Anonymous strikes again

[YoshiEgg25]

These threads are always so amusing.

[MrPopo]

Regardless of what the TOS says, Sony cannot unilaterally change the terms of contracts.

Actually, I'm fairly certain that the TOS contains a clause that does state that they can unilaterally change the terms, or at the very least can change it and require you to agree to the new one before you can use the new update.

Edit: Here we go, as taken from here.

14. GENERAL LEGAL

SCEA, at its sole discretion, may modify the terms of this Agreement at any time, including imposing a fee for creating PSN accounts. By accepting this Agreement or by accessing Sony Online Services, you agree to be bound by all current terms of the Agreement.
...
If material changes to this Agreement are made, you will be notified by e-mail or a posting as you sign in to Sony Online Services. If necessary, you will be given additional choices regarding such change(s). Your continued use of Sony Online Services, including use of your associated Sub Account(s), will signify your acceptance of these changes. If you do not accept material changes to the Agreement, then you may contact us to terminate this Agreement and your account(s). If there are funds in your wallet as of the date SCEA terminates your account, those funds may be refunded to you and you will not be able to access Sony Online Services.

[FerretGamer]

(^_^)

These kinds of stories please me. Good work, hackers. Let's teach Sony a lesson.

I don't mean to add any fuel to this fire, but I really cannot help but fully disagree with that statement. There are far more effective and appropriate measures that an individual/persons can take instead of resorting to some "script kiddies" activity.

In the end, Anonymous is only hurting the people that they hope to gain support from; that is, gamers. As voiced by others in this topic, I have very limited time when I come home from work. Now, I can't enjoy playing Socom 4 with my long time friend in NY because of this malicious activity.

Sorry, I didn't mean to extend this discussion, but in this case I felt I needed to at least say something.

[Rurouni_Fencer]

[sevin0seven]

those guys on the back (dancing) kinda reminds me of Elite Beat Agents...

[CFFJR]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxtmQDCyLE8

[Ack]

Man, Gorbachev has some sweet moves.

[noiseredux]

PlayStation®Network Service Outage 4/21/2011
Answer ID: 2185

We’re aware certain functions of PlayStation Network are down. It may be a full day or two before we’re able to get the service completely back up and running. Please stay tuned to this space for more details, and we’ll update you again as soon as we can.

Thank you very much for your patience while we work to resolve this matter.

During this time you may:

* Not be able to access the PlayStation®Store
* Have difficulty signing in to the PlayStation®Network
* Not be able to play online games
* See a maintenance page when attempting to access the PlayStation®Network


Note: When you log into the PlayStation Network, a message may appear which states, "the PlayStation Network has been suspended". This does not mean that your account has been suspended; it simply means the PlayStation Network has been taken offline. Please wait until the maintenance window has passed before attempting to connect to the PlayStation Network again. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

[Niode]

Regardless of what the TOS says, Sony cannot unilaterally change the terms of contracts.

Why do you keep acting like what Sony did was illegal when numerous court cases have made it clear that they were within their rights as far as the law is concerned?

Really? Please cite a reference. It's news to me.

Also, ToS and EULA ARE NOT Law. Simple as. This is the issue that I have and one of the reasons why I wish this shit would get taken to court properly as in a class action lawsuit AGAINST Sony, not Sony playing 'Who's got the biggest dick' with the little guys. I want to know whether what Sony did is lawful. To me it isn't justified, not in the slightest, they took away something I paid for. It's the biggest fuck you they can give to a consumer. They sold me a console that does X, Y and Z. Now it can only do X and Y. If I'd have known Sony can and will remove features because it 'possibly' could be used against piracy I wouldn't have bought the damn thing in a million years. Piracy is an inevitability. EVERY system gets broken. No system is perfect. Piracy is guaranteed. I don't give a flying fuck whether or not you used the feature or not. I DID. Half the time it was the sole reason I turned the fucking thing on.

[brunoafh]

Why do you keep acting like what Sony did was illegal when numerous court cases have made it clear that they were within their rights as far as the law is concerned?

Really? Please cite a reference. It's news to me.

I'm not going to just dump a bunch of Google links like a douche, but here's one.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010 ... 999045.htm

There's also this site that documents all lawsuits filed against Sony over the issue so far. Some are still underway, but the court has sided with Sony on every one that has been decided.