Poll: Identify Yourself - Sony vs Geohotz

Recommended Videos

Salem_Wolf

New member
Jul 9, 2009
417
0
0
Okay, so we can't seem to have too many threads without people going nuts and bashing others opinions, so there's one rule if you post in this thread, and please let's use the honor system: there is no quoting another post. You wanna say something? Do it without quoting, that way your comment is more likely to be missed to avoid an argument. That cool?

So, which side of the fence are you on? And if you so want to, explain yourself. Be honest, too, if you're blind by the issues and just go with whatever Sony is against, admit it. Likewise, if you're against Sony for no reason you just hate them, go ahead and admit it. Rule 1: No quoting. So if people want to question what you believe in, you might not see it.

Yes I do see the potential for this not working, but The Escapist is the only place I really think I could post this. So let's get started. Are you:

A) The "Informed Sony Side"; you know the facts, you've kept up with it, and you side with Sony.

B) The "Blind Sony Fanboy"; you purchase the games, systems, all without a whim and may not have much knowledge in the case but if Sony says it you're with them.

C) The "Informed Hacker Side"; you're for the hacker scene, you know the facts and think Sony is wrong.

D) The "Blind Hacker Fanboy"; you've probably been hacking consoles your whole life, you don't care about Sony and are just siding with your like-minded peers.

Or E) "Neutral", you just don't give a damn.

Personally, I'm A, Informed Sony Side. I get they're a business, they're in it for profit, I don't agree with how the OtherOS went away and that was a mess, I'm with GeoHotz on trying to give it back, but against the potential that you could use the key he distributed to pirate games, even if he wasn't intending for it to be used that way, but it's a mess because he distributed the security key and that's where the problem lies. That's why Sony went after him and I don't agree with what he did at all.

The way I see it, the only analogy that truly works is...none. It's a unique case, but I have one that I think comes close.

It's like buying chicken from KFC or Popeye's, you own that chicken and can do with what you want to it. You can dunk it in ketchup or smother in A1 sauce, thereby modifying it as you could a Sony console (I.E. turning it into a grill) and they won't care. You can skin it and make it into a sandwich, maybe even make a flashlight out of it (if at all possible). The company doesn't care. But then you reverse-engineer the recipe and post it online for other people to do with what you want, your intentions that they modify their own bucket of chicken for a "healthier" alternative. But we all know that people would just start using it to "pirate" chicken by making it themselves. I feel the analogy comes close.

Anyway, give your thoughts and refrain from quoting people, let this (try) to be a friendly, intelligent discussion on your thoughts and why.
 

Awexsome

Were it so easy
Mar 25, 2009
1,549
0
0
I may not agree with everything Sony does in the name of fighting piracy... but this one they were in the right on. Going after each individual pirate is never going to work. Go after the sources that cause it. This guy releasing Sony's code would be a major source.

Saying that he didn't control what people did with it doesn't exempt him from responsibility to release the code in the first place. Ask Limewire. He built himself on this crusade against Sony but caved when his lawyers probably told him that he had no chance in hell of winning this. Something I would agree with.
 

Thunderhorse31

New member
Apr 22, 2009
1,818
0
0
Both parties are right and wrong.

As a buyer/owner he should be able to do whatever he wants to his own property (in this case, the PS3), but he shouldn't be enabling other people to hack/crack/pirate or any other manner of illegal activity either.

And yes, your chicken analogy works well enough to get that point across. ;)
 

Drummie666

New member
Jan 1, 2011
739
0
0
I chose neutral, but that's not really what my opinion is. From what I've gathered, both Sony and Geohotz are being dickheads to a precisely equal level.
 

Mr Shrike

New member
Aug 13, 2010
534
0
0
I don't really care either way, to be honest. They're both being jerks and can fight it out as much as they want.
 
Aug 25, 2009
4,611
0
0
Neutral. I don't know enough about either side to make a fully informed decision.

As far as I can see (taking into account the above) Sony have not in any way acted illegally. That is to say that they broke no laws. However, I am fully aware that they (like every business on the planet) probably exploited all sorts of loopholes during the trial.

HOWEVER

The GeoHot hacker has (taking into account my opening statement) broken the law as far as I can see. He has then not exactly endeared himself to me with his ridiculous claims of not knowing Sony America existed, his taking a vacation in the middle of all this (I don't care if it was pre-scheduled or not, if you want to show you're taking something seriously, you don't leave the country halfway through.) Basically I have seen nothing to make me think he is anything more than the sort of entitled dickhead that I tend to lump most hackers of his ilk into.

Long story short, neither side has exactly showered themselves in glory over this for me, and I'm sure if I cared enough to get into the law of it I'd find all sorts of transgressions on both sides. Reservedly I side with Sony, because on the face of it GeoHot broke the law (and I law which I, again reservedly, agree with) whereas they did not break the law, though they perhaps exploited it, as any company will inevitably do.
 

mireko

Umbasa
Sep 23, 2010
2,003
0
0
What Hotz did was illegal, so Sony is in the right when it comes to their lawsuit. They were wrong to remove Other OS, but that doesn't actually have anything to do with the matter at hand, which is that he distributed their keys online.

For the record, modding your console isn't illegal. That's not what he was prosecuted for, he committed copyright infringement. Enough moral outrage already.

[sub]Sticking to A, in other words.[/sub]
 

Chibz

New member
Sep 12, 2008
2,158
0
0
Is it bad that I want to see both sides damaged from this?

I'm just sick of the whole stupidity. Plus Geohotz looks like a douchebag.
 

kaioshade

New member
Apr 10, 2011
200
0
0
I am actually with Sony on this one.
People cried that Sony took off OtherOS on their machines and they wanted it back. A method was discovered to open up the console and get Linux back on there.

And....

Backup Loaders. Tons of them. There is one project for getting Linux back on the PS3 but quite a few backup loaders. That tosses out just about the entire argument the hackers had and pretty much makes Sony look completely right in this case.
 

MurderousToaster

New member
Aug 9, 2008
3,074
0
0
I'm with Sony, because, as far as I can see, George Hotz is coming off more and more as a dick with every passing altercation that occurs. Also, Sony's case is legally correct - Hotz did violate their copyrights.
 

MetallicaRulez0

New member
Aug 27, 2008
2,503
0
0
I'm neutral. Hacking and piracy are both wrong, and there's really no excuse for what George Hotz did. On the other hand, Sony handled this extremely poorly. Both sides are pretty retarded in this argument, I think.
 

Akihiko

Raincoat Killer
Aug 21, 2008
952
0
0
Neutral I guess. I'm not against hacking, permitting people don't use it to 'harm' others. However Geohotz really hasn't done himself any favours, and neither has Sony.
 

Salem_Wolf

New member
Jul 9, 2009
417
0
0
Awesome replies so far, and very well opinionated from everyone. :D If the thread dies here I'd still call it a success. The reason I asked in the first place is because I just like to see where everyone was at, what they thought about the whole ordeal without being in the middle of a fight, keep 'em coming. :)
 

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
I may not be a big fan of the PS3 but I'm on Sony's side with this. What Geohotz did was illegal.