Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Operating Systems PlayStation (Games) Sony The Courts Your Rights Online Games Linux

Sony Sued Over PS3 "Other OS" Removal 546

Stoobalou writes "A Californian Playstation 3 user has filed the first class action lawsuit against Sony over removal of the 'Install Other OS' function from the Playstation 3. The action seeks to redress Sony's 'intentional disablement of the valuable functionalities originally advertised as available with the Sony Playstation 3 video game console.' The suit claims that the disablement breaches the sales contract between Sony and its customers and constitutes 'an unfair and deceptive business practice perpetrated on millions of unsuspecting customers.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Sued Over PS3 "Other OS" Removal

Comments Filter:
  • by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @08:43AM (#32028568) Journal

    That's what an EU citizen did. It came out of amazon's pocket if I recall correctly, and I'm sure they then charged it back to Sony.

  • Well... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Raxxon ( 6291 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @08:51AM (#32028658)

    (1) How do people join?

    (2) If I bought the unit used for the ability to play PS2 games and OtherOS, do I qualify? It was bought within the time specified....

  • Re:Can't lose! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by nitio ( 825314 ) <paulo DOT ruthes AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday April 29, 2010 @09:07AM (#32028860) Homepage

    Unless it's like Brazil where the law states you have to have a spare tire at all times.

    And God forbid you try driving around without one - it comes with a nice ticket for you to pay.

  • A reasonable outcome (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jmichaelg ( 148257 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @09:09AM (#32028898) Journal

    I'm not a fan of class action lawsuits because they usually result in pennies for the consumer and millions for the attorneys. They're basically lawyer-enrichment actions.

    For this suit to be any different, the best outcome would be to give Sony an option.

    1. Restore the Linux implementation and purchase full page ads in the NY Times, LA Times, Washington Post advertising they have done so along with a mea culpa and a promise never to disable functionality again.
    2. Refund the full purchase price to any purchaser who wishes to return the unit and purchase ads as above advertising the availability of the refund with a mea culpa.

    Give the attorneys a few million for their time whichever choice Sony takes and the outcome will serve as a warning to companies that they can't put whatever they wish into EULAs because consumers will bite back.

  • Re:FYI (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lunix Nutcase ( 1092239 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @09:16AM (#32029000)

    That's because you won't see any such citations. The whole "EULAs are unenforceable" is a false meme that constantly repeated on Slashdot. It's the same as the people who will talk about how ISPs are "common carriers" yet no such actual status for ISPs exist. The problem is that since these falsities have been repeated so many times that most Slashtards take them as fact.

  • by tophermeyer ( 1573841 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @09:57AM (#32029522)

    I love class-action lawsuits. I get lots of free money:

    - $25 from the U.S. versus RCA, Sony, et cetera - $75 from U.S. v. Paypal - ~$4000 from U.S. v. Equinox (of course I actually gave them $10,000 so that was a bit of a loss)

    And so on. I wonder what I'll get out of the PS3 class action deal?

    If Sony plays it smart, all you will get is an offer to return your PS3 for a refund of your purchase price. So few people will actually follow through on the offer that it will be cheaper for Sony than settling and offering a cash payment for each PS3 owner.

  • by JavaBear ( 9872 ) * on Thursday April 29, 2010 @10:09AM (#32029690)

    Next time they may remove a funcionality you do care about.

    Which brings to mind the old statement:
    "THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
    and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

    THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
    and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

    THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
    and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

    THEN THEY CAME for me
    and by that time no one was left to speak up."

    Besides, they won't remove the Blu-ray feature, however they may remove the ability to play BD-R's, though I hope they keep their grubby little mints off my features.

  • Re:Can't lose! (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 29, 2010 @10:11AM (#32029726)

    So, you need TWO spares? One to use when needed and one so you would not break the law when its in use...?

  • Define Irony... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by cjjjer ( 530715 ) <> on Thursday April 29, 2010 @10:51AM (#32030506)
    All of the people who are bitching about the removal of the "Other OS" feature and how much they hate Sony now will be lined up to buy the PS4.
  • Tax evasion (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Xian97 ( 714198 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @12:35PM (#32032440)
    Didn't Sony get a tax break in Europe because they were able to claim that the PS3 was a computer because of the Other OS functionality? The tax rate on a console was higher than a computer. []
  • by Red Flayer ( 890720 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @12:40PM (#32032496) Journal

    ...when I asked for an even exchange they said my receipt was past the 60-day return limit so "sorry we can't exchange sizes".
    Instead I contacted my credit card, told them what happened, and they reversed the charge on the basis of the merchant not fulfilling contractual obligations (selling the product advertised).

    Can you tell us who the credit card issuer was, because I'd like to research switching a card to them. I'm curious what card issuer would have honored a request like that more than 60 days past date of sale. Most will not honor requests for charge reversals after 30 days, though I've had some luck with Amex between 30 and 60 days.

    It surely wasn't Visa or Mastercard, since they are contractually obligated to the merchants not to reverse charges after 30 days past sale. Maybe the credit card company just ate it, since the cost of a 3-pack of tighty-whities was insignificant to the amount of money they're making off you.

  • by Moryath ( 553296 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @01:07PM (#32032956)

    Not far off the mark. I had two "leftovers" gift cards for BB once - one had like 5 bucks and change, one about 10 bucks.

    Tried to put them both down for a game that was marked down on sale to $20. First they hassled me over using them on a sale item. Then they tried to say I could only use one gift card per item so I'd need to buy another item.

    If it were coupons, maybe. But they were fucking GIFT CARDS. Worst Buy had already taken the ACTUAL MONEY that they represented, from the gift giver.

    Haven't bought anything from Shit Buy since. Not worth the fucking hassle.

  • I was citing something different than I think you're replying to. But your point is valid.

    For example, my APC UPS comes with a note saying that if I have problems, please contact APC directly instead of returning it to the retailer.

    I figure that (A) they figure they can probably fix my problem faster, and (B) they don't want retailers getting shell-shock from returned units when APC can handle it directly.

Each honest calling, each walk of life, has its own elite, its own aristocracy based on excellence of performance. -- James Bryant Conant