Why you should support the "Other OS" Lawsuits.

[Danpascooch]

Never saw it before, it's not on the box either.

So they changed there mind about it being a pc, big deal, if you want a pc you should have bought one. Personally, them being separate is better, surf the net during loading screens and boring cut scenes.

I proved my point. The only thing you proved is that you're fine with them stealing from you as long as it's not something you care about. Congrats on failing at life.

LordZ, I think you're right, and I support your position, and how you back it up, but be careful, because saying things like that can incur moderator wrath, and I'd hate to see you taken out of this debate.

 

[OmegaXzors]

I will state this:

Sony did say you could not download their update if you chose to keep your buttfuckingly failed OS, Linux. So, cry me a river because 39 million people don't give a shit about this thread.

And, as for LordZ. Welcome to real-life.

Where the news broadcasts "white girl was kidnapped, raped, and found in a ditch. Support this charity to stop things like this later. Also, another hundred dead American soldiers for today's tally. Here's Joe with Sports!"

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions are statistics." - Joseph Stalin

My point? No one cares about your Linux.

 

[Danpascooch]

If you don't think our legal system is heavily influenced and shaped by precedent, then you don't know anything about US law.

Many of the most important cases in history were decided on legal precedent.

I admited that sometime ago.

All I know of law is it's a broken system, filled with loopholes, were all the evidence can point to somebody being the murderer but them being let off on a technicality.

Don't you think murderer cases are alot more important that a "install other OS"?

Sure I do, Murder is more important than my graduation party too, but I don't cancel that because someone I've never heard of murdered someone else I've never heard of, that would be insane.

Murder cases and civil suits are not mutually exclusive, I never claimed this was more important than a murder case, so that accusation is ridiculous.

 

[Danpascooch]

I will state this:

Sony did say you could not download their update if you chose to keep your buttfuckingly failed OS, Linux. So, cry me a river because 39 million people don't give a shit about this thread.

And, as for LordZ. Welcome to real-life.

Where the news broadcasts "white girl was kidnapped, raped, and found in a ditch. Support this charity to stop things like this later. Also, another hundred dead American soldiers for today's tally. Here's Joe with Sports!"

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions are statistics." - Joseph Stalin

My point? No one cares about your Linux.

So, because bad things happen, we should let bad things happen?

I'm sure you're a HUGE contribution to the community.

You can expect a visit from a Mod for that "buttfuckingly failed" comment too BTW

 

[LordZ]

I will state this:

Sony did say you could not download their update if you chose to keep your buttfuckingly failed OS, Linux. So, cry me a river because 39 million people don't give a shit about this thread.

Yeah, it's clear you're an asshole who just came here to shit on people for being upset when a company screwed them. Nice job, now go troll elsewhere.

 

[Danpascooch]

First of all, analogies are flawed by nature, if I wanted it to be perfect, it wouldn't be an analogy, it would be an account of what actually happened. Secondly, Sony did not offer any sort of replacement OS, they didn't change out one for another, they just took something away.

And lastly, in my OP I detail that you lose a lot more than PSN access, because without the firmware update, you won't be able to play any PS3 games that are released from now on.

Bad analogies are flawed by nature. Good analogies hit straight to the heart of the matter.
Here's a good one:
If there was only one PC OS that could pirate software, how long do you think it would take for it to get shut down?

It's a service they provide. The continued providing of such a service indefinitely is not contestable.
At which point people begin to make assumptions on how long the service will be supplied for.
It's a very easy point to make that it is not false advertising, because at the time, the service was available, and now it is discontinued, they have stopped advertising it.

Even if you can call it advertising. Which I still have not seen corroborated.

Here's your advertising: http://playedstation.blogspot.com/p/sony-ps3-promotion.html

 

[Flying Dagger]

Do you know what a "class action" lawsuit means? It means that the plaintiff is MORE than one person.

And if it REALLY is just four people, then Sony are even bigger assholes than I thought, because they could just pay $2,400 (which is basically a penny compared to what they are paying to fight this lawsuit) and be done with it!

A hell of a lot more than "four" people are victims here, there are thousands of people who used that feature.

Also, it's not the army, it's the Air Force, and they aren't suing because it would be a PR disaster to fund a lawsuit with taxpayer dollars.

Since when did the air force worry about PR? as I recall, they don't have to stand for re-election.
The PR disaster would be for the other side, as Sony loses respect for going against a national service.

Don't Sony have special lawyers set aside for fighting lawsuits and writing License Agreements? I merely state it as it would make a lot of sense to have someone on the inside of their company, who knows the ins and outs of the case easily, who wrote the documents the court can bring up, to quash any half baked lawsuits.
It's what I would do.

But if I was sony I'd be fighting this as well, it's their console, they can shut down the PSN, if they so wish. It would be a pretty big dickmove, but that's life. Nothing lasts forever, it just highlights the downsides of a one time payment for internet access.

 

[OmegaXzors]

So, because bad things happen, we should let bad things happen?

I'm sure you're a HUGE contribution to the community.

So, someone steals your bottle and you're going to cry about it? I thought the world had accepted that Windows is the superior OS? Why the fuck would you want to run Linux on a processor that was obsolete before it was even released to the general public? Upgrade your computer and run Linux on that.

This thread holds no valid points. Personally, I don't want Sony to lose because I'm sure the EULA says they hold rights to whatever they choose to do. If they wiped out your trophies and buying history, that's their choice. It fucking says so when they sign up or buy something. For fucks sake.

I like how both of you flame me because you know that what you fight for is irrelevant. How about caring about causes that matter, such as hunger in third-world countries, or animal abuse.

About the Air Force, THIS DIDN'T FUCKING HURT THEM AT ALL. All they care about is how they're going to get replacement PS3's incase one of them goes down. And do you fucking pay attention to what NVidia releases? Who controls our money? Because the Air Force blew tons of dollars out the window buying inferior PS3's to power their super computer when they could have spent half that to get twice the power. Fuck.

 

[omega 616]

Never saw it before, it's not on the box either.

So they changed there mind about it being a pc, big deal, if you want a pc you should have bought one. Personally, them being separate is better, surf the net during loading screens and boring cut scenes.

I proved my point. The only thing you proved is that you're fine with them stealing from you as long as it's not something you care about. Congrats on failing at life.

You might want to watch the way you speak to people if you want to stay a member here.

You really don't get it, do you? I never used it, very few people besides corporations used it so they never stole anything from me.

Even if I had the PS3 for a million years I would never have used it, want to know why? I have a PC. Why would I want 1.5 PC's? It's an insignificant feature they they removed, not stole.

Stealing is a little different but lets not get into semantics.

Fact is if they had left it I would never have used it, would you have? Would anybody on this forum have? Doubtful.

 

[Danpascooch]

Do you know what a "class action" lawsuit means? It means that the plaintiff is MORE than one person.

And if it REALLY is just four people, then Sony are even bigger assholes than I thought, because they could just pay $2,400 (which is basically a penny compared to what they are paying to fight this lawsuit) and be done with it!

A hell of a lot more than "four" people are victims here, there are thousands of people who used that feature.

Also, it's not the army, it's the Air Force, and they aren't suing because it would be a PR disaster to fund a lawsuit with taxpayer dollars.

Since when did the air force worry about PR? as I recall, they don't have to stand for re-election.
The PR disaster would be for the other side, as Sony loses respect for going against a national service.

Don't Sony have special lawyers set aside for fighting lawsuits and writing License Agreements? I merely state it as it would make a lot of sense to have someone on the inside of their company, who knows the ins and outs of the case easily, who wrote the documents the court can bring up, to quash any half baked lawsuits.
It's what I would do.

But if I was sony I'd be fighting this as well, it's their console, they can shut down the PSN, if they so wish. It would be a pretty big dickmove, but that's life. Nothing lasts forever, it just highlights the downsides of a one time payment for internet access.

My point is, the Air Force is funded by tax dollars, they can't just use those dollars to sue Sony, it's not the same as a private citizen suing Sony over this, I don't know all of the intricacies of how and whether or not a government agency can pursue a lawsuit like that, but the point is it's not the same as a private lawsuit, so don't compare them.

And yes, Sony COULD shut down PSN, because it requires upkeep from them, but Linux required no upkeep from them, and it was actually LESS effort to leave it there than to remove it, it was a feature, not a service, very big difference there.

And of course Sony will get their best lawyers on this, how is that relevant?

And yet again, it's not THEIR console, it's YOUR console, if you purchased it, you OWN IT. Otherwise, what did people pay $600 for? Just because they made it doesn't mean they own it, for god sakes, these people BOUGHT it so THEY own it.

 

[Flying Dagger]

Bad analogies are flawed by nature. Good analogies hit straight to the heart of the matter.
Here's a good one:
If there was only one PC OS that could pirate software, how long do you think it would take for it to get shut down?

It's a service they provide. The continued providing of such a service indefinitely is not contestable.
At which point people begin to make assumptions on how long the service will be supplied for.
It's a very easy point to make that it is not false advertising, because at the time, the service was available, and now it is discontinued, they have stopped advertising it.

Even if you can call it advertising. Which I still have not seen corroborated.

Here's your advertising: http://playedstation.blogspot.com/p/sony-ps3-promotion.html

Writing in the manual and details in a subsect of the website do not create substantiative advertising.

Furthermore the website advertising it has since changed to explain that the firmware update is incompatible with Open Platform.
At all times it was advertised as being Open platform, it was open platform, when it wasn't, it wasn't advertised as such.

But don't ignore my above point on analogies, to further it, I'll make a bad one.
If Marks & Spencers advertise grapes as half price, they have to sell them at half price.
They do not have to sell them at half price forever.

 

[Danpascooch]

Never saw it before, it's not on the box either.

So they changed there mind about it being a pc, big deal, if you want a pc you should have bought one. Personally, them being separate is better, surf the net during loading screens and boring cut scenes.

I proved my point. The only thing you proved is that you're fine with them stealing from you as long as it's not something you care about. Congrats on failing at life.

You might want to watch the way you speak to people if you want to stay a member here.

You really don't get it, do you? I never used it, very few people besides corporations used it so they never stole anything from me.

Even if I had the PS3 for a million years I would never have used it, want to know why? I have a PC. Why would I want 1.5 PC's? It's an insignificant feature they they removed, not stole.

Stealing is a little different but lets not get into semantics.

Fact is if they had left it I would never have used it, would you have? Would anybody on this forum have? Doubtful.

You can't assume most of the people on this forum wouldn't have used it, you have no basis for that claim.

And yes, it IS stealing, because they are stealing the $600 you used to purchase a device that was promised to have Linux capability.

 

[omega 616]

Sure I do, Murder is more important than my graduation party too, but I don't cancel that because someone I've never heard of murdered someone else I've never heard of, that would be insane.

Murder cases and civil suits are not mutually exclusive, I never claimed this was more important than a murder case, so that accusation is ridiculous.

Exactly my point, if people can get let off with murders over technicalities then install other OS isn't going to effect anything.

Things will always be removed, when the things they remove are considered important then things will change.

You can't assume most of the people on this forum wouldn't have used it, you have no basis for that claim.

And yes, it IS stealing, because they are stealing the $600 you used to purchase a device that was promised to have Linux capability.

Is that a use of hyperbole? That claim implies people only bought a PS3 for it's Linux capabilities which couldn't be further from the truth, thats like saying people only bought the 360 'cos you can customize the avatar.

Edit. I can assume all of the people on this will download or already have downloaded the firmware. If I am wrong so be it.

 

[Flying Dagger]

A service implies that it required regular upkeep on Sony's part, this was not a service, it was a FEATURE, the distinction being that it would continue to exist on its own had Sony not stepped in and actually made an effort to have it removed.

I know you think you have a good analogy there, but I have no idea what you're talking about with it, I would say it's not even an analogy, but to say that, I would have to understand what you're trying to say with it first. An analogy is "_____ is like ______" it's not "Here's a hypothetical question:" Perhaps you think my analogy is bad because you don't know what an analogy is?

The situation at sony is like the situation I previously described. The answers remain the same, you just had to fill in a couple of gaps.

Their arguments for removing it is that it allows people to pirate software. "This is like" if only Linux on pc allowed people to pirate software. It would be shut down.

The flaw in the analogy is that in the second case it decreases contestability in the market, but in the first it increases it.
It was also a "Rhetorical" question. You know what those are right?

 

[Danpascooch]

Bad analogies are flawed by nature. Good analogies hit straight to the heart of the matter.
Here's a good one:
If there was only one PC OS that could pirate software, how long do you think it would take for it to get shut down?

It's a service they provide. The continued providing of such a service indefinitely is not contestable.
At which point people begin to make assumptions on how long the service will be supplied for.
It's a very easy point to make that it is not false advertising, because at the time, the service was available, and now it is discontinued, they have stopped advertising it.

Even if you can call it advertising. Which I still have not seen corroborated.

Here's your advertising: http://playedstation.blogspot.com/p/sony-ps3-promotion.html

Writing in the manual and details in a subsect of the website do not create substantiative advertising.

Furthermore the website advertising it has since changed to explain that the firmware update is incompatible with Open Platform.
At all times it was advertised as being Open platform, it was open platform, when it wasn't, it wasn't advertised as such.

But don't ignore my above point on analogies, to further it, I'll make a bad one.
If Marks & Spencers advertise grapes as half price, they have to sell them at half price.
They do not have to sell them at half price forever.

That is a bad analogy, but it seems to be one you adhere to with your argument that they "have since changed" the advertising.

Let me set this straight, at PURCHASE TIME (the only time that matters, once you've already payed them, you're already out the $600) they said they had Linux, now they don't. It was a feature not a service, so they can't just cancel it like they could something that requires upkeep costs from them.

And sure, they could change the prices on those grapes for FUTURE PURCHASES much like Sony stopped advertising the feature and anyone who bought a PS3 after that point has no case, HOWEVER those grape sellers could NOT visit the houses of all the grape customers who have bought grapes in the past and demand more money because the price changed. Which is what Sony did, they retroactively slashed a feature, instead of simply not including it in future units.

 

[Danpascooch]

A service implies that it required regular upkeep on Sony's part, this was not a service, it was a FEATURE, the distinction being that it would continue to exist on its own had Sony not stepped in and actually made an effort to have it removed.

I know you think you have a good analogy there, but I have no idea what you're talking about with it, I would say it's not even an analogy, but to say that, I would have to understand what you're trying to say with it first. An analogy is "_____ is like ______" it's not "Here's a hypothetical question:" Perhaps you think my analogy is bad because you don't know what an analogy is?

The situation at sony is like the situation I previously described. The answers remain the same, you just had to fill in a couple of gaps.

Their arguments for removing it is that it allows people to pirate software. "This is like" if only Linux on pc allowed people to pirate software. It would be shut down.

The flaw in the analogy is that in the second case it decreases contestability in the market, but in the first it increases it.
It was also a "Rhetorical" question. You know what those are right?

I do, and I also know that a Rhetorical question is not an analogy. And that something can be both a hypothetical question and a rhetorical question at the same time.

 

[LordZ]

You might want to watch the way you speak to people if you want to stay a member here.

You really don't get it, do you? I never used it, very few people besides corporations used it so they never stole anything from me.

Even if I had the PS3 for a million years I would never have used it, want to know why? I have a PC. Why would I want 1.5 PC's? It's an insignificant feature they they removed, not stole.

Stealing is a little different but lets not get into semantics.

Fact is if they had left it I would never have used it, would you have? Would anybody on this forum have? Doubtful.

I've used it about as much as I've used my PS3. I was mostly just waiting for better development before really putting any use into it. The fact is, they sold me a product with X features and now they're forcing me to choose between them after the fact.

 

[Flying Dagger]

My point is, the Air Force is funded by tax dollars, they can't just use those dollars to sue Sony, it's not the same as a private citizen suing Sony over this, I don't know all of the intricacies of how and whether or not a government agency can pursue a lawsuit like that, but the point is it's not the same as a private lawsuit, so don't compare them.

And yes, Sony COULD shut down PSN, because it requires upkeep from them, but Linux required no upkeep from them, and it was actually LESS effort to leave it there than to remove it, it was a feature, not a service, very big difference there.

And of course Sony will get their best lawyers on this, how is that relevant?

And yet again, it's not THEIR console, it's YOUR console, if you purchased it, you OWN IT. Otherwise, what did people pay $600 for? Just because they made it doesn't mean they own it, for god sakes, these people BOUGHT it so THEY own it.

1. The airforce may be funded by tax dollars but it can spend them how it wants, if it thought the act warranted a lawsuit, they'd do one, knowing that Sony would have to cough up their fees.

2. The point being that the lawyers are already being paid, cutting a huge amount of the extraneous legal costs.

3. Who own's the rights to the Linux software, PS3 firmware, or even a game software?
Just because you paid for something doesn't mean you own it.

 

[omega 616]

You might want to watch the way you speak to people if you want to stay a member here.

You really don't get it, do you? I never used it, very few people besides corporations used it so they never stole anything from me.

Even if I had the PS3 for a million years I would never have used it, want to know why? I have a PC. Why would I want 1.5 PC's? It's an insignificant feature they they removed, not stole.

Stealing is a little different but lets not get into semantics.

Fact is if they had left it I would never have used it, would you have? Would anybody on this forum have? Doubtful.

I've used it about as much as I've used my PS3. I was mostly just waiting for better development before really putting any use into it. The fact is, they sold me a product with X features and now they're forcing me to choose between them after the fact.

I will bet you will install the firmware and in less than a year you will have forgotten all about this.

If you were that bothered you would be suing Sony aswell and I doubt you are.

 

[Flying Dagger]

That is a bad analogy, but it seems to be one you adhere to with your argument that they "have since changed" the advertising.

Let me set this straight, at PURCHASE TIME (the only time that matters, once you've already payed them, you're already out the $600) they said they had Linux, now they don't. It was a feature not a service, so they can't just cancel it like they could something that requires upkeep costs from them.

And sure, they could change the prices on those grapes for FUTURE PURCHASES much like Sony stopped advertising the feature and anyone who bought a PS3 after that point has no case, HOWEVER those grape sellers could NOT visit the houses of all the grape customers who have bought grapes in the past and demand more money because the price changed. Which is what Sony did, they retroactively slashed a feature, instead of simply not including it in future units.

The way the website tells it to me, and as someone who does not own a ps3 and is looking at this from a purely legal and economic standpoint, is that updating is not compulsory. You have access to the linux firmware, it just voids access to the service of PSN.
From that legal standpoint, you have access to all your features, just not all at once.

Your analogy would be improved if you changed it from "coming to your house and stealing your grapes" with "changed your green grapes for red grapes"
Sure some people will be outraged and want nothing to do with red grapes, some might be a little upset but realise the two are, on the whole, interchangeable, and most will not care.