Assholes trying to take down PSN

[Rurouni_Fencer]

Hackers are fags who need their heads caved in

..And now you are officially on ignore from pretty much 95% of the community..

Go back to your Westboro Baptist Church and keep slinging the ignorance..

[MrPopo]

Ok guys, the mods are taking care of it. Let's focus on whether or not Sony is evil.

[ZeroAX]

Ok guys, the mods are taking care of it. Let's focus on whether or not Sony is evil.

banhammer?

And yeah Sony is evil, just as every corporation. As I always say, if they could use you as a slave, they'd do it.

[Rurouni_Fencer]

I don't think Sony is necessarily evil - just greedy, like all major corps. They're in it for as much money as they can make, like all corporations. But the extreme ends that they go to (ie - controlling how you use their product after you purchase it,) is kind of irrational when it comes to the legal threats and removal of certain features, (other OS, not PS2 BC, btw..)

Sony's no different from a car company:
If I buy a new car and decide to throw in a turbocharger under the hood, I can do whatever I want - I bought it. But because Nissan or Ford didn't manufacture the car with that intent, they void your warranty. So you choose what's more important - more HP or a warranty.
If I buy a new PS3 and decide to throw some Atari emulators or Linux under it's hood, I can do whatever I want - I bought it. But because Sony didn't manufacture the console with that intent, they void your access to online services. So you choose what's more important - more features or PSN.

[brunoafh]

My problem with the "Sony is evil" thing is that they're just an electronics company for chrissake. No company that produces electronic entertainment devices should ever be described as "evil", regardless of how many morals their business decisions lack.

There ARE evil corporations in the world, but the one that's responsible for your shiny video game player just isn't one of them, no matter how pissed off you are at them.

[Hatta]

Let's focus on whether or not Sony is evil.

The question isn't whether Sony is evil, it's how evil Sony is. I'd say they're more evil than your average petty criminal, but less evil than AIG or BP.

Also, brunoafh, this is about more than just a game console. It's about essential property rights and equal protection under the law. If a corporation can do whatever it wants to an individual's property without recourse, I guarantee it doesn't stop with just game consoles.

[Niode]

I don't think Sony is necessarily evil - just greedy, like all major corps. They're in it for as much money as they can make, like all corporations. But the extreme ends that they go to (ie - controlling how you use their product after you purchase it,) is kind of irrational when it comes to the legal threats and removal of certain features, (other OS, not PS2 BC, btw..)

Sony's no different from a car company:
If I buy a new car and decide to throw in a turbocharger under the hood, I can do whatever I want - I bought it. But because Nissan or Ford didn't manufacture the car with that intent, they void your warranty. So you choose what's more important - more HP or a warranty.
If I buy a new PS3 and decide to throw some Atari emulators or Linux under it's hood, I can do whatever I want - I bought it. But because Sony didn't manufacture the console with that intent, they void your access to online services. So you choose what's more important - more features or PSN.

That's not quite the same. Sony allowed you to put linux on the machine. OtherOS was a feature of the machine at the point of sale. They then removed it.

It's more like a car company allowing you to put a turbocharger in a car and stating that it would not void your warranty, then removing that clause from the warranty. You either remove the turbo charger and keep your warranty, or keep the turbo charger and lose your warranty. The only difference between this and what Sony did is that the removal of OtherOS is a true Lose/Lose situation. At least your car will function just the same with or without a warranty.

[Rurouni_Fencer]

I don't think Sony is necessarily evil - just greedy, like all major corps. They're in it for as much money as they can make, like all corporations. But the extreme ends that they go to (ie - controlling how you use their product after you purchase it,) is kind of irrational when it comes to the legal threats and removal of certain features, (other OS, not PS2 BC, btw..)

Sony's no different from a car company:
If I buy a new car and decide to throw in a turbocharger under the hood, I can do whatever I want - I bought it. But because Nissan or Ford didn't manufacture the car with that intent, they void your warranty. So you choose what's more important - more HP or a warranty.
If I buy a new PS3 and decide to throw some Atari emulators or Linux under it's hood, I can do whatever I want - I bought it. But because Sony didn't manufacture the console with that intent, they void your access to online services. So you choose what's more important - more features or PSN.

That's not quite the same. Sony allowed you to put linux on the machine. OtherOS was a feature of the machine at the point of sale. They then removed it.

It's more like a car company allowing you to put a turbocharger in a car and stating that it would not void your warranty, then removing that clause from the warranty. You either remove the turbo charger and keep your warranty, or keep the turbo charger and lose your warranty. Lose/Lose.

well...poop!

[irixith]

I only pirate games that I wouldn't normally buy. In other words, my piracy does not cost game creators any money.

What a bizarre world view you have!

Me, I only steal cars I wouldn't normally buy, food I wouldn't normally eat, and movies I wouldn't normally watch. After all, my theft isn't costing those companies any money, because I never intended to buy those products anyway.

Sounds like we'd get along great!

Let me just point out to you that copying a few bytes over the internet is not the same as stealing a car/food/DVD. When you steal a physical product that has cost the person stocking the product. It's a loss, they can't sell it if they no longer have it. Making a copy still means that the original is in tact and can still be sold. It's not cost anybody any money.

If I could make a copy of a car as easily as I could when pirating a film/game I would. You know why? Because it would be easy. Have I cost anybody any money? No because I've copied it.

WARNING: This is probably going to be long, so I'll try and make it amusing where I can.

Let me point out to you that it *IS* the same. Just because you can do it from the privacy of your own home over an anonymous proxy where no-one can see you and there is little to no risk of being caught, does not make it any less of a theft than brazenly walking into a store and lifting a physical item.

I'm getting pretty tired of hearing the "it's a copy" argument. It's clever and obfuscates the point, but surely anyone with a dose of common sense must see past that. Sure, it's a copy. A copy that you've taken and enjoyed without paying for. Just because the original still exists does not mean that suddenly they've lost no money from your theft of a copy. You, a potential consumer who would have had to potentially buy the product, didn't. In fact, your copy "which isn't costing companies any money" is actually far worse than the theft of the physical item -- you can only steal as many physical items that a) exist or b) you can carry/make off with, limiting the extent of the monetary loss. You can distribute as many copies of an item as you would like, exponentially increasing the amount of the loss. Let's use an example:

Let's say there was this new "Game X". Game X costs $5. Joe buys his copy of Game X, and then he uploads it onto every seedy FTP, torrent site and usenet server on the internet. 10,000 people download and enjoy Game X (or, since we're talking about the internet, more like 10,000 people download it and then run to their favourite message board to complain about how much it sucks). 10,000 people * $5 a pop = $50,000 that the developer of Game X is never going to see. Say 50,000 people download it. At $5 a pop, that's $250,000 the developer of Game X is never going to see. The developer must be getting pretty pissed off at this point. Maybe he's going to lapse on his mortgage payments, or not be able to afford to put food on the table for his family. All that hard work and effort blown away, all because a few self-entitled snots on the internet think they aren't hurting anyone, and that somehow the copies they downloaded have zero value.

(Aside: That's actually the crux of this whole silly issue (value) -- the availability at your fingertips of any piece of software, any music track, any movie, any game, whatever, has actually managed to devalue the content. When you file down all consumable content to just bits and bytes, it feels valueless. Ask any pirate who's been pirating since the BBS days, and they'll tell you all about pirate's syndrome. Gotta have 'em all, but fucked if play any of them for more than five minutes. The content has no value because you ascribe it so. Once you no longer have to exchange money for it, your brain automatically doesn't assign any value to it. A physical game, in contrast, has value because it's something you can touch and feel and put on a shelf. Even if that physical item was stolen, it still has value. Weird, right? However, your mental devaluing of digital content does not actually take away the true value of the product, and that's a hard line to cross if you've been at it long enough.)

Conversely, let's say that Joe walks into his local game store and lifts a copy of Game X. That's $5 that the developer will never see. Of course, Joe has his triangular hat and eye patch on, and in addition to the theft of the physical copy, he uploaded it as per the paragraph above, and now he's caused the developer to lose $50,005.

The moral of the story is:

- Joe is a dirty, dirty thief.
- The piracy is not theft, it's piracy (aka a copy) argument is so ridiculous it makes my head hurt, especially when otherwise sane, logical and educated people spout it.

[ZeroAX]

I'm not going to argue that morally it is the same, but legally normal theft is a lot more dangerous to society than IP theft.