Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Your Rights Online Sony Entertainment Games

Playstation Network Gets Revised, More Restrictive ToS 75

Posted by Soulskill
from the my-toys-my-rules dept.
LordDax writes "Sony just rolled out their new Terms of Service for the Playstation Network. The new ToS features additions about the Master & Subaccount relationship, specifically that you can only 'legally' create a sub account for your own child. No friends allowed. Where it really gets interesting is when you get to the additions to section 3.0 Community Code of Conduct. You now can't tell anyone your real name, where you live or basically anything besides your PSN ID. The new ToS also brings to light that SCEA is going to be monitoring every piece of communication and activitiy, and reserves the right to remove any content or communication they find objectionable without having to tell you in interests of SCEA, its users, or licensors. Another addition is: 'Some content may be provided automatically without notice when you sign into PSN. Such content may include automatic updates or upgrades which may change your current operating system, cause a loss of data or content or cause a loss of functionalities or utilities.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Playstation Network Gets Revised, More Restrictive ToS

Comments Filter:
  • Automatically force an update on me? Sounds a bit intrusive to me. Why should I have to update if the firmware I have now plays my games just fine? Also.. read my messages, and delete any they deem inappropriate? Yeah this sounds like a great plan.
  • by notsoclever (748131) on Friday October 17, 2008 @11:29PM (#25421659) Journal
    Subaccounts exist so that you can allow other people to buy games/movies/etc. from your wallet, while limiting the amount of money they spend per month. These TOS restrictions have nothing to do with whether people can use their own (master) accounts on your PS3, or play the games you purchase from your PSN account while logged in to your system, or whatever.

    Further, I'm actually glad for them to make explicit a policy of wanting to remove abusive griefers. Lately I've stopped playing PSN games online with non-friends simply because I keep on running into asshats with Bluetooth headsets and too much time on their hands, which make the whole experience horrible. By giving possible consequences for peoples' actions, it makes it possible that people might actually, you know, not be complete dipshits.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by walshy007 (906710)
      and on the other side of the scale, nintendo online, is completely asshat free, but only because they make it so nobody you don't know can send you messages. double edged sword with friend codes, horrible solution, but at least I don't have ten years olds saying N00B F4G!!1
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Cruciform (42896)

      I've got a headset and it doesn't see any use on PSN at all any more. When I first got on PSN it was pretty good. After Xbox Live it was a breath of fresh air.

      But then it started to get tainted too, and now when I log into an online game the first thing I usually hear from the voice comm is "Turn on your headsets faggots."

      Yeah, I really wanna chat with that guy.

      And on the plus side, on the rare occasion that I do let slip with expletives in a game that's got kids playing, they don't hear me. :)

      • by metamatic (202216)

        I've had no problems with Burnout Paradise online chat.

        I've only encountered 2 asshats in Team Fortress 2 online. That said, most players don't have headsets or don't switch them on.

        I've come to the conclusion that it's all about which games you play. I hear that Call of Duty has very heavy headset use, and probably lots of asshats.

  • I got a feeling, somebody's watching me...
  • Lack of PS3 sales leave Sony executives baffled!
  • the "not able to let a friend make a sub account" thing looks silly at first, but keep in mind digital ip rights. if they say that, and if you lose your cloudsong to your best bud who made a sub account and xfered it over, they're not (or less) legally responsible to help retrieve/recover the item. also keep in mind sub accounts possibly share account data. maybe, i dunno, i didn't rtfa tbh.
  • by Dutch Gun (899105) on Friday October 17, 2008 @11:56PM (#25421817)

    Well, Sony is just telling us that it's *their network*, and they can do whatever the hell they want with it. It's a closed network. Is anyone surprised?

    Naturally, no company in their right mind would create a closed network without asserting control over it. After all, whatever happens on the network, they'll likely held responsible for it to some degree. They're a big company with deep pockets, so they cover themselves like this.

    The whole notion of users not broadcasting their real name - well, that's a pretty good idea in general, right? But by codifying it into the terms of service, they protect themselves when some idiot smack-talking kid actually gets the crap beat out of him when someone learns his real name and home address. Or is the target of a scam. Or any number of a thousand bad things that can happen if you aren't careful with your identity online.

    • If parents could not educate their kid not to tell the real name or address to strangers on net, then no SONY on earth can. They're just covering their asses against potential lawsuits.

      As for automatic updates that may (and will) break things -- that's SONY as usual. If you don't like it, don't buy it. They'll reconsider if the losses are too high.

    • by Babbster (107076)

      The whole notion of users not broadcasting their real name - well, that's a pretty good idea in general, right? But by codifying it into the terms of service, they protect themselves when some idiot smack-talking kid actually gets the crap beat out of him when someone learns his real name and home address. Or is the target of a scam. Or any number of a thousand bad things that can happen if you aren't careful with your identity online.

      Definitely! It's long past time that everyone in the world legislated fo

      • by Dutch Gun (899105)

        The above is hyperbolic

        I'm glad you mentioned that, or I would have had to counter that this a) isn't legislation, b) has nothing to do with free speech, and c) I don't think they're even making any pretense that this is to "protect the children"(tm), but to protect themselves.

        Lawyers keep puking up these kinds of stupid agreements because, well damn, they get paid to do so.

        Well, yeah, that was sort of my point. I guess for me, I never expect anything good from Sony anyhow, and as it turns out, I'm never disappointed (or surprised).

    • I've read a lot of agreements where the company in question did their best to get as favorable terms as possible when it comes to things like warranty and possible lawsuits. Read the typical Microsoft EULA for an example of this.

      But the "COMMUNITY CODE OF CONDUCT" goes far beyond the typical asshattery of such EULAS. Sony reserve the right to censor your communications, and I suspect some rules, like
      "You may not use, make, or distribute unauthorized software or hardware in conjunction with PSN, or take or u

    • by HalAtWork (926717) on Saturday October 18, 2008 @11:21AM (#25424087)
      Yeah sure, what they do with the network is fine. But control over a network and control over a device are two different things! If they modify pieces of data that pass through them, I guess it's their right as we are using them as a conduit and they say there is no guarantee that it should behave in a way we expect it to, it's their property and they set it up to behave the way they want. However if they're sending us data that modifies our device without consent, no, that's not their right. It's my property. Our device can behave however we want it to and choose to modify it. They can block it at the server or alter data in their own server that we choose to send to them. But they cannot just take over our devices and change things around and delete shit and alter functionality.
  • Any.. (Score:1, Flamebait)

    Any questions now why DRM is a... MASSIVE FAIL?

    Just wait until the PS3 is no longer popular and Sony shuts down the netplay servers. Wow... nobody'll then be able to play along or against each other. DRM at its finest.

    • Re:Any.. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Cerium (948827) on Saturday October 18, 2008 @12:30AM (#25421953) Homepage

      Oh no! We'll have to resort to using local multiplayer and actually socializing with REAL people! Clearly such a platform would never succeed.

      Seriously though, the hell are you even ranting about? Where is DRM even presenting a problem here? I'm fairly certain my PS3 doesn't have net access from time to time, yet everything I've downloaded from the PSN still works great. The only thing even remotely related to DRM in this change is the ability for them to push and kill content without the end-users direct approval (Which, I see there being some minor problems arising out of this, but honestly -- aside from force-killing homebrew hacks, what's the worst that could happen [heh]?).

      I think what you're trying to be upset about is the whole net-nanny crap they're introducing. I don't agree with it either, but I also understand how many idiots have PS3s and how many of them are likely to do something stupid which somehow results in someone trying to sue Sony for a ridiculous amount of money. Care to take a wild guess what happens after that?

      I get it, everyone hates Sony because they're ZOMG SPYING ON THE INTERNETS THROUGH THE PS3. Whatever. If they want to take extra measures to make sure two trash-talking jackasses don't end up killing each other, fine by me -- so long as I can still smoke you fools in some Wipeout HD.

    • by node 3 (115640)

      Just wait until the PS3 is no longer popular and Sony shuts down the netplay servers. Wow... nobody'll then be able to play along or against each other. DRM at its finest.

      This is not going to happen any time soon. But, let's say the day comes when PSN is shut down due to lack of popularity...

      Who is going to care? It's no longer popular. Presumably that means everyone has moved on to whatever the new, popular gaming network is.

      PSN works just fine. The DRM employed by Sony on the PS3 (as well as that on the Xbox 360 and the Wii) is not onerous.

  • So (Score:4, Funny)

    by elrous0 (869638) * on Saturday October 18, 2008 @12:56AM (#25422075)
    Does this mean my PSN account will get banned if I quote the Quran?
    • Only if you sing it, apparently. :) And then only after it's been out for two years and nominated for awards to boot. So, I think you're safe. :)
  • Typical Sony Fail (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Once, a long, long time ago I liked Sony. That time is past.

    Why do they think they can do this to their customers? Unfortunately, they think they can do this to their customers because too many of us have kept coming back for more. When they would not honor their warranty on my laptop a few years back, I finally had enough. I have not regretted my decision one bit. Life is better without Sony.

    • Re:Typical Sony Fail (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Renraku (518261) on Saturday October 18, 2008 @04:42AM (#25422757) Homepage

      What they're doing is preventing their customers from doing things to them. If little Timmy met someone off of PSN and got himself murdered, lawsuit papers would be on their way to SCEA before his body was even cold and in the grave. Seeing as how most judges and juries care about children, that's pretty much a blank check for the parents of the kid. They're protecting themselves.

      And modders? I'm looking at you. There are many of you who would sue when you run that update that SCEA put out and had your system bricked. Lots less legal hassle/bills to nip it in the bud. I doubt anything will change in the way that they are doing things.

      Also, there are people who use the PSN for posting obscene/offensive material that could be accessed by minors. See the first paragraph.

      • by Khyber (864651)

        They should have NO REASON to wipe a damned thing out when they give me EXPLICIT OPTIONS to install a separate OS. From that point on, it's MY HARDWARE, MY SOFTWARE. Do all you want with YOUR SOFTWARE, you TOUCH mine and I'll have your ass on wire fraud charges and hacking.

        • You keep going on about "having Sony's ass on wire fraud and 'hacking' charges." We here at slashdot are eagerly awaiting news of your success with Sony's 'ass' in court. Go ahead. No really, you'll win.
          • by Khyber (864651)

            Here in California, many people have already won against EULAs.

            How about you read CA consumer protection laws and get back to me on that?

            And while I 'keep going on' until they actually DO SOMETHING to me, all I can say is I *WILL* do it.

            Sony should pray they never cross my path. I've got a few rabid lawyers for friends who have had a nice success record against larger companies, especially when damages are proved.
             

      • And modders? I'm looking at you. There are many of you who would sue when you run that update that SCEA put out and had your system bricked. Lots less legal hassle/bills to nip it in the bud. I doubt anything will change in the way that they are doing things.

        Hell yes. If an update bricks my system (as opposed to a PC where I can reformat and install another OS), I would want the maker of that update to pay for the damage.
        Of course that is hypothetical in my case, as Sony are on my boycott list anyway. No PS

  • So.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by MBraynard (653724) on Saturday October 18, 2008 @01:09AM (#25422133) Journal
    A/S/L?
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by NovaHorizon (1300173)
      hey, someone mod the parent up. If not funny, then at least underrated. He's making a joke by asking something that isn't unheard of to ask commonly in a net based community, and can't be answered according to the ToS..
  • I got this horribly long mail about this, and thought: fuck it, if this is bad, it'll be on slashdot. thanks as always slashdot.
  • by AbRASiON (589899) * on Saturday October 18, 2008 @04:44AM (#25422759) Journal

    Do we sit and whine about our rights, complain about big brother spying on us or what?

    I don't know, I realise some of these things are 'bad' in their TOS but really as has been stated, it's THEIR network and it's very very likely this is to cover their ass from litigation and kids being on the system.

    I think you'll find it's unlikely that 2 conscenting (sp?) adults will be banned or in any real kind of trouble if they strike up a genuine friendship and swap names on the system, this is purely due to our modern, over litigous (sp?) society unfortunately

    Disclaimer: I own a PS3 and hell yes, I do like it.

    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by Khyber (864651)

      I own a PS3 as well, but never will it get connected to PSN, at least not by me, maybe my fiance. I'm looking forward to installing a different OS on the PS3 since it's allowed, and I swear it better not monitor a damned thing when I'm not using their network and am on the regular internet. If the hypervisor or some piece of hardware is monitoring me when I'm not on PSN and in a different OS altogether, there will be hell to pay. I will try to get them on hacking and wire fraud at bare minimum.

      • by RedK (112790)
        If you're this paranoid, how about you just don't buy a PS3 and just get one of the cheap desktop computers to surf the web and send e-mail with ?
        • by Khyber (864651)

          What you think Sony's the only company that'd try this shit?

          Hello, Trusted Computing. Did you forget that was around? How about the old PIII? How about Skype scanning my hardware and artificially limiting my multi-way conversations to five people if I'm using AMD instead of Intel, even though there's NO REAL DIFFERENCE in performance?

          I'm not paranoid, my eyes are wide open and observing EVERYTHING. If I was paranoid, I wouldn't even be on the internet.

    • by Mattsson (105422)

      And it is actually that easy.

      If you can't live with their terms of service, don't use their service.

      If you can't live with giving such a company your money, don't buy their product.

      Personally, I'm still using my old PS2 since there hasn't been any games released for the PS3, XB360 or Wii that motivate the price they're asking.
      I usually don't whine about it, I simply don't buy their products.
      The terms of service on their network doesn't really bother me, since I wouldn't use it even if I got a PS3, but I can

  • OMGWTF (Score:3, Funny)

    by Ieatsyou (1383005) on Saturday October 18, 2008 @08:16AM (#25423207)
    WHAT!? I cant tell strangers where I live anymore!? Well damn, there go my Friday nights!
  • While I do love to use pad my folding@home stats on the PS3, I would never seriously consider it for online gaming... Sony is too big brotherish...
    Actually it just boosts my F@H stats mostly these days rather than gets used for anything else... and it plays blue-ray DVDs occasionally...
    If I am going to shell out $60 for a PS3 game, I'll just spend much less cash for a better game and online experience with my Steam account and use my superior GTX 280 video card in my PC.
    I know that not everyone has a ga

"I have more information in one place than anybody in the world." -- Jerry Pournelle, an absurd notion, apparently about the BIX BBS

Working...