PlayStation®3 General Discussion

[ValiX]

---

Fremean wrote:

Notice: Cross post - Sorry, I didn't see this thread first.

----

I am from a hacker community - not necessarily the bad side that everyone seems to be afraid of.

I am a person who got a new phone, promptly downloaded the firmware on it and customized it well beyond what the original design and specifications for customization were.

I code in several different languages and make software, and hardware tools do my bidding daily.

However, I do not partake in acts that would breach any agreement I have made with anyone (for example, hacking Sony firmware or hardware) or would be illegal.

-

Now, having said that.

I'm of the firm belief that this firmware release from Sony may run foul of the ACCC and the Australian Trade Practices Act.

The Australian Trade Practices Act states

• The goods must be of merchantable quality. That is, they must meet a basic level of quality and performance, taking into account their price and description. They also should be free from defects that were not obvious to you at the time of purchase.
• The goods must be fit for their purpose. That is, they should do what they are supposed to do and be suitable for any purpose that you might have made known to the supplier.
• The goods must match the description you were given or the sample you chose from. For example, any carpet laid must be the same quality and colour as the sample you chose from.
• You must receive clear title to the goods, including goods bought at auction. In other words, you can expect to own the goods outright and any restriction on ownership should be explained to you beforehand.

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/815360

The act makes a very good analogy using carpet. I however propose one more applicable to Sony and this update.

Sony have sold me a Playstation 3 unit capable of being used with the OtherOS feature - legitimately half the reason I purchased such an expensive device. Sony are now removing that feature, decreasing my purchase value by half.

This is akin to selling me a table with 4 legs, and then coming into my house some time later to remove 2 of them.

Yes, they give me the ability to ignore this update, but doing so will break OTHER features of my system - that I have paid for.

So that's a choice of which two legs would I like Sony to remove.

I'm in the process of writing a letter to Sony and the ACCC regarding this news - it's not hard to see that Sony are quite probably in breach of these laws as the device I purchased is clearly labeled and sold for uses that will be disabled after this update.

--

Further based on what I've read here - the box was clearly marked as being able to run other operating systems, that was clearly a factor in my decision to purchase the device, if it was marked "We may decide to remove this feature at a later date" I wouldn't have made this purchase.

This modification DOES change the suitability of the device for a purpose and does put it at odds with the material it was marketed with.

--

Edit: Official source - http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010/03/28/ps3-firmware-v3-21-update/

Also note, I do not believe format shifting (transfering from CD to MP3) to be legal, I also suspect that recording from TV and Radio however tollerated or unenforced is not legal

---

The thing is... the TOS you agree to when you access PSN and again when you download and install a Firmware Update give Sony permission to modify their software as much as they please.

[Fremean]

Which does not imply that I gave them permission to remove a core feature which was clearly used in the marketing and valuing of the original device.

The feature may have been handled, in some way or entirely by software but it was marketed ON THE BOX to a target market that was interested in laying down $700 to use that feature.

The ACCC tends to agree with me in that respect, they're a little gray on firmware updates but they're not at all fond of features that were used to increase the perceived value of the device through marketing being removed. They might not if it wasn't written as a feature on the box but it is.

To satisfy them I must pen a letter to Sony and wait a reasonable amount of time for a reply, then I can contact my local office of fair trading.

In this country - TOS necessarily doesn't trump law and rights, especially when the likes of TOS are presented well after sale and ownership has changed hands, also especially when there is no signatures involved.

I put to you - how long till they remove other features for security?

The built in browser? How often does IE, Firefox, etc suffer a security exploit, surely that's an attack vector (hell it was one of the original ways to JailBreak the iPhone)

The network streaming? Sure, it's secure lol, so was OpenSSH - one of the best vetted secure protocols on earth.

[Lythinari]

As said in other post... somewhere.

---

Fremean wrote:

Which does not imply that I gave them permission to remove a core feature which was clearly used in the marketing and valuing of the original device.

---

The capbilities on the box were all there in the software when you bought the product.

And you do actually agree to them removing features, and that is when you update the software.

[nyx-666]

---

NekedFaerie wrote:
...

As for mod chips, think about it. I brought the console so its mine and I can do what I like with it. If I want to install a modchip then I can and whos going to tell me what I can and cant do to my console? It's mine, I paid for it I will do what I like with it. Will Sony or Microsoft sue me if I install a modchip in it? WIll they sue me if I shove an axe through it? Whats the difference? It's my hardware so I will do what I like with it.

---

I think you need to recheck some of your 'facts'. There have been several court cases Im aware of and theres definately legislation relating to the installation of mod chips and their use.

[Lythinari]

Isnt it because the modchip modify's/reverses the OS software

which is generally a no-no in the IT world unless the software was in public domain.

[GTR34mh]

I really can't believe how some people are taking this far too seriously. Funny how all the arguments for keeping Linux have pretty much all been snuffed out, yet people still try press their broken point...

[kiwiatlarge]

---

NekedFaerie wrote:
...

As for mod chips, think about it. I brought the console so its mine and I can do what I like with it. If I want to install a modchip then I can and whos going to tell me what I can and cant do to my console? It's mine, I paid for it I will do what I like with it. Will Sony or Microsoft sue me if I install a modchip in it? WIll they sue me if I shove an axe through it? Whats the difference? It's my hardware so I will do what I like with it.

---

By all means you can argue whether it is your right or not to tamper with something you've purchased... (HORI stick owners tamper with and modify their sticks as soon as they take them out of the box)... but it is 'their' network, and thus their right to ban you from using it..

Also.. that is the same arguement that copyright infringers use... "Oh I bought the game/CD... I can do anything I want with it..."

[Lion-Face]

Isn't it on the consumers hands? It is up to you to choose and accept the TOS, the agreement that you will play by the rules if you are to install the latest update. If you agree, then you are agreeing to drop Other OS support. If you don't want to agree to that, then don't accept the TOS and don't install the update...Sony are giving you the choice are they not? 

[Zedimus]

A passing thought...

What if Sony decided to keep the "Other OS" option even after it came to light that that the PS3 could be hacked by it.

At first the 1% of users who use "Other OS" would rejoice and cheer, the rest of us would probably say "Meh, whatever".

But then a particualy skilled hacker gets into the PSN and shuts it down.  We all now know what the result of that would be after the leap year incident, No PSN, No Trophys and restricted game access if at all.

Then 99% of users blames Sony for NOT doing somthing earlier.

When weighing up the options, regardless of local laws, Sony would be mad not to remove the "Other OS" option if the Hacking story is true.

I do feel sorry for those who legitamitly use Linux for computing but you can not blame Sony for wanting to protect thier product so 99% of its users will continue to have uniterupted access.

Yes, Sony is a company in the business of making money but there is no profit in taking this action.  Its a simple act of self preservation.

If you want to get angry and blame someone, look no further than the "Hackers", without them there would bo no problem.

Cheers.

[ValiX]

I really don't see why people are complaining. If you like Linux on your big TV so much then buy (or re-use if you have one lying around) a cheapy old laptop or box, put ubuntu on it and output it to your TV. Its more flexible than using your PS3 anyway, as you're not bound by the restrictions of the PPC Architecture and restricted GFX/Memory. Plus you can upgrade the hardware to your heart's content.

Me? I use my PS3 for games and media. If I want to play an emulator or surf the web, I use my computer. If I want to do that on a big screen, then I plug my laptop into my TV and use it as a monitor.

Although I can understand people's frustration, the amount of whinging that is going on is astounding. Especially since the Linux/OtherOS functionality was significantly crippled functionality to begin with - and for the fraction of the price of a PS3, you can create your own Linux box that is infinitely more flexible.