Fellow Hackers Blast Geohot For Sony Settlement 310
RedEaredSlider writes "The hacker who settled with Sony after the company sued him for modifying his PlayStation 3 console is getting a lot of flak for not taking the fight further. 'Night Breed' [wrote], 'So basically you settled for a job and took people's money, giving them a false hope of settling for their rights? What do you plan to do with the money that was donated to you to provide a cushion for the legal battle? I hope you will be paying all those people back since you obviously didn't live up to your word.'"
this is a (Score:3)
DramaFest.
Misleading (Score:2, Informative)
Hotz didn't "settle for a job" and it's assumed that he is going to donate remaining legal funds to the EFF. What some misinformed blog commenter says is irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2)
it's assumed that he is going to donate remaining legal funds to the EFF
Assumptions are always dangerous, especially when a lot of money is involved. Will he donate all of it, some of it, of none of it? We'll likely never have anything better than his word on what he did with the money. And that has an even more damning effect on these sorts of cases in the future, since people will be much more reluctant to donate to someone else's case after this guy sold out and took the money (even if it's just some of the money, even if it's just *allegations* that he pocketed some of the
Re: (Score:2)
it's assumed that he is going to donate remaining legal funds to the EFF
Assumptions are always dangerous, especially when a lot of money is involved. Will he donate all of it, some of it, of none of it? We'll likely never have anything better than his word on what he did with the money. And that has an even more damning effect on these sorts of cases in the future, since people will be much more reluctant to donate to someone else's case after this guy sold out and took the money (even if it's just some of the money, even if it's just *allegations* that he pocketed some of the money).
Well we can always hope that the EFF would share information as to whether these donation claims are factual or not down the road.
Re: (Score:2)
It still wouldn't matter, as he's never said how much he received in the first place. People will always suspect that he pocketed some of the money.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:this is a (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:this is a (Score:4, Informative)
Actually it's pretty freakin accurate. He gave up to just get the lawsuit over, and took substantial hits to his own freedoms.
Geohot essentially "won", but the settlement was a joke, especially considering it roughly translates to him accepting an unrealistic permanent injunction. Really, not supporting "PS3 infringing activities" that aren't specified? Say it ain't so!
He had this case in the bag from the issues at hand, and instead settled giving Sony a major advantage. The facts were on his side bigtime unless there is something we don't know about.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The facts may have been on his side, but there's one thing that Sony has that he doesn't -- an endless pool of money and lawyers to make his life hell. Sure, the community thinks they're doing a good job by sending him a buck here or there for his legal defense fund, but it costs more than a couch full of pocket change to pay for a reasonable defense. Unless you suggest that he take a serious (and likely) risk of committing himself to a lifetime of poverty due to a crushing multi-million dollar loss in cour
Re: (Score:3)
Wait wait wait wait wait.
Engaging... unauthorized access... SONY PRODUCT under the terms of any.... license agreement or terms of use.... whether or not Hotz has accepted such agreement or terms of use
Whaaaaaaaaat the holy fuck?
Isn't the whole point of a contractual agreement that both parties have to agree to it first? Hotz just gave Sony a rubber stamp with his signature on it! If he so much as looks at a Sony product sideways, they could pin his ass to the wall any time for any reason. That's insane! The whole thing could be simplified if it was just:
1. Mr. Hotz agrees to never purchase, use, or be affiliated with the use of any Sony product. Evar. Byebye!
Sheesh.
And secondly..
Re:this is a (Score:4, Insightful)
The facts were on his side bigtime unless there is something we don't know about.
The biggest fact not on his side is that Sony is a multi-billion dollar international conglomerate, and he's just a guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Please, you do realize they settled before resolving the jurisdiction issue right? And that the facts show that the Sony which sued in California very likely has no standing [groklaw.net] (hasn't been ruled yet - per the class action's statements as well).
The case never moved forward into discovery, there was no actual proof of infringement or ANYTHING substantiated. Now he has a settlement saying "don't do it again".
#2 has never been proven in court as straight up illegal, although DMCA has no exceptions carved for it f
Re: (Score:3)
If you read the list you posted, those things are already illegal anyway
The whole point of the case was that he had done those things because he believed (and still believes) that they are not against the law.
Had he won, it would have set legal precedent that they are in fact not against the law. Had he lost, it would have set precedent that they are illegal, and since he was convinced that he was inevitably going to lose he chose to settle and avoid setting that precedent.
Re: (Score:3)
The whole point of the case was that he had done those things because he believed (and still believes) that they are not against the law.
It sounds like he got some good legal advice after being hit by the lawsuit and not surprisingly, very little of that before the lawsuit.
Re: (Score:3)
As I see it both sides had a lot more to lose in this case than they had to gain.
If sony won the lawsuit then they would just drive the next guy further underground yeah that is a victory for them but most people with a sense of self preservation undertaking such activities are likely to be somewhat underground about it anyway. If they lose then the case would essentially legitmise such hacking attempts.
If geohot lost the lawsuit then he would likely be bankrupted, lose most of his possesions and have finan
Re:this is a (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:this is a (Score:4, Informative)
The main complaint is that he was asking for donations to fight this, and then more or less bailed on the fight. That's the only valid complaint in my opinion, then again, we don't know if and how much money was raised. It pays to be wary of donating to a legal defense fund, you can't be certain it will be spent the way you want it to be spent.
Re: (Score:2)
The main complaint is that he was asking for donations to fight this, and then more or less bailed on the fight. That's the only valid complaint in my opinion, then again, we don't know if and how much money was raised. It pays to be wary of donating to a legal defense fund, you can't be certain it will be spent the way you want it to be spent.
Agreed. Whether it was a good move on his part or not, it doesn't matter when it comes to the donations scenario. He implicitly collected donations to fight Sony, and then discontinued the fight. Would we do it too? Probably. But that is not the point. If I paid seeded X amount of money to you to sail across the world and then you stopped part way because the outcome looked bleak, I would all or some of my money back. Hopefully it does get passed on to the EFF.
Re: (Score:3)
People donated to geohot's defense to get him the legal advice needed to fight Sony. Obviously, his legal advisors told him accept this settlement. It would have been a far greater waste of the donations if geohot had failed to follow the legal advice the donations paid for.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. This is a common mistake. Those public documents are not the terms of the settlement that geohot is not allowed to discuss. Those documents are part of the public record. It would be ridiculous for Sony to prohibit geohot from divulging terms that are part of the public record.
Settlements have two parts: the public part (that in this case has been splashed all over the web) and the private part. It is the private part that geohot cannot discuss. Often when a corporation pays money to settl
Re:this is a (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I disagree, Geohot is a complete dumb ass if he didn't see the lawsuit coming. If you're going to kick the hornet's nest you're going to get stung, and caving in on something like this is stupid. Geohot made himself a pinata and apparently hasn't the integrity to stand up.
Remember Sony took away the otheros feature in response to that initial crack that he refused to release after posting about it online.
Nobody forced him to do that, he voluntarily made himself a target in all this.
Re:this is a (Score:4, Insightful)
I suspect that he didn't prepare for this eventuality as well as, say, Compaq did when reverse engineering the IBM BIOS, and that there was damning evidence out there or on his own hard drives. Maybe he has or had a PSN account, or maybe he did in fact profit from this hacking somehow. Just because he swore to the contrary in his affidavit(s) doesn't make it so, and we have no more reason to believe him than to believe any random person off the street.
What we really need is a corporation, formed by interested parties, with the sole raison d'etre of undertaking the next generation of hacks on our behalf. It can be a thorn in the side of onerous, overbearing multinational corporations, and if it's sued out of existence it won't matter one bit; just turn around and form a new one. It's time to fight fire with fire.
Re: (Score:2)
The result of Sony getting litigious as a result of Geohot's publications was entirely predictable. When he accepted donations for the purpose of "the fight against Sony" it was a breech of his moral obligation to see it through.
Both of these details were expected -- Sony's reaction and Geohot's fight. This has little to do with idealism except for the people who sought to support him.
I can't say if I would have done the same as Geohot or not -- the details of the settlement are secret as are the full det
Re: (Score:3)
When it's your own, well, different story.
It depends on the person.
Lots of people will jump in with accusations of "selling out", "siding with the man", etc. That's all pretty much delusional though.
Yet, even so, the fact that they might crumble if they themselves were in such a situation does not make them incorrect.
Re:this is a (Score:4, Informative)
Anyway, he was a freshman the year after I was, and I'm 23. He's no more than 21/22. It's theoretically possible he has a family, but given his age and the fact that he's the subject of a Slashdot story, I doubt it.
Inevitable but maybe a good thing (Score:5, Informative)
Much as I think this battle needs to be fought geohot is an attention seeking ass, and it’s a shame he was the one who was slated fight it.
I think it’s actually a blessing in disguise that he decided to save his own skin. Not saying I wouldn’t do the same, I’ll admit it, when it comes to me or the greater good I’ll go with me and screw everyone else. However there are lots of noble idealists types who would fight themselves in prison and then keep at it and that’s who needs to be fighting this thing, not some annoying jackass.
As for donations wasn’t the plan for unused (so in this case, most of it) money to go to the EFF.
And just cause I’m already pseudo flamewar-ing, we really don’t need another Kevin Mitnick in the world.
Re:Inevitable but maybe a good thing (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Thanks for the laugh (Score:3)
... when the Chinese president call the White House and say: "Tell Sony to drop this BS, or we will call back ALL Treasury bonds". When that day comes, DMCA will be repealed quickly, and a new patent/copyright reform will come.
Sony is a Japanese company, not American. Of all of Sony's business units, Sony Computer Entertainment America would be an unlikely choice to go after someone in China. It's entirely possible that Sony has a division located somewhere in Asia - that division might try to get the Japanese and Chinese governments involved, but it's not clear why you'd think America would be involved. Maybe you got your wires crossed a little.
Or, the USA can always print $1 trillion and pay back the Chinese. Then we will have inflation -> Civil War -> Constitution suspended -> No DMCA.
Yeah, right. I think you may be in a strange mental state where you're dreaming,
Re: (Score:2)
People will always suspect that he pocketed some or all of the money. That will cast a cloud on donating to similar cases in the future. There is no silver lining here. GeoHot has made it a lot harder for people in the future to defend themselves against Sony and other thugs on hacking hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the thing that bothers me most about this: it's blatantly obvious that geohot intended for Sony to come after him, by the fact that he released the work using his real name. If he didn't have any genuine intention of fighting, why couldn't he have had the decency to just be anonymous in the first place?
Re: (Score:3)
So I'm guessing you know nothing about Mitnick?
He was a complete and total douche who got what he deserved. He wasn't clever, he didn't even do anything original, he just sucked enough to get caught. You need to learn a fair amount about his history if you think he's someone to be idolized. Get the real history about what happened and what a pussy he is and you'll be far better off picking someone else with skills to be impressed by.
Let me give you a hint, the leet hackers you want to be impressed by, ar
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't like the guy! I think he's an attention seeking egomaniac who brought most of his misfortune on himself and has milked the fame of his case for every damn penny (ok, I don't blame him for that at all..) to the point where it _almost_ seems planned.
Ok, probably not fair, but from my view it parallels the whole "guy I don't like fighting a cause I believe in" type situation that geohot would have been in. At least Kevin Mitnick really did suffer in prison for a while.
Re: (Score:3)
He didn't do anything original, everything he did was someone elses work
He got caught for trivial reasons that anyone with half a clue would have avoided.
He tried to throw it in the face of those he was abusing that he was doing it.
He cried like a little girl when the police interviewed him.
He's nothing more than attention whore who thinks the world should be handed to him because ... HE is Kevin Mitnick.
He's a nobody who got a bunch of publicity, thats it, nothing more.
Armchair Hackers (Score:3, Insightful)
It's easy to criticize GeoHot when you're not the one being sued by one of the largest corporations in the world. I feel bad for GeoHot, it seems like no matter what he does and how he tries to help -- and make no mistake, he has helped immensely on many projects -- he keeps getting blasted by haters.
Re:Armchair Hackers (Score:5, Informative)
The best part is how the haters aren't the ones who were being sued. They have no vested interest, and nothing to lose. Screw them.
Re:Armchair Hackers (Score:5, Insightful)
+1
Next time you're looking down the barrel of a gun, or at a multi-billion dollar company out to crush you, tell me how brave you're going to be.
It's easy to watch an action flick and say "I can do that" and another thing not to shit yourself when you hear the bullet whiz by before you hear the crack of the rifle.
Re: (Score:2)
If you watch an action flick and think, I can do that, I have news for you, you're wrong. At least for every single action flick I've seen, there is a significant percentage of physical impossibilities.
Re: (Score:2)
If you watch an action flick and think, I can do that, I have news for you, you're wrong..
Ever read the darwin awards?
Re: (Score:2)
If you watch an action flick and think, I can do that, I have news for you, you're wrong..
Ever read the darwin awards?
Wouldn't that simple confirmation that even if try something crazy you are necessarily going to make it alive?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Depends on the state. In SC you get to keep a mattress. Seriously. Still, a bankrupcy will fuck up your life for at least 7 years. No decent job, no college, no rentals, no credit cards, no checking account. You wanna live like that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
no checking account? I think you went a bit far, there. CREDIT, yes. checking, no, that's not based on credit. you deposit funds in a checking account. if you have funds, any bank will take you as a customer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
no checking account? I think you went a bit far, there. CREDIT, yes. checking, no, that's not based on credit
Really? Show me a bank that doesn't do a credit check before opening an account for the first time. Checks are treated as a form of credit since you can write them without the money actually BEING in the account. Checking accounts are most certainly dependent on your credit history.
I walked into multiple banks with a $9500 cashier check and was denied due to my horrible credit. I was told flat out they would be happy to deal with me if I can back with proof that I had paid the debts I owed but they coul
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. If you have bad Credit, no bank wants you as a customer becuase of the potential for writing bad checks and yes I know what I'm talking about as it happened to my brother. He couldn't even get a savings account because of his bad credit. The banks simply didn't want him as a customer because he cost too much to have.
Re:Armchair Hackers (Score:4, Interesting)
Depends on whether it was civil or criminal. If it's criminal I'd sell out. If it's civil once you declare bankruptcy then it should be all over. You usually get to keep your house and cars in bankruptcy.
You clearly have no idea what happens in bankruptcy.
You might get to keep your house, depends on what state its in and how much its worth. You most certainly may be forced to sell it and move to something more modest. Same goes for the car and pretty much every other posession you own.
Bankruptcy is NOT a get of jail free card, and its been made worse recently to cut down on the number of idiots like yourself who try to use it as such. Its doubtful he would even qualify for it.
Then ... to top it off ... the court can simply say 'you don't get out of this by filing bankruptcy' and he's done. Depending on the laws where the trial was taking case, it may already legally be that way by state law.
Re: (Score:2)
The best part is how the haters aren't the ones who were being sued. They have no vested interest, and nothing to lose.
Isn't that usually the case?
But *some* of them DO have a stake in this! (Score:2)
If you're a "hater" who donated to his cause, then you have every reason to complain! He spent YOUR money and didn't do what he promised with it!
In the case of everyone else, no ... like everyone else outside the immediate court battle, they're not being sued over it. But we ALL have a vested interest, in the sense that companies like Sony are apparently still able to sell you a product that lists a certain feature-set, remove part of that feature-set in a software update, and twist your arm to either tak
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's easy to criticize GeoHot when you're not the one being sued by one of the largest corporations in the world. I feel bad for GeoHot, it seems like no matter what he does and how he tries to help -- and make no mistake, he has helped immensely on many projects -- he keeps getting blasted by haters.
Perhaps geohot keeps getting blasted by haters because he makes himself so easy to hate, as he is, in fact, a douchebag.
The legal documents pertaining to his case read like some sort of self-aggrandizing group wank, referring to himself as a "prodigy" of some sort. Sorry, but George is a prodigy in no field other than taking the LEGO Bricks that other hackers have so kindly molded for him, then popping them together and subsequently claiming that not only did he build the entire model from scratch, he pain
To the EFF (Score:5, Informative)
Wasn't it pointed out in the last GeoHot story several times that unused donations would be sent on over to the EFF?
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up, and for god's sake add that to the story headline.
Re:To the EFF (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem is that people didnt donate to him so that he could settle with sony. people donated because it was a fight to set a precident and they were lead to believe by Geohot that he was going to fight $ony until the end. now people have less $$ in their accounts and nothing to show for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously.
People are surprised to hear that a guy who was relying on donations to pay his legal fees took the opportunity to settle before going to trial. Film at 11.
Re: (Score:2)
I have no clue how much money was donated to date. But with the deep pockets Sony has to pay lawyers, I can image going up against them could burn through a hell of a lot of cash in short order. If he had to go through 10's of thousands of dollars just to settle this, he may have come to the conclusion that it was not financially possible to win.
Re: (Score:3)
Right, his lawyer told him to settle. That's the wisest move. The law isn't like it is in the movies where the young guy challenges the status quo and wins. In real life, the status quo sues you to oblivion and 80% of your check is garnished for the rest of your days.
Corporations have too much power. Fighting them in court doesn't work as they more or less write the laws they're attacking you with. Change the laws. Regulate corporations tighter.
Re: (Score:2)
donations would be sent on over to the EFF
So he claims. But how will we ever know if some of it didn't end up in his pocket? I won't be donating to any of these cases in the future, not after this. I don't want to ass-clown to fold without even a fight, pocketing some or all of the money I gave him to defend himself.
If they want a fight... (Score:5, Insightful)
If they want a fight, they are invited to post the secret key on their own web site (including a manual how to use it), add their contact details and wait for Sony (or their lawyers) to come for them. Then they can show how brave they are...
CU, Martin
If GH's work and code is in the wild... (Score:5, Insightful)
...then the whole settlement is moot.
That's really stupid. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
WE dont have debtors prison, what backward country do you live in?
A possibility (Score:5, Informative)
Geohot can't talk much about why he settled, but his replies on his blog [blogspot.com] suggests a plausible reason: he realized he was unlikely to win the case (suggesting that the judge was biased) and chose to settle to avoid setting a legal precedent.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 informative
Re: (Score:3)
Geohot can't talk much about why he settled, but his replies on his blog [blogspot.com] suggests a plausible reason: he realized he was unlikely to win the case (suggesting that the judge was biased) and chose to settle to avoid setting a legal precedent.
Can we replace "unlikely to win the case" to "unlikely to leave the court room without being at least bankrupt, if not worse"? As an individual, it's no good if you "win" a case if it costs you money that you cannot afford to spend. And I don't think that he got donations that are enough to pay the cost of a good lawyer. Plus the risk of losing the case, which might have happened whether he was guilty or not.
Re: (Score:3)
But why would Sony want to settle the case?
Re: (Score:3)
I actually have trouble understanding why hackers just completely lose their shit when the law is involved. It's an interesting and complex system that any real hacker should relish understanding and, well, hacking.
Wrong because of what you said shortly thereafter:
I actually argued with a linux kernel dev who refused to accept the verdict even after Reiser led the police to the body, because he couldn't understand how a guilty verdict was reached in the trial. He actually said "the investigation was flawed, and couldn't logically produce Reiser as a suspect, therefore the trial was flawed and the guilty verdict wrong."
"Hacking" the legal system doesn't work if the judge doesn't care. Yes, maybe the judge should release you on a technicality that you cleverly discovered, but if he/she doesn't, there's absolutely nothing you can do about it.
"Hacking" a system is only possible when it always follows its own rules. Judges are allowed to make up the interpretations of rules as they go. It's called setting precedent.
Re: (Score:2)
Setting precedent only happens when the judge is ruling on something not covered either by existing law or prior precedent. They don't get to just make shit up. And if they do, there's several layers of appeals courts that routinely revisit and overturn the rulings of judges.
The legal system does follow its own rules, which allow for
Re: (Score:2)
Setting precedent only happens when the judge is ruling on something not covered either by existing law or prior precedent. They don't get to just make shit up. And if they do, there's several layers of appeals courts that routinely revisit and overturn the rulings of judges.
Court cases cost money. Lots of money. Appeals cost even more money. Unless you can find someone with extremely deep pockets to back you, you just lose and pay whatever penalty gets dished out. And judges aren't accountable to anyone if their decision does get overturned higher up.
Hackers have trouble dealing with the legal system because they can't handle the apparent ambiguity of the process and the results.
No shit, Sherlock. Not even all of the justices of the Supreme Court can typically agree on the legal issues with which they're faced. When the highest court in the land is divided in their opinions on really important cases, what
Re: (Score:3)
The legal system does not exist to provide you with your desired outcome. It's not a computer where the right inputs get the right outputs. It exists to resolve disputes according to the law as written and the body of previous judgements that are applicable. And, pretty much by definition, where a trial proceeds through appeals, it's because the existing body of law and precedent do not provide a clear rule on who's right and
Re: (Score:2)
Precisely this - I wish I had mod points today because you hit so many points squarely on the head.
I don't. Many hackers and /.ers (the sets are in overlap, not congruent) are a) zealots and thus shut out any evidence that disagrees with their fore-ordained conclus
Re: (Score:3)
[The law is] an interesting and complex system that any real hacker should relish understanding and, well, hacking.
The problem with the law is that it's written in an ambiguous language and applied inconsistently from one case to the next. It is essentially a chaotic and unpredictable system which, frankly, is not worth the expense in time and money for most people to bother with unless they absolutely have to. Trying to win a court case is like trying to make it rain in New York by spraying some water in
Get off your high horses (Score:5, Insightful)
What, so people are disappointed that Geohot didn't wreck his life to fulfill their armchair fantasies? "I gave you $20, and you won't ruin your life to make me happy? You SUCK, Geohot!"
Get real. I've had some dealings in civil cases, and let me say that there are few things in this world as life-destroying and gut-wrenching as being a defendant in a civil case against a plaintiff with lots of money and a willingness to do whatever it takes to crush you.
It is very easy for people with l33t nicknames to criticize Geohot behind the safety of an anonymous computer account. It is another to sit in a room with a group of highly paid lawyers who explain to you in excruciating detail how your life will be made a living hell if you don't cooperate.
Geohot got in over his head, and wisely decided to settle and get on with his life. If Geohot's critics want to fight the good fight instead, all they have to do is repost his techniques on a web page of their own, and wait for Sony to come calling. Somehow I don't think that's gonna happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly what kind of living hell are we talking about ? This is the part I don't understand... it's a civil suit, so all they can do is win a judgment worth $X, which he likely does not have, so he would go bankrupt. End of story. The injunction still applies either way, so nothing is really lost except a few trivial belongings. He's barely out of diapers for fuck's sake, not like he's losing a house and child support...
If he had taken the chance to fight, and lost everything, I certainly would not mind
Re: (Score:3)
They are angry that someone talked about how they were going to fight Sony over this, asked them for money and then settled. People didn't offer him money if he agreed to do something stupid, he said he was going to do something 'brave' and people gave him money to support him in that action.
Re:Get off your high horses (Score:5, Informative)
"They picked the wrong guy to sue"
"Out of business is jail for me and you're suing me civilly"
"I want the settlement papers to contain the words OtherOS and an apology from Sony"
Now can you see why people are disappointed? He talked ALOT of smack and then backed out. I think he is due some deserved criticism. What concerns me most is that the MAJORITY of this discussion is about the donation money and not about the true issues of the matter.
Re:Get Hotz off his high horse first. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, when Mr. Hotz got that first cease-and-desist letter, I'm sure he thought: "I gonna beat these assholes! My fellow hackers will rally to help me!" Maybe he reads Slashdot - no doubt he could have picked up lots of bogus bravado from this crowd.
And then he had one of those "growing up" epiphanies that most 20- and 21-year-olds go through, where you realize that empty words of support mean nothing, and that while many will cheer you on as you march into the lion's den, damn few will stand by you against the lions.
As for the donations, I doubt that Geohot collected enough money to pay for a week of a good lawyer's time, much less enough to fight a real court battle. If his attorney worked pro bono, maybe he'll have something left to give to the EFF - but frankly, I wouldn't count on it.
Geohot learned a hard lesson about the real world, and wisely opted not to ruin his own life just to make a lot of strangers happy. I don't fault him one bit.
Re: (Score:2)
The learning moment from this whole episode is... (Score:2)
That in the future these kinds of security breaches will be placed anonymous on all downloading platforms if Sony is lucky, otherwise they end up on botnet auction sites and in that case Sony is really fucked up.
But then, most management is rather right than smart. (big egos et al.)
Title is wrong (Score:5, Funny)
Title should be: "Script Kiddies Blast Actual Hacker Geohot For Sony Settlement".
He who fights and runs away. (Score:2)
Nothing was settled here. There is no precedent.
For the content companies, this is a battle to retain control over the things they sell. For the hackers, it is a battle to be able to freely use the things they have purchased. Tension is inevitable. There will be other battles, on other days.
Lawsuits are not fun (Score:4, Insightful)
No one is asking, why did Sony settle? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
He should do exactly what he said he'd do with any money not used in his legal defense. If you didn't know what that was before you donated, you really should have read the donation web page.
Re: (Score:2)
So he does something, get's sued and ends up not paying a dime out of his own pocket.
It's scumbaggy because nobody would have donated a dime if he said "I'm hoping for a settlement". It's his own fault for stroking his own ego and making sure he could be identified. He knew that Sony would be on him like bees. A smart move would be to release this crap anonymously or under a unconnected pseudonym that took care to not leave footprints to follow. So total out of pocket costs to him is ZERO plus a nice tax
Re: (Score:2)
So total out of pocket costs to him is ZERO plus a nice tax deduction for a donation to the EFF.
Wouldn't he have to pay taxes on all of the money that was donated anyway? Writing off the tax deduction for the portion that he donated to the EFF would only partially offset that, as he'd only have to pay taxes on the money he didn't donate.
Re: (Score:2)
An indignant hacker? What's next? Shoplifters of the world uniting?
You sir have no idea what hacking is. Hacking is not stealing, hacking is exploring and creating new uses for devices and software. Pirating is what you are referring to. The "hackers" that are following an internet HOWTO that walks them through downloading ripped PS3 games are nothing more than cheapskates costing the rest of us useful tools like OtherOS.
Re: (Score:2)
An indignant hacker? What's next? Shoplifters of the world uniting?
You sir have no idea what hacking is. Hacking is not stealing, hacking is exploring and creating new uses for devices and software. Pirating is what you are referring to. The "hackers" that are following an internet HOWTO that walks them through downloading ripped PS3 games are nothing more than cheapskates costing the rest of us useful tools like OtherOS.
Sandra Bullock is a hacker, right? Hackers are so cool. And l88t.
Re: (Score:3)
There are no legitimate concerns about what will be done with excess donations to his legal fund since he made that clear from the beginning.
Re: (Score:3)
More likely George won the right to not be bankrupt and spend the next 6 years dealing with ongoing litigation. Anyone who faults him for cutting his losses is an asshole.
Re: (Score:3)
he BEGGED for donations with the express understanding it was a 'fight the good fight' battle.
he exited far too soon for many of us (yes, I did donate and I have never even SEEN the gaming system he hacks about; I don't game and have no interest in it at all). I did support the freedom aspects of his fight and he basically gave up instantly and without any real fight.
if he had not involved the community, that would have been one thing; but he stood up and said 'I will fight this!'.
and yet, he didn't.
so, he
Re:Settlement terms confidential (Score:4, Insightful)
You also didn't see the fight he was facing.
Fighting the good fight is only logical if you have a chance of winning.
Suicide is ALWAYS stupid, regardless of why you donated money to him.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't think that perhaps he should have considered that before he claimed credit for that initial exploit? I can understand getting scared, but what sort of dumb ass posts the encryption key under his own name and then goes on various shows talking about it?
He more or less sank his own case, but at the same point, what sort of an idiot thinks that they can get away with that sort of crap when you're up against a corporation that thinks rootkitting a few million people is a reasoned response to piracy?
Re: (Score:2)
You cant go to jail from being sued. he did not break any laws, this is a lawsuit not a criminal case.
Re: (Score:2)
The settlement isn't that confidential. Geohot Sony settlement details leak [eurogamer.net]
Re: (Score:2)