Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Sony The Courts Games

Geohot Battles Back Against Sony 255

Posted by Soulskill
from the hacking-justice dept.
csaw.csaw writes "According to Ars Technica, 'Hotz is slamming Sony's arguments at every turn. Sony claims there is a PSN account that Hotz created? Well, the serial number is wrong and anyone could have made that account. The manuals contained information on how SCEA is located in California? The manuals were never opened.' Groklaw posted the latest court filing (PDF) as well as their own analysis, saying, 'All the over-the-top allegations, in short, that some journalists published last week after reading SCEA's filing are now answered ably, about blickmaniac, the Playstation Network, the California downloads, the serial number, SCEA's jurisdictional arguments, everything. I confess, this is getting exciting.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Geohot Battles Back Against Sony

Comments Filter:
  • Boycott Sony! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mikaelg (2028366) on Monday March 28, 2011 @03:50PM (#35643768)
    I dont know why people support Sony. Countless of times they're showed their true colors. The stuff they do to paying customers is absolutely stunning. Both Nintendo's Wii and Microsoft's Xbox 360 do have DRM, but they don't do shit like this. Microsoft only bans the modded user from multiplayer, and rightfully so because he could cheat against other players. Sony is going way over the line.

    . If you want to play the same games, just get a XBOX 360 and drop PS3. They have the same games anyway, and 360 is a better console, especially with Kinect.
    • Re:Boycott Sony! (Score:5, Informative)

      by Locke2005 (849178) on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:00PM (#35643924)
      Sad but true, I've concluded Microsoft is less evil then Sony. In fact, I'm tempted to by an Xbox with included Kinect now that they are $380 at Costco. Nintendo is much less evil than either Sony or Microsoft, but my Wii is looking a little long in the tooth now.

      I decided to boycott Sony a few years back with my Sony "Dream Machine" home theater system turned out to be a nightmare -- Sony managed to put out some of the worst quality DVD players at the highest prices.
      • Re:Boycott Sony! (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Samalie (1016193) on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:41PM (#35644372)

        There's only one case I know of (console to console compare) where Microsoft is still more evil than Sony.

        Specifically, it came in with Netflix (at least in Canada)

        On the PS3, Netflix is "free" from Sony's standpoint. I have the console, downloaded Netflix, got my Netflix membership, and away I go.

        On the X360...I have the console, went to download Netflix, found I couldn't because I'm not a Gold member. SERIOUSLY? I spend money on your console and want to download a free to you app and I can't because you have that gold-only restricted. FUCK YOU! I'm not spending $60 a year to download a free app.

        • And you can't play multiplayer without a gold subscription either!

          Seriously, it kinda sucks, but take it or leave it, right? I mean, they have no obligation to make their device support Netflix at all. You can complain that the service is crappier than Sony's as a result (and you'd be right), but eviler?

          • Indeed, Playstation Network is free for online games and Netflix... only very few titles are on their "Plus" membership tier, and even then, you can buy those one-off without signing up for the whole year. And if you do, it's cheaper than Gold membership. For how much they screw over some of their customers, they also take pretty good care of the majority, relatively speaking.
        • by EdIII (1114411)

          I feel the same way. I own (well took over) a XBOX360 and have no interest in playing online. Having to spend $60 bucks a year just for fucking Netflix is insulting.

          The best solution though, is to purchase a Western Digital Live TV Plus. It's $99 and the Netflix application on it rocks. Much better than the app on the XBOX360. It also has a much better ability to connect up to network shares, media players, etc.

          Ohhhh, and it's HDMI 1.3 with an optical out for a nice sound system setup.

        • While I totally agree with you that Microsoft making gold a requirement to use Netflix sucks. If you do still want it, you can get a year of gold membership for 30-35 dollars usually. Just keep an eye out on slickdeals and other websites for sales on the 1 year prepaid cards. Still a real annoyance but at least it isn't as expensive.
          • by h4rr4r (612664)

            $35 is more than a third of what the cheapest netflix runs for a year. One would be far better off getting a roku or other netflix player for a $100 and avoiding the reoccurring charge.

        • by Joce640k (829181) on Monday March 28, 2011 @05:43PM (#35645028) Homepage

          Why does charging money for something make a company "evil"?

          Evil is when they sue you, install viruses on your PC without asking, make CDs that won't play on PCs, try to lock you in to their products at every turn (eg. memory sticks), use proprietary connectors everywhere, overcharge for replacement batteries, etc. It's all in a days work at SONY.

          • Demanding money for a free app so you can use a paid service by a third party is evil. Basically, MS isn't providing enough value to justify charging for it.
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Blakey Rat (99501)

              Basically, MS isn't providing enough value to justify charging for it.

              Then don't pay for it. That doesn't make it "evil."

              I mean, we're comparing this to a company that *removed* an advertised feature from the console. Xbox 360 *added* the Netflix feature. (And was by a full year the first console to have it.) Completely apples and oranges.

              If you want a cheap Netflix player, buy a Roku.

              • Sure it does - evil doesn't have to be on a grand scale or anything, it just has to fit our individual idea of evil.
              • Pretty much it. It would only be evil if they FORCED you to pay to play the console.

                If you look through my previous posts, you can see I am by no means an MS lover, but I won't stand for this bullshit that somehow charging for a service is "evil".

                Sure, you can get the service free on PS3 & PC, where's the problem there? Buy a PS3 or PC, MS is not locking you into paying for live unless you bought their product already. People were well aware live was paid for before the Xbox & Xbox360 came out, so e

              • Then don't pay for it. That doesn't make it "evil."

                Then don't use Sony. Then don't mod a console made by Sony. This same thing could be applied to anything. Even if it doesn't make them 'evil' (whatever that means), it sure does make their console less appealing.

            • To be fair they're not charging for the netflix use. They are saying to use the app on the xbox you have to be a gold member. Fair enough if netflix is the only thing you want to use online it's as good as but still, if you did pay it you'd get the rest of gold membership benefits whether you want them or not. If you have relatively modern tv you should be able to hook up the pc or laptop or whatever to it for less than the price of a live sub.
            • by exomondo (1725132)

              Demanding money for a free app so you can use a paid service by a third party is evil.

              They aren't demanding money for a free app, they are charging for access to their network (which is quite clearly far more extensive than one single app).

              Basically, MS isn't providing enough value to justify charging for it.

              How do you figure? Sure PSN is free but that doesn't reduce the value of XBL. I like that PSN is free, but $5 a month for XBL isn't exactly breaking the bank.

        • by billcopc (196330)

          I agree that it's abusive to require Gold for just Netflix, that's just ridiculous, but the Gold service itself is fine. I don't mind paying $5 for their extensive online service, and I find it helps cut down (somewhat) on raging preteens. Many still get mommy and daddy to pay up, but on PSN it seems I'm the only adult around, while every other player is a team-killing imbecile whose vocabulary consists exclusively of the words "nigger" and "faggot". I would gladly pay $20 a month just to keep those miss

      • by cpu6502 (1960974)

        >>>Nintendo is much less evil than either Sony or Microsoft

        NOW Nintendo is less evil. They used to be as bad as Sony back in the NES and Super Nintendo days (late 80s and early 90s).

      • by Lifyre (960576)

        According to the Consumerist Apple is also more evil than Microsoft (http://consumerist.com/2011/03/worst-company-in-america-round-one-apple-vs-microsoft.html) And Sony is still in the running for most evil in the country.

    • by poetmatt (793785)

      All consoles do indeed do shit like this. Why do you think you're still buying games on disc, why do you think the prices are going up? Even with inflation prices should be far far lower by now, by an order of magnitude.

      If you want to play the same games, get a PC, which you can actually use for shit other than gaming, without paying a premium on everything that exists. For the price of a PS3 you get an easy 3 years of use as a gaming system, it's incredibly easy to download games for free (a more realistic

      • by Ruke (857276)

        Can you clarify what exactly you mean when you say that game prices should be an order of magnitude lower? There's certainly no historical trend that would indicate this: adjusted for inflation, SNES games retailed for about $80. If you're referring to the fact that there are games available for $5, you should keep in mind that those were developed under a vastly different model than the big-studio, multi-million-dollar-development-cost games that retail for $60 for console. If you simply prefer indie games

      • Get a PC.

        Then upgrade PC.

        Repeat.

        I don't need to upgrade my console every few months to a year to play the latest games. That's the reason I got out of PC gaming, it was just too expensive. And sure, I might be able to play some new PC game on low settings without upgrading, but on the console I can have pretty good settings if not the same quality as the PC.

        • Re:Boycott Sony! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Belial6 (794905) on Monday March 28, 2011 @09:01PM (#35647076)
          That is a sad myth that has seriously hurt PC gaming. If you are hooking up to a TV you are maxing out at 1920x1080. So, any comparison of screen resolutions above that are only gravy for the PC. It doesn't take that powerful of a video card to do 1920 by 1080. You can practically do it on an integrated graphics chip. So, you don't have to upgrade the PC ever. You can keep what you have and just buy a whole new one, just like with a console. The fact that you CAN upgrade is a benifit, not a drawback. Besides, The consoles are moving into the upgrade direction anyway. After all, MS isn't just shipping the Kinect to every 360 owner for free. It is an upgrade to the system. The PS3 and Wii have also had their own upgrades.
      • by exomondo (1725132)

        Even with inflation prices should be far far lower by now, by an order of magnitude.

        By what logic? Big studios these days are spending more on games with voice actors, motion capture studios, elaborate art design, music and sound yet you think a game like COD - that employs all these - should be sold for $6? Either you don't understand the meaning of the term 'order of magnitude' or you don't understand how much work is put into the big commercial games.

        understand that when you buy a console for $300 you effectively are buying a box

        how is a console is 'effectively a box'?

      • last time I built a PC for gaming, the video card alone cost more than the PS2 I bought after dropping Grand Theft Auto 3 in it and being forced to reduce detail and textures to min to make it work.

        I highly doubt that a PC *can* be built to handle console-style games for 3 years after it's purchase. Video cards have a useful gaming life of about 6 months to a year after launch. In contrast, consoles have at least 5 good years after launch and then stagnate for a while before games are not made for it anym

    • by larien (5608)
      Sony are a royal PITA on so many levels. Most people who need to supply removable storage on a mobile device use SD cards (or mini/micro variants thereof) so that you can use them anywhere and buy from a variety of places. Hell, the manufacturers even have someone else doing all the hard graft in making up the specs for it. You'd think it was a given that someone would use the industry standard product for their stuff.

      But no. Sony have to come up with their MMC cards, complete incompatible with everyt

      • by mlts (1038732) *

        Sony did score a dubious achievement of having a console out for so long before it was cracked.

        However, I am almost certain it would have been cracked earlier had they not pulled the Other OS thing out.

        I hope Sony learns this lesson... if they have a PS4 with the ability for people to do homebrew stuff on it, accessing the features of the machine (pretty much everything but the DRM stack), it likely would never be cracked. The true jailbreakers/devs can't stand pirates and just breaking a DRM stack so som

      • SSD was created to compete with MemoryStick, Sony had 'em first. It just happens that SD is everywhere because it's a standard rather than a Sony product.

        MMC is unrelated, SD is the "new generation" of MMC.

        • MMC is very related, in the sense that SD is just MMC + DRM support. MemoryStick was pointlessly created to compete with MMC, because Sony can't bear to support a standard that it doesn't control.

    • Is this the same Microsoft that settled with Immersion to give them cash to sue Sony in court over vibrating controllers with the proviso that MS would get paid from any settlement with Sony?

      http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2007/06/18/microsoft-sues-immersion-over-sony-agreement/ [seattlepi.com]

      If you're looking for a non-evil company, Microsoft isn't it.

      I do think Sony's lawsuit is pointless and stupid. Microsoft is smarter to avoid all this. But that's not a question of evil/non-evil, it's just wiser or less wise.

    • by Dan667 (564390)
      Just get a Gaming PC and ditch this console crap from all of these guys.
    • Because the PS3 is a finely made piece of hardware is why. It really is badass. And I dont think ANYONE thought Sony would go as far as they have regarding straight up removing advertised and fully supported features. The Rootkit thing , well honestly i dont think Sony knew how bad that design was and it was 3rd party developed. Still culpable, but it easy to see that it jsut got out of hand and wasnt intended or explained to them how bad the damage would be. The Other OS thing they have no shield nor excu
    • This is why I support Sony:

      I like gaming. The Wii lacks the content I, as a gamer, require. So, that leaves the PC, PS3 or 360 as choices. Two of those choices equate to supporting Microsoft. In summary, I have these three options: not game, support Sony or support Microsoft. I find the moral short-comings of Microsoft several orders of magniture more distasteful than the moral short-comings Sony. And I truly adore some of the exclusive content on the PS3.

      I don't know why people support Microso
    • by westlake (615356)

      I dont know why people support Sony.

      By the numbers:

      49 million PS3 consoles sold. 69 million PSN accounts. 17 milion PlayStation Home social networking accounts. 4 million MOVE controllers.

      Firmware upgrades have kept the five year old PS3 feature-competitive with the latest and greatest in Blu-Ray HD and streaming media.

      Netflix at 1080p with theater surround sound.

      The Red Box vends Blu-Ray videos and PS3 games.

      The Walmart mega-store places the PS3 Slim at the center of a golden triangle of sophisticated console video games, big screen HDT

  • skip ars technica (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SpiralSpirit (874918) on Monday March 28, 2011 @03:51PM (#35643788)
    skip ars technica and go straight to groklaw http://www.groklaw.net/ [groklaw.net]
    • by SomePgmr (2021234) on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:05PM (#35643986) Homepage
      In defence of Ars, they almost always add quite a lot to the conversation in the way of context and intelligent explanation. It's not like a PC World write-up just ripping off the source.
      • Re:skip ars technica (Score:4, Informative)

        by poetmatt (793785) on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:45PM (#35644422) Journal

        Ars almost adds a whole lot of misinformation, and I would not suggest reading Ars if you want actual factual information that is unbiased and/or factual. Microsoft writer makes an op-ed rallying against android? say it ain't so! etc.

        Groklaw, on the other hand, actually provides relative analysis and makes sense of the legal shit that would otherwise be skipped as TLDR or just generally not make sense.

      • I used to have a bit of respect for ars, but after the embarrasing paid-for articles regarding mpeg and webm I dont trust or read them anymore.

      • Ars is all over the map in terms of quality. Ars science writing and engineering overviews are as good as it gets for educated lay audiences. Other stuff is above average, depending on who is doing the writing. Ars gaming content - meh. And the recent "Ask Ars" responses make me wonder about the editorial staff - articles that get basic transfer speeds of popular media wrong and confuse bits and bytes?

        I read Ars almost every day but I don't have nearly the amount of respect for most of their non science

    • the Summary links to groklaw as well, a direct link in fact
  • Won't matter (Score:4, Interesting)

    by elrous0 (869638) * on Monday March 28, 2011 @03:53PM (#35643814)

    Sony is rich and powerful, and has the best lawyers [wikipedia.org] at their disposal. They can even call on Congress and the President to help them out, and rewrite the laws if they have to.

    He's just a little guy. At most he might have the backing of the EFF and some donations.

    I hate to be so cynical, but so far Sony has won every round in this case. The courts are falling all over themselves giving Sony whatever they've asked for, no matter how outrageous. I'd like to think the little guy can win, but really, how often does that actually happen anymore?

    • by jd (1658) <imipak @ y a h o o .com> on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:03PM (#35643952) Homepage Journal

      Depends on how many ninjas the EFF can call on. A few magic mushrooms in Sony's lawyers' coffee and even the courts would have a hard time being sympathetic.

    • The more attention this battle gets, the better his chances. If it looks like Sony is so sloppy and zealous they'd happily railroad an innocent man, enough press will ensure some damage to their reputation. Plus as these stories continue to grow, and as people continue to see corporations in control of both parties in the US, we can look forward to an ever growing fountain of anger and desire for real change. Of course I am as much of a cynic as you are, so my bet is that all that ever growing rage trans
      • by hedwards (940851)

        You overestimate the masses. Clearly Geohot is guilty, otherwise Sony wouldn't be suing him. Plus, he admitted cracking the protection scheme which could lead to losses of jobs after everybody stops buying games and just pirates them./sarcasm

    • Re:Won't matter (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:23PM (#35644178)

      ... from the wikipedia page:

      "successfully represented Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s family in a lawsuit over the CBS network's unauthorized use of the famous "I Have a Dream" speech"

      WTF? Isn't that *exactly* what should be public domain?

      • by guruevi (827432)

        The King family has been cashing in on the dear doctors name for years now. They don't really care about the plight of the ones they once lead, at most they'll give a political sound bite on these issues now.

        • by elrous0 (869638) *

          Not only that, but his kids have been suing each other and alleging fraud over all that money since Coretta King's death. The family has become a fractured mess of corruption and sibling bitterness. Just sad.

      • Re:Won't matter (Score:4, Informative)

        by jd (1658) <imipak @ y a h o o .com> on Monday March 28, 2011 @05:05PM (#35644646) Homepage Journal

        Sure, but copyright has nothing to do with logic. If you have any sound recordings from 1972 or earlier, they're all copyright (in the US). I mean ANY amount earlier. It is an act of piracy to download an MP3 rip from one of Edison's wax cylinders. Those most definitely should also be public domain by now, but they won't be until 2067.

        • by j33px0r (722130)
          US Copyright law, though rather complicated, does not typically include any works before 1923. Edison's wax cylinders would not be typically covered by copyright though I'm sure that the RIAA could find a couple exceptions.
      • by blair1q (305137)

        Nope.

        If you want to hear it, you know how to find it.

    • by DMoylan (65079)

      > how often does that actually happen anymore?

      not often. but when you feel down about it watch/read about

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLibel_(film) [wikipedia.org]

      it will cheer you up.

      • by elrous0 (869638) *

        Yeah, but that was in Europe (where DVD Jon [wikipedia.org] also ultimately prevailed). Trying to take on the big guy in the U.S. is a helluva lot tougher.

  • I need to donate some more to the legal fund for some serious Sony whoopa$$

  • Yeah,. right (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Locke2005 (849178)
    "Your honor, my client couldn't possibly have known that SCEA was located in California, because he is utterly incapable of using Google! I rest my case."

    I not clear on how not knowing where a company is headquartered helps GeoHotz's case.
    • Re:Yeah,. right (Score:5, Informative)

      by One Louder (595430) on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:19PM (#35644134)
      There's no way to know without opening the manually that SCEA even exists. He bought a product manufactured by SCEI, not SCEA. SCEI is based in Japan.
      • by dasdrewid (653176)

        I still feel like "The manuals contained information on how SCEA is located in California? The manuals were never opened." isn't that different from shouting "NANANANANANANANACANTHEARYOUNANANANANANA" while you have your fingers in your ears, as far as a defense goes...

        Don't get me wrong, I hope he wins this. I just don't know that it's quite the "slam" the submitter thinks it is...

        • Re:Yeah,. right (Score:4, Informative)

          by Gaygirlie (1657131) <{gaygirlie} {at} {hotmail.com}> on Monday March 28, 2011 @05:15PM (#35644754) Homepage

          I still feel like "The manuals contained information on how SCEA is located in California? The manuals were never opened." isn't that different from shouting "NANANANANANANANACANTHEARYOUNANANANANANA" while you have your fingers in your ears, as far as a defense goes...

          Don't get me wrong, I hope he wins this. I just don't know that it's quite the "slam" the submitter thinks it is...

          Sony claims he would have known where SCEA is located and that he is dealing with SCEA. But that is ONLY mentioned in the manual, nowhere else: not on the PS3 itself, not on the box, not in firmware.. And if he never read the manual there simply is no reason to expect him to have known about SCEA in the first place. Hell, I too own a PS3 and I had never even heard of SCEA before this whole thing started.

          That's the whole point: no one can prove in any way or form that he should logically have known of the existence of SCEA, let alone where it is located, and that's why it is such a slam-dunk for defence.

        • by Chyeld (713439)

          Ok, here's one. WTF does SCEA have any jurisdiction to bring this mater forward? What legal standing do they have?

          The console is made in Japan. The rights are own by the Japanese company. The business agreement they tried to fuck Geohot over indicate clearly that SCEA knows this. The SDK that they were trying to prove was on Geohot's hard drive doesn't even contain any information concerning the SCEA. So what is their legal standing here?

          Forget whether or not it's reasonable to assume that everyone knows th

          • by gordguide (307383)

            Ok, here's one. WTF does SCEA have any jurisdiction to bring this mater forward? What legal standing do they have?

            The console is made in Japan. The rights are own by the Japanese company. The business agreement they tried to fuck Geohot over indicate clearly that SCEA knows this. The SDK that they were trying to prove was on Geohot's hard drive doesn't even contain any information concerning the SCEA. So what is their legal standing here?

            Forget whether or not it's reasonable to assume that everyone knows that the SCEA even exists, lets start with the basics. Can it even be shown that they have the right to bring this civil suit?

            Keeping in mind that I don't know either way what is the case here, one answer to your question can be found by examining what "rights" are and what they are not. They are not a whole thing, except insofar as the entire possible universe of rights are granted at the time a creative work is created. Once created as a whole, they can be cut, chopped, divided, limited, granted and revoked in literally infinite ways.

            SONY could, as a way of example, give the rights to all SONY's IP now and forever to Billy Bob

    • Re:Yeah,. right (Score:5, Insightful)

      by compro01 (777531) on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:23PM (#35644180)

      I not clear on how not knowing where a company is headquartered helps GeoHotz's case.

      It matters for arguing that California is an inappropriate venue. The case being in California could be disastrous, as it would be expensive for geohot to appear in court for his defense.

      Also, I believe California has some whacky trade secret laws Sony could utilize.

      • IADefinitelyNAL, but aren't trade secret protections useless if somebody reverse-engineers your product? That's why they're somewhat the opposite of patents - if you patent something, you disclose how you do it but you legally prevent others from doing it until the patent expires. If it's a trade secret, nobody can look it up - but if somebody figured out the process independently there's no protection. Unless they're going to argue that GeoHot stole the secret without finding it independently...

      • by jd (1658)

        Do you need "California" and "whacky"? Surely one makes the other redundant in the sentance.

    • by Jaqenn (996058)
      Sony filed their case in California. They want the case tried in California for lots of reasons, probably including that it is close and convenient. Or maybe they know the state's laws better? Or maybe they think that what he did is illegal in California but not elsewhere?

      Sony is trying to demonstrate that they had a working relationship with GeoHotz in California, then time went by, then he wronged them, so the case should be tried in California.

      GeoHotz wants the case tried in his home state (
    • I not clear on how not knowing where a company is headquartered helps GeoHotz's case.

      SCEA is trying to sue in CA because they want to make it as expensive as possible for Hotz (a NJ resident). Part of the claim they are making is that he 'directed his actions against SCEA in CA'.

      If he was unaware that SCEA was in CA, he couldn't have directed his action towards CA. Essentially, Hotz is trying to get the case dismissed in CA for lack of personal jurisdiction. If he succeeds, SCEA will have to refile in NJ,

  • by fish waffle (179067) on Monday March 28, 2011 @04:18PM (#35644114)

    Now, after Mr. Hotz's computer hard drives, and a graphing calculator have been impounded

    Surely that was inadequate---what if he counted on his fingers?

    • by pgn674 (995941)
      Apparently, he did have something on the graphing calculator. To quote Mr. Hotz in a declaration to the court in April,

      The impounded hard drives and calculator were and are the only storage devices in my possession, custody or control, containing the Code that achieves interoperability between computer programs at the time of the the impoundment order.

    • Don't worry, Sony has most likely already drafted up a proposal for confiscating his fingers too, preferably with something very dull and painful.

    • by Myria (562655) on Monday March 28, 2011 @06:08PM (#35645306)

      Because the TI-84 Plus graphing calculator had a USB port, and is user-programmable, people used it [youtube.com] to do the USB-based original jailbreak.

  • And don't buy and of Cher's recordings either!
  • While I don't care about modding systems for the purpose of playing pirated games (I own a PS3 and Wii and am fine with buying games), I think this is an important case for hobbyists/hackers and anyone who thinks they should have the right to hack on their own hardware - which as far as I'm aware is what Sony is trying to set a precedent against.

    I want to be able to mod my PS3 or anything else I own for whatever reason I want - whether that's to put Linux on it or do something more unique with it as part of a research project or just for fun. The fact that this can be used for copyright infringement/piracy is secondary. It is the act of pirating the material that should be illegal and enforced, not any of the technological means that allow it to happen. (similar examples: outlawing VCRs instead of the sale/exchange of copyrighted material, outlawing torrent programs instead of the action of sharing copyrighted material, outlawing guns instead of crimes committed with guns, outlawing cars instead of hitting people with cars, etc etc.)

    As such, I donated a nontrivial amount to Geohot's "give me donations to help my legal defense" plea a month or two ago. I want the ability to do whatever I damn well please with the hardware that I've purchased.

    Aside: I think it's amusing that Sony requested Geohot's paypal transaction records to try and help prove parts of their case. I wonder if they'll be discriminating between "people who paid Geohot for modding-related things" and "people who donated for his defense." Clearly this should be easy based on the amounts there, but I almost wish I knew how much he was accepting for modding jobs before I donated, so that I could have donated that amount N times to approximate the amount I ended up donating, just with the hope that Sony would confuse defense donations for payment for modding jobs/chips/whatever and cock up their case against him even more.
    • I should add that this kind of cause is why I intend to continue to make regular donations to the EFF as well. These are important issues for the tinkerers, geeks, researchers, developers and students amongst us.
    • The problem is, is what GeoHot decided to do.

      If he leaked the metldr keys discreetly, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

      This isn't about tinkering with your equipment, this is about leaking bootloader keys. AFAIK, the Wii and Xbox 360's encryption keys are still safe and sound. The second they get leaked, you better bet your ass that Microsoft and Nintendo would come down hard.

  • It is truly heartening that the standard large company practice of spinning off portions of the business to minimise taxation, isolate risk, provide a favourable legal environment, provide deniability, and reduce legal liability are precisely the things causing SCEA grief.

UNIX is many things to many people, but it's never been everything to anybody.

Working...