share quite a bit of the piracy code. Worse, currently, all installable PS3 homebrew is developed with the leaked Sony SDK, which, in and of itself, is also piracy.

      I'm not saying Sony's case is a good idea, but they have a much better case than Apple would right now.

      Personally, I'm working on using the PSJailbreak exploit (not any of its code, payload, patches, or functionality) to run a fully original payload that will eventually boot Linux as GameOS (with access to the 3D hardware, but otherwise similar to OtherOS). In order to avoid legal trouble, I would recommend that open source PS3 hack authors do something along similar lines and distance themselves from the original game-loading payload and the Sony SDK (and even GameOS). If you do that, then you seriously cut down on the number of things that Sony's lawyers can grab on to for a case.

      My €.02.

    3. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Dalzhim · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Jailbreaking to bypass a carrier lock-in isn't a better reason than jailbreaking to run your own software that didn't go through the app store.
      The only difference is that bypassing a carrier lock-in might be a more widespread reason than running software that didn't go through the app store.

      If the reason for allowing jailbreaking is to allow people to bypass carrier lock-in, then there is a serious problem. The rationale for allowing jailbreak should be that you fucking own the hardware. End of discussion.

    4. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by rs1n · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While you don't need to jail break your PS3 to hook it up to XBOX live, you (apparently) need to do so to run other applications). The real issue here is how Sony will fight this. _IF_ they plan to use the copyright argument, the surely they will not prevail.

      To reiterate a quote from the GP:"The owner’s technological measure must protect the copyrighted material against an infringement of a right that the Copyright Act protects, not from mere use or viewing" If the jailbreaks somehow infringe on copyrighted material, then Sony has a case with respect to copyright. If I'm not mistaken, there were reports that the software used in some of the jailbreaking may have made use of an illegal copy of Sony's SDK.

    5. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Threni · · Score: 2, Funny

      > The primary purpose of the device (the PSJailbreak) that started this is piracy
      > they still share quite a bit of the piracy code.

      lol! "the piracy code"!

      > Worse, currently, all installable PS3 homebrew is developed with the leaked Sony SDK, which, in and of itself, is also piracy.

      Wow - using an SDK is piracy? Is buying and playing a game using 'piracy code' also?

    6. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's not like you can "jail break" your PS3 and hook it up to XBOX live.

      We can't?! Let's sue Sony and Microsoft!

    7. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wow - using an SDK is piracy?

      Insofar as "piracy" is a common, if somewhat informal, term for acts which violate copyright law, sure. At least, it is if the SDK is protected by copyright, if the work you create is a derivative work under copyright law, and you have neither a license to use the SDK for the purpose nor the protection of an applicable exception to copyright law.

      While, absent litigation on the specific cases, there's may be some room for debate, I'd expect that most uses of a leaked Sony SDK to create homebrew PS3 software, and the copying and distribution of such software after it was created, be "piracy".

    8. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by marcansoft · · Score: 4, Interesting

      lol! "the piracy code"!

      I would normally prefer the term "the copied-game-loading code", which is more correctly neutral, but sometimes I get so irritated by all the lying smartasses who use the term "backup" as a thin veil (and thus discredit the minority of people actually legitimately backing up their own games) that I feel like using a term that is biased the other way just to make it blatantly obvious what most people end up using the code for.

      Specifically, I'm talking about the Blu-Ray redirection patches which are still present in the PSGroove code (which is just a version of the PSJailbreak code hex-edited to trivially break, but not remove, this functionality). In other words, the PSGroove is technically a pirated PSJailbreak (not that I care about commercial game copying products getting copied, but there are legal implications to basing your stuff too much on a piracy device). It's a lot cleaner if you just take the required core concept of the exploit and develop an open product around it that shares nothing more than what is strictly necessary with the original.

      Wow - using an SDK is piracy?

      Torrenting it and then distributing code compiled with it both are, which is what everyone who is using the Sony SDK did. Copyright infringement is copyright infringement. If Sony didn't grant you a license to use the PS3 SDK, then you aren't allowed to legally use it.

    9. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by internettoughguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      hmmmm targetting a segment of the market of whom the majority have gone out of their way to avoid having to purchase games, yeah that sounds like a successfull business model for those struggling indie developers.

      Is that true? I find it hard to believe those people would get a console in the first place, PC games are a great deal easier to pirate.

    10. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Schadrach · · Score: 4, Informative

      The jailbreak itself doesn't use Sony's SDK. Pretty much all currently available homebrew (except maybe PSPong?) does use it however, since there isn't a stable open alternative...yet. Building a complete, mature, and stable SDK for a newly accessible system in, what, a month? is frankly an unreasonable demand.

      Sony should be driving legal action to stop the current PSJailbreak scene, but they shouldn't be targeting the creators of PSGroove, PSFreedom, or OpenPSJailbreak -- they should be attacking the people who have released actual homebrew to date using the Sony SDK (which is, admittedly, basically all of it so far and includes the original creators of the PSJailbreak hack). That would protect their copyrights while also encouraging the creation of an open SDK as an alternative to the leaked Sony SDK.

    11. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Schadrach · · Score: 2, Informative

      The open source clones actually specifically disable the "piracy" function, by blocking bluray dvd access. It's admittedly not hard by any means to re-enable it, but it's disabled the way it is for a reason -- they haven't found a way to re-enable or reinstall Other OS yet, and the only "piracy" functionality really left after their alteration is "can run unsigned code."

      They should crack down on the github branches that re-enable the piracy functionality, and on the so-called "hermes payload" which is an altered payload with more advanced piracy functionality.

    12. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by sixteenbitsamurai · · Score: 2, Funny

      I find it hard to believe those people would get a console in the first place, PC games are a great deal easier to pirate.

      This. If I had mod points, you'd be getting one right now.

      --
      Yeah, that just happened.
    13. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by marcansoft · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem is that all of the code is still there and working, they just changed a single string to subtly break it. Right, this "does the job", but it makes it so ridiculously easy to reenable that it could be considered similar to, say, openly selling a game console cheat device that just happens to enable loading copies if you hit the right button combination, load the right hacked configuration file, or enter the right magic cheat code. It's still dodgy.

      And heck, I know full well that the people responsible for these open clones (at least the original PSGroove and PSFreedom authors) are perfectly capable of rewriting the code to yank out the piracy parts (and save a lot of space; for technical reasons, the payload is pretty constrained), especially seeing as it's been analyzed pretty thoroughly by now. This is why I'm advocating at least taking the (not much) time to make an independently compilable reimplementation that entirely does away with all of the redirect code, instead of just trivially disabling it.

    14. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      hmmmm targetting a segment of the market of whom the majority have gone out of their way to avoid having to purchase games, yeah that sounds like a successfull business model for those struggling indie developers.

      Is that true? I find it hard to believe those people would get a console in the first place, PC games are a great deal easier to pirate.

      Are you really that niave? you think just because they can also pirate on the PC they won't on a console? I know a ton of people with hacked gaming consoles (in the order of 15-20), all of them do it so they can copy/pirate/share games, none of them would even consider doing it to give them access to more stuff to purchase, they do it to get something for free.

    15. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by xMilkmanDanx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sony made it's initial money off a sliver of non-infringing purpose with the vcr (with its ability to record, not play that is). almost all uses of it were infringing but there was the one case of time shifting that was deemed non-infringing and that sliver was enough that the lawsuits were denied.

      Soooo, as long as there's a non-infringing use for it, even if 99% of the capability is infringing, it should be allowed as was allowed by the prior ruling.

      Of course, as IANAL and the law rarely does what is right (or even remains self consistent) when faced by big money.

      --
      I am not in anyway affiliated with Max Cannon
    16. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by bloodhawk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As it currently stands I know more people that pirate games for their Xbox and Wii than I do for PC Games. PC games being easier to pirate is irrelevent, people will pirate whatever they want to play if it is an option and it isn't exactly hard to pirate for the 360 or Wii (and now the PS3). I have been around gaming a long time and I can honestly say I don't know a single person that has hacked their console for any reason other than to play pirated games, even backups is a ridiculous excuse with the current guarentees and replacement disc deals you can get with most game shops.

    17. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by EvanED · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sony made it's initial money off a sliver of non-infringing purpose with the vcr (with its ability to record, not play that is)

      Huh? Sony was founded decades before VCRs were invented, and then probably lost a non-trivial amount of money, at least at first, by pushing Betamax.

      almost all uses of it were infringing but there was the one case of time shifting that was deemed non-infringing and that sliver was enough that the lawsuits were denied.

      I'm not convinced that "almost all uses" of the VCR were infringing; I'd be astonished if the proportion of uses of the VCR that were infringing is close to that of uses of the PS3 jailbreaks for infringing purposes.

      If memory serves, the SCOTUS also explicitly said that the VCR wasn't illegal solely by the reason that Congress hadn't made it illegal, and it was not a Constitutional argument. the DMCA has changed that too.

    18. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by nomadic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are generally right about it only being a recommendation at this point, but wrong about it being just a policy paper; it's a formal recommendation under the DMCA to the Librarian of Congress, who can adopt those recommended exemptions, and his or her decision is final--it doesn't have to be endorsed by Congress or the President.

    19. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by xMilkmanDanx · · Score: 2, Informative

      you made me doubt myself and while wikipedia isn't the most reliable source, it's quick and usually in the right direction on non-controversial articles.

      Sony vs. Universal City Studios

      While the ruling wasn't as strong as I remembered, it was about that there were non-infringing uses and not even that there were widespread use of said non-infringing uses, but just the capability of non-infringing uses.

      --
      I am not in anyway affiliated with Max Cannon
    20. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by wierd_w · · Score: 3, Interesting

      All that this means is that somebody needs to create a competing service. Sounds like there is a very fertile industry for it, especially if it s more lax than the default platform creator's choice. (Such as, actually ALLOWING halo map mods, etc.)

      See for instance, things like the successor to BnetD, and associated open servers. Creating an actual company geared toward servicing "blacklisted" consoles would fill a valid market niche. Last I checked, reverse engineering laws STILL provided safe habor for such practices when used for "Cross compatibility" and "Interoperability".

      *would LOVE to see an alternative to sony's PSN and Microsoft's XBOX Live! service; Especially if that same service was console agnostic, and would permit multiplayer games from both consoles to have mixed matches.

    21. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by interval1066 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "I find it hard to believe those people would get a console in the first place, PC games are a great deal easier to pirate."

      • Not everyone is a pirate
      • some people like to have hardware
      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    22. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It bears repeating that the PS3 used to allow for alternative software and was at one time sold specifically for this purpose.

      The fact that this crack is merely re-enabling features that were sold with the hardware might make a bit of difference to the judges.

      The fact that these cracks only came about when those features were disabled might be of some influence too.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    23. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by jank1887 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'll add a second anecdote: I have a hacked Wii. I have my whole (20-30, 90% used from gamestop) game library loaded on a hard drive. I like the convenience. At this moment, I could pull out any game disc for anything on my hard drive you'd like to see. For me, it's about convenience. The same reason people want a media library of ripped DVDs even through they own all 400 the discs. Heck, it's even easier to FIND the game you want when the count gets high. I first figured out the USBloader process after my 4 year old rendered the Wii sports disc unreadable. (it was able to rip, luckily). could I replace a disc? probably. is there a convenient way for me to avoid needing to replace discs and avoid that hassle? yes. so that's all I need.

      Then again, I also don't know you. so you're point stands. maybe you just need friends with a bit more moral fiber.

    24. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well I can't speak for them, but I can speak for myself, and I bought a Dreamcast even knowing it would probably be a loser PLUS buying games for said dreamcast specifically BECAUSE it had been jailbroken, thus allowing me to use emulators on it instead of having to keep my old consoles are wired together in a mess. I was more than happy to buy games for it PLUS buy games for my Xbox (which I had XBMC on) because they gave me MORE value for my money. The dreamcast was my one stop for all my classic games plus the newer Dreamcast stuff like Power stone, just as the xbox was my stop for playing lots of games PLUS it made a damned good media center.

      To me it has always been about giving me a good value for my dollar. same reason I buy tons of games from Good old games even though there isn't a single game there I couldn't pirate, but they give me lots of extras like soundtracks PLUS guaranteed x64 support on all games PLUS make it easy and cheap to pay them. I think the bigger problem is game companies charging $50+ for frankly shitty games that are nothing but eye candy without any gameplay and then looking for a scape goat. Sure there will always be some that pirate, most of the pirates I've known were poor college students that couldn't afford the product anyway.

      That is why I hope Sony gets the smackdown. Too many of these great new toys coming out are locked down tighter than a nun's thighs and there just ain't no sense in wasting all that good tech when it could do so much more. I might be tempted to get my family an x360 or PS3 if someone jailbroke it so I could have an HD XBMC and be able to run any format, along with emulators and homebrew and anything else cool someone thinks to do with one. If I buy the toy I want to play with it, no have some company tell me I'm only allowed to do what they say with it.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    25. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by wierd_w · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Offering a competing multiplayer backend (replacing WiiConnect24, PSN, and XBOX Live!) for "blacklisted" consoles would create an extensive reason to mod a console.

      The issue that such a fledgling company (threatening to steal the apples from these company's walled gardens) would need to assert is that such a service is not geared toward allowing pirated games to be played. As such to be legitimate it would need to also ban people that are found to be using it for this purpose.

      It's main function would be to allow people who have modified their consoles so that they can play modified multiplayer maps to continue to do so. (Currently this activity violates the PSN, XboxLive, and WiiConnect EULAs, resulting in being blacklisted.)

      If I wasnt deathly afraid of blood sucking vampir^V^V^V -- "Lawyers", I would consider investing the time with a copy of Wireshark examining raw packet dumps of the Live, PSN, and WiiConnect protocols. (I have a PSP, a 360 and a Wii, so I should be able to investigate all 3 authentication methods.)

      Once you have the language down, all you have to do is get the console to communicate with the new server; Something that might be doable by instructing it to use a "Special" proxy server. (IIRC, all of these consoles allow the use of a dedicated proxy for internet connectivity. Just point it at the rival service server's IP address, and it then masquarades as the real deal, by "internally" routing the target's IP address at itself, while opening the rest of the internet as a proxy is supposed to.)

    26. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Nursie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The potentially massive amounts of data on a bluray disc count in Sony's favour there I would think, it could take a loooooong time to download 50GB. Not that many games are quite that big, but still.

      Anyway, screw 90% of people, this is slashdot, where we're supposed to care about whether you can run BSD on a toaster, or linux on a ps3.

      Do all the people that modded the Wii play pirated games? I don't. Likewise with the PS2. But then I would try to install linux/BSD on a toaster if I thought there was a chance of it booting.

    27. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by kimvette · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How is that?

      Instance A: You buy a phone and own it outright. You wish to chance carriers. Oops. carrier lock. Jailbreak/root and unlock it. Interoperability!

      Instance B: You buy a video game console and own it outright. You want to install Linux and use it as a cheap theater PC/media server. Jailbreak it and install what you want. Interoperability!

      How is either not an explicit exception?

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    28. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by sixsixtysix · · Score: 2, Interesting

      then it is up to you, and you alone, to figure out how to let the legit segment use their fair use rights to make back-ups, whilst stopping those that pirate. what is your game plan? hell, i don't even own a console, but i don't like the idea of taking away some legit use because some people (majority or otherwise) use it in a bad way.

      side note: if console makers just had free, open development in the first place like they should, none of this would be a problem, but they don't because they are retarded.

      --
      ...
    29. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by eldepeche · · Score: 2, Informative

      The US Copyright Office periodically publishes an exclusive list of permitted exceptions to the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions. Unlocking a phone is on the list. Unlocking a video game console for this purpose isn't.

      http://www.copyright.gov/1201/

      I think you should be able to do it. The DMCA is a pile of shit. There's no good reason why uses of hardware that don't involve copyright infringement or unauthorized network access should be prohibited,

    30. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Slashdot's idiotic UI means that if the moderating user uses the mouse wheel to scroll down the page while leaving the focus set to the moderation list control, you will end up with a random moderation. I've done this before, myself. That accounts for a lot of seemingly nonsensical moderations.

    31. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by Sollord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People with limited funds who will never buy another non-PSN game ever. What accessories will they buy? 1 extra controller?

    32. Re:Sony should have lost this already. by marcansoft · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your game is not functional as an SDK in itself, so it is not derivative.

      That's not how copyright works. Derivative works don't have to be in the same class or perform the same function as the original, they just have to be derivative.

      the call to a certain function presumably always lies at the same address in flash / memory

      Static linking doesn't work like that. Your final binary includes large chunks of the SDK inside it (for typical homebrew, the SDK portions are larger than the homebrew itself). And the addresses of those chunks of code change depending on how things get linked. It's the same output that you would get if you had the full source code of the SDK libraries and used it as part of your app, except you don't get to see or change that code. The end result, nonetheless, includes a fully relocated and linked version of it.

      Their terms are wrong, and I'm surprised they are legally enforceable. Well no, I'm not surprised because judges don't need to be knowledgeable in the cases they try, and this is the US we are talking about, where the legal system is fucked up anyway.

      I don't see why there would be an issue enforcing a license which is clearly being violated if you're not an authorized developer. Doing what you want with your own hardware is/should be a right, but you don't have the right to getting a convenient SDK for it.

      Sony are simply trying to equate using something as making a derivative copy of something, which is absolute nonsense.

      They are, in fact, equivalent, in this case, as I've explained. This is how embedded SDKs work. This isn't new and applies to every console SDK and also pretty much every embedded SDK. It even applies to PC applications, just to a lesser extent: library code is usually dynamically linked, but header files are statically included, your program includes the compiler's support functions (e.g. floating point emulation where necessary, and general support routines such as function prologue and exception handling helpers). You also use the library's crt0 startup code. Again, these things come with licensing exceptions (e.g. libgcc comes with a linking exception) that we take for granted, but those licensing exceptions are still required.

      Compiling code with a development system isn't like producing a data file with an application (e.g. making a document in a word processor). Software compilation always involves copying (sometimes large) parts of code from the SDK into your app.

      Now s/piano/SDK and s/music/game ... see what I mean ?

      Using prototype.js or jQuery on your Web application means you COPY them into your website and include them via script tags.

      Now s/jQuery/SDK/ and s/Web application/game/ and s/script tags/static linking/. See what I mean?

      (ignore the fact that you can include them from external URLs; this isn't an option on consoles. You have to pretend that instead of <script src=...> you actually copy and paste the entire thing into an inline <script> block)

  2. The only real question is... by istartedi · · Score: 3, Funny

    The only real question is, can anybody figure out how to fit the source on a T-shirt? If yes, the case is moot, right?

    Sort of half joking. In all seriousness, is the source small enough to compress, encode in printable form, and put on a shirt along with instructions for use?

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  3. Thanks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    , "PSGroove," "OpenPSJailbreak," and "PSFreedom,"

    Okay Sony-- thanks for letting me know what to google for. Can you save me some search time by suing someone who might have a walkthrough or tutorial?

  4. Re:That summary by Master+Moose · · Score: 3, Funny

    Which makes about as much sense as my previous post.

    I must remember to proof-read posts
    I must remember to proof-read posts
    I must remember to proof-read posts

    --
    . . .gone when the morning comes
  5. I Don't Understand Why... by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't understand why Sony doesn't just send the jailbreak software authors a few select "complimentary" Sony music CDs. They could then simply delete the code at their leisure.

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    1. Re:I Don't Understand Why... by Ant+P. · · Score: 5, Funny

      And would want to listen to the contents of Sony music CDs instead of putting them in a blender.

    2. Re:I Don't Understand Why... by BlueStrat · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think this is where one replies;

      "WHOOSH!"

      YMMV

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  6. Endgame? by kurokame · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're not going to unhack it. Your target doesn't have anything in their pockets to take. You're not going to silence anyone. In fact, this will just draw more attention to the hack and probably expose it to completely new audiences which may not have been aware of it yet.

    I see a few possibilities. Firstly, spite. Secondly, it may be a knee-jerk response by people disconnected from the realities of the situation. Lastly, they may need to establish intent to protect their DRM in order to validate future efforts to defend it as valid protection in the courts and to developers.

  7. It is silly... by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is silly that Sony and the US government through copyright laws, seems to think that Sony should own our consoles that we paid for, and quite honestly it sets a disturbing precedent against property rights. If Sony wants to try to block people from accessing PSN for this, if Sony wants to make firmware updates to prevent this it should be well within their rights, but don't tell me what I can and can't do with -my- console. The idea that I don't own the hardware that I bought and should be able to run whatever on it is quite scary. Property rights need to be balanced to have a free economy, Sony should own their services and I should own my own console.

    The next thing you know, people are going to sue for removing the OEM copy of Windows off of your new computer...

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  8. consoles or PC's ? by volcan0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, where does the line between a console and an embedded system lies ? I mean, if this would go through, does this mean that DELL can ship a computer running windows and legally refrain you from installing another operating system or restricting you to an app store with pre-approved apps ? I understand that one is a general purpose computer while the other is a game console, so the intended usage is the difference. But under the hood, they are the same hardware ( ok, not litteraly... ) and can do exactly the same things. Can you imagine the legal precedent this would set ?

    1. Re:consoles or PC's ? by slinches · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I understand that one is a general purpose computer while the other is a game console, so the intended usage is the difference.

      To muddy the waters even further, the PS3 was originally advertised as being a general purpose computer as well a game console through the "Other OS" capability. Sony, with their decision to remove Other OS in a required software update, effectively made PS3 owners choose between their hardware being a general purpose computer or a game console. Assuming the firmware update EULA is upheld, I think Sony may have an argument that by updating to firmware 3.41 (necessary to use the current jailbreak exploit) the console owners would have to accept the removal of the device's ability to be a general purpose computer. Although, that could be complicated by a release of jailbreak code that works with firmware 3.15 (last one with Other OS) which is supposedly being worked on right now.

      I don't envy the judge and jury in this case.

      --
      Knowledge Brings Fear
    2. Re:consoles or PC's ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      One of the reasons Sony initially put OtherOS capabilities into the PS3 was so that they could claim that the PS3 was a "General Purpose Computer" and dodge a bunch of European taxes... If I was a citizen of one of those countries I would be asking why they are not now suing Sony for those back taxes and/or the reinstatement of the OtherOS functionality.

  9. get ready for your subpoena by aethogamous · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...or who may have knowledge of the distribution or sale of this software.'"

    I think by now this includes everyone on slashdot...

  10. Screw these guys, I'll mirror by jmorris42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't even own a PS3 (or any console for that matter) but I have about had it with this DMCA crap. There isn't any Sony copyrighted code in the crack is there? If somebody can point me to a good description of how to jailbreak one of these damned things I'll host it on my homepage and then toss the gauntlet down to Sony. I'm a humble librarian but one benefit is I can use a page on our server. Ever seen how rabid the library world gets when the word 'censorship' gets tossed their way?

    Way I see it I can't be subject to a Sony EULA since the only Sony product I own is a fairly basic receiver. If there is no Sony code copied into the crack I can't be subject to copyright. And a text page describing something can't violate a patent. With the right disclaimers trademark is out. So that leaves it a pure DMCA play and I really don't think the bastards want that going to court. They will use em when they think they can get an instant takedown from a frightened ISP but I ain't one of those. Our lawyer happens to be the district attorney so we don't have to instantly fold at the threat of lawyering up.

    The most defendable position would be detailed instructions on how to crack a PS3 for the purpose of installing Linux back on one. So has that been accomplished yet?

    Haven't stuck a finger in the system's eye since my minor role in the Cuecat fiasco a decade ago. Looks like it is time to stand up again.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
  11. PS3: "It only does everything"...* by Pezbian · · Score: 2, Interesting

    * ...everything but what we originally touted.

    Scary you can build a supercomputer from PS3s and immediately have the system bricked without notice. True, if it were doing anything important it would be built from different stuff, but consider this: cellphones and a bunch of other devices made in China update firmware automatically. If China had enemies, they have a potential backdoor killswitch to disable these devices. Clever.

    So why can't we start making things like that? (I don't care where you are. The same strategy applies and would rock.)

    --
    In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
  12. Re:It's comforting to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You guys realize that Nintendo and Microsoft are doing the same thing, right? So the alternative is to not buy proprietary consoles.

  13. Re:what about the issue that m$ blocks 3rd party H by wierd_w · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The point of an alternative multiplayer back-end is not to allow downloads to the console, but to allow existing legitimate games to be played with modifications. (done with things like Datel Xport for XBOX360, etc.)

    Hacking the console's firmware to support non-branded hardware upgrades would fall outside the scope of this theoretical network service.

    What MIGHT fall into it would be an alternative to the MSN store front, allowing direct download of homebrew games. (Possibly along with tricking the console into giving it a local signature so that it can run cleanly without modding.)