Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Sony PlayStation (Games) The Courts Games Your Rights Online

Sony Lawsuits Target PS3 Jailbreak Authors 205

Posted by Soulskill
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.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Lawsuits Target PS3 Jailbreak Authors

Comments Filter:
  • by pecosdave (536896) * on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @06:43PM (#33729168) Homepage Journal

    I'm under the impression Sony has already lost this case. Very recently it was decided that you CAN hack your own phones [wired.com]. 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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Kenja (541830)
      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.
      • by Dalzhim (1588707) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @06:58PM (#33729308)

        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.

        • by eldepeche (854916)

          The difference is that one is an explicit exception to the DMCA and one isn't.

          • by kimvette (919543) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @10:57PM (#33730580) Homepage Journal

            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?

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by eldepeche (854916)

              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/ [copyright.gov]

              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,

            • by nedlohs (1335013)

              The DMCA exception in question is:

              """
              (3) Computer programs, in the form of firmware or software, that enable used wireless telephone handsets to connect to a wireless telecommunications network, when circumvention is initiated by the owner of the copy of the computer program solely in order to connect to a wireless telecommunications network and access to the network is authorized by the operator of the network.
              """ - http://www.copyright.gov/1201/ [copyright.gov]

              Please explain how jailbreaking your PS3 to use as a PC/media

              • by nedlohs (1335013)

                Sorry, snipped too much, also:

                """
                (2) Computer programs that enable wireless telephone handsets to execute software applications, where circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such applications, when they have been lawfully obtained, with computer programs on the telephone handset.
                """ - http://www.copyright.gov/1201/ [copyright.gov]

                I suspect you are still going to have a hard time fitting a PS3 acting as media server into that...

      • 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.

        Theoretically at least, you can source games from suppliers other than Sony. Some of the indie games companies should do just that, compete with Sony for the supply of games to their console.

        • by bloodhawk (813939)

          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.

          Theoretically at least, you can source games from suppliers other than Sony. Some of the indie games companies should do just that, compete with Sony for the supply of games to their console.

          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.

          • by internettoughguy (1478741) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:20PM (#33729494)

            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.

            • Re: (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.

            • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

              by Anonymous Coward

              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.

              • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

                by pecosdave (536896) *

                I don't have a single pirated PSP game on my hacked PSP. Then again I don't know you.

              • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                by hairyfeet (841228)

                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 pl

            • by bloodhawk (813939) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:49PM (#33729694)
              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.
              • by jank1887 (815982) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @08:38PM (#33729948)

                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.

                • by Moryath (553296)

                  I suggested doing this same thing for friends.

                  They have a 4-year-old kid and a dog, which is reason enough to have the hard drive route and keep the original discs locked safely in a closet where small larval-human hands or puppy teeth can't chew them to bits. The hard drive is easier to replace and a lot harder to damage in the first place.

                • by Twanfox (185252)

                  I, too, have a child and fear dreadfully the day she gets her hands on a game disk ($50, no question, few discounts ever available) and in one careless moment *SCRATCH!* There goes playing that game. Additionally, isn't it nice to just grab your controller and skim through the HDD menu to get to the game you want, rather than dig through a shelf, pull it out, and load it into the console? Also easier to switch games on a whim.

                  That was my only motivation for hacking my console.

                • by Bert64 (520050)

                  Aside from the convenience...
                  Many people live in very small apartments especially in large cities, where are we supposed to store 400 or more DVD cases? I certainly don't have any space for that, but a couple of 2TB hard drives is far less of a problem.

              • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                by wierd_w (1375923)

                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

                • what about the issue that m$ blocks 3rd party HDD on the xbox 360 you want to pay $70 for a 120gb HDD? $129.99 for a 250gb?

                  • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

                    by wierd_w (1375923)

                    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 i

            • by interval1066 (668936) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @08:30PM (#33729930) Homepage Journal

              "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
              • by jedidiah (1196) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @08:37PM (#33729946) Homepage

                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.

            • by cgenman (325138)

              Hacking a $300 console is still a lot cheaper than a $1,000 gaming PC, and the gaming PC doesn't even live in your living room.

            • by Bert64 (520050)

              If you've saved money by not having to buy games, you can use the money you saved to buy multiple platforms to play those pirated games on. Not all games exist for all platforms.

      • by rs1n (1867908) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @06:59PM (#33729320)

        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.

        • by Schadrach (1042952) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:25PM (#33729526)

          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.

          • by GizmoToy (450886)

            But Sony in no way wants to encourage the creation of an open SDK. They want to make the jailbreak go away, and that's it. Of course it's not going to happen, but that's all they're working toward with these lawsuits. They want any potential future firmware hackers to see what they did to these guys and think twice about working on PS3 exploits themselves.

      • by Yvan256 (722131) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:06PM (#33729386) Homepage Journal

        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!

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by wierd_w (1375923)

        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 suc

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by marcansoft (727665)

      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 S

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Threni (635302)

        > 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?

        • by DragonWriter (970822) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:11PM (#33729426)

          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".

        • by marcansoft (727665) <hector@@@marcansoft...com> on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:14PM (#33729450) Homepage

          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.

          • by Nursie (632944)

            Whilst I agree that the SDK is illegal to use (and I'm amazed at the number of people who don't understand this!) I wish the bluray redirection could stay.

            It's not 'backups' I care about, it's loading my games from a hard drive. It's usually faster (in terms of load time etc) and I don't need to have game cases and the inevitable pile of discs hanging around. Perhaps in time we could find a way to create signed isos and exploits/loaders that check for backups being ripped by a specific machine before they l

          • by daveime (1253762)

            Wow - using an SDK is piracy?

            Torrenting it and then distributing code compiled with it both are

            So, if I use MS Visual Studio to compile MY code, somehow that is a violation of THEIR copyright.

            They aren't distributing the SDK itself, so no copyright has been infringed. And mores to the point, if they didn't want people using their SDK, why on earth did they make it public ?

            If I build a house out of bricks, I'm not infringing the copyright of the brick manufacturer. I'm merely using their tool to create s

          • by Boogaroo (604901)

            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.

            I know that physical object and copyright don't match 100%, but consider the following scenario:

            A guy steals a knife from someone. The knife is infinitely reproducible so while the owner hasn't lost anything except control over the knife, it makes the owner of the knife angry.
            Using the knife, the guy whittles a bunch of wood into neat little sculptures which are also infinitely reproducible.
            Sure you can prosecute the taking of the knife, but what of the sculpture? Does he not have ownership of his sculpture

        • lol! "the piracy code"!

          The code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules...

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Schadrach (1042952)

        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 a

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by marcansoft (727665)

          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 respon

        • by Nursie (632944)

          Why should they crack down on it?

          'pirates' will find a way to re-enable it anyway. The fact that the exploit came out of the pirate circles and not homebrew types tells me that they're going to be a step ahead because they have both higher numbers and a financial motivation.

          Non-pirates like myself also like being able to run games from a hard drive. In fact it's the primary reason I hack/crack/jailbreak/whatever my consoles.

          Linux? Sure, I love linux, but it'll be not much more than a curiosity on my console

      • by xMilkmanDanx (866344) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:43PM (#33729652) Homepage

        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.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by EvanED (569694)

          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 infringin

          • by pecosdave (536896) *

            No it hasn't. The DMCA is not in the constitution.

            You can still challenge the constitutionality of the DMCA on the grounds that it isn't in the constitution in and of itself. Good luck with that of course, but the DMCA still does not have the full power of the constitution.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by xMilkmanDanx (866344)

            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 [wikipedia.org]

            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.

    • The "decision" [wired.com] cited in the Wired article does not carry the force of law. It's own title says that it is a "recommendation". It is just a policy position paper and doesn't do anything to change the DMCA. That can only be done by Congress, the president, or a federal judge ruling in a case.

      It affirms the right we've always had to reverse engineer which the DMCA never took away. If you jailbreak something and keep it to yourself you are safe from the DMCA. The sticky bit is when you distribute a "circumventi

  • by istartedi (132515) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @06:46PM (#33729192) Journal

    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?

    • by toastar (573882)
      just print it in a book, ala pgp
    • 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?

      I take it you're referring to this?

      http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/ [cmu.edu]

      A wonderful gallery of multiple representations of the "illegal" DeCSS DVD decryption code presented with artistic merit. For example, the DeCSS code can be represented as a prime number. Does this make that prime number illegal?

      • by istartedi (132515)

        Yes, that's exactly what I had in mind. I guess it might be a bit of a leap to assume everybody on /. remembers that. Sometimes I forget about the steady flow of teenagers just discovering geek history. Wow! Your link starts out referring to dates in the year 2000. Is DeCSS really that old? How time flies.

    • by mjwx (966435)

      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?

      12 pt font for shirts sold in Europe, 20 pt font for shirts sold in America.

  • Thanks! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @06:53PM (#33729250)

    , "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?

  • by BlueStrat (756137) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:01PM (#33729346)

    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

    • by Yvan256 (722131)

      You seem to assume that these guys are using Windows, with auto-run enabled on top of that.

      • by Ant P. (974313) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:18PM (#33729472) Homepage

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

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by BlueStrat (756137)

        I think this is where one replies;

        "WHOOSH!"

        YMMV

        • I'm sorry sir, but that's an invalid use of "WHOOSH!". The respondent clearly had to "get" the joke in order to respond the way that he did. I'm going to have to issue a demerit, and I would remind you that this will go on your permanent record.

          • by BlueStrat (756137)

            I'm sorry sir, but that's an invalid use of "WHOOSH!". The respondent clearly had to "get" the joke in order to respond the way that he did. I'm going to have to issue a demerit, and I would remind you that this will go on your permanent record.

            Heh!

            I'm going to have to appeal my "Whoosh!" on the basis that respondent did *not* clearly get the joke, as demonstrated by his failure to grasp that the joke was that this topics' discussion of Sony's hostile behavior toward users was compared in my post to past ho

  • Endgame? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by kurokame (1764228)

    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 eff

    • by JordanL (886154)
      With corporations as large as Sony, it's almost surely #2 and/or #3.
    • 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.

      In other news, the children of four out of five Sony execs have beans [wikipedia.org] up their noses.

    • and what twit modded this "troll"? Its directly on point

    • Sony's lawyers are embarked on justifying their salaries and Uppest Management is being fed bullshit by those lawyers because they certainly don't listen to their customers.

      If it bothers you so fuckin' much, STOP BUYING SONY CRAP.

      Make your own hardware platform, open-source it, product it on a shoe-string.

      Negotiate with games makers to port their games to your platform, while agreeing that their existing agreements with Sony will be honored (meaning NO PIRATING their software.)

      End result, you have an open p

    • Just because they have no real money in Sony terms does not mean this law suit wont ruin their lives.

      This is about 1. getting the source code. Sony may not know exactly how the OS was broken into and 2. making an example of those responsible, sticking their heads on a Playstation pike for all to see that you do _not_ hack Sony products. Not that it would work mind you.
  • It is silly... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Darkness404 (1287218) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:14PM (#33729444)
    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...
  • consoles or PC's ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by volcan0 (1775818) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:22PM (#33729496)
    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 ?
    • by slinches (1540051) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @08:26PM (#33729910)

      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.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @08:45PM (#33729992)

      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.

      • Apathy.

        As long as Joe Sixpack can play Cod2 and PES with his mates, he doesn't give half a shit, let alone a full one, about the Other OS functionality, how much tax Sony dodges, whether jailbreaking the console is made illegal, or whether they actually own the console. They Just. Don't. Care.
  • by aethogamous (935390) on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:24PM (#33729516)

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

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

  • Unlike what the summary says, I see nothing about PSFreedom in there. It seems to be mostly about PSJailbreak which if I understand correctly is a dongle, so there is a commercial side to it. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

  • by jmorris42 (1458) * <jmorris@[ ]u.org ['bea' in gap]> on Tuesday September 28, 2010 @07:37PM (#33729616)

    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 [beau.org] fiasco a decade ago. Looks like it is time to stand up again.

  • * ...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.

  • "We don't have legal ground to stand on, but we'll keep you in court until you are out of money. Doesn't matter if you were right or wrong; all that matters is that you bleed to death."
  • "or who may have knowledge of the distribution or sale of this software."

    So like everyone in the entire fucking world, then? Good job, Sony. I don't have a PS3 and I don't ever plan to have a PS3, but you've just ensured that I'll find this software and keep it handy, just because you don't like it enough to sue some John Does over it.

  • ...to serve subpoenas. If you receive one you can (and should) contest it. They will then have to convince the judge that there is good reason you specifically should be ordered to obey this particular subpoena, and if such an order issues they will have to pay all your expenses.

  • I hope someone can create a payload using this exploit specifically designed to load Linux and incapable of running ANY PS3 games at all. With full access to all the hardware (maybe the NOVEAU drivers can help with the PS3s GPU)

    A way to "dual boot" such that you can boot into GameOS and play games (including playing on PSN) yet at the same time can then run the exploit and load Linux would be great too.

    Something that specifically allows legitimate uses without allowing any piracy at all.

  • Oh Goodie goodie goodie, a Sony vs the World battle is about to begin! Will they start with google or yahoo?

Real Programmers don't write in PL/I. PL/I is for programmers who can't decide whether to write in COBOL or FORTRAN.

Working...