Anonymous strikes again

[MrPopo]

Software can be changed after launch with patches. This includes removal of features. I'm fairly certain any EULA out there allows for that, so Sony is abiding by the contract you agreed to.

Furthermore, the PSN terms of use state that you have to be using the most up-to-date firmware to access it. So Sony is very much in the right to keep you off if you don't want to update your firmware.

The judge ruled in favor of the law. The judge even commented that what Sony did is probably a douche move, but it's fully legal. Usually when people bribe judges it's to get them to ignore the law, not follow it.

So? Just because something is legal, doesn't make it OK. Bribing a congressman to vote in favor of a bill is completely legal too, but it's not OK.

"This company is fucking me over! Oh wait, that's legal? Oh OK. I don't mind it then."
Sorry Popo. I can't think like that.

Again, I'm not questioning the potential doucheyness of what's going on, I'm saying that the judge was fully in the right to throw out the case.

[Jmustang1968]

Software can be changed after launch with patches. This includes removal of features. I'm fairly certain any EULA out there allows for that, so Sony is abiding by the contract you agreed to.

Furthermore, the PSN terms of use state that you have to be using the most up-to-date firmware to access it. So Sony is very much in the right to keep you off if you don't want to update your firmware.

The judge ruled in favor of the law. The judge even commented that what Sony did is probably a douche move, but it's fully legal. Usually when people bribe judges it's to get them to ignore the law, not follow it.

So? Just because something is legal, doesn't make it OK. Bribing a congressman to vote in favor of a bill is completely legal too, but it's not OK.

"This company is fucking me over! Oh wait, that's legal? Oh OK. I don't mind it then."
Sorry Popo. I can't think like that.

But they aren't fucking you over or affecting you in any way. They are trying to pevent people from pirating software. You have no concern for a company's rights at all? To protect their investments and ips?

[Inazuma]

I have no problem sleeping at night, and am not by any stretch some "selfish idiot gamer".

Do you use PSN or Xbox Live? If so, you would qualify. You have to agree to give up your right to sue in order to use these services.

[noiseredux]

Bribing a congressman to vote in favor of a bill is completely legal too,

it is?

[dsheinem]

I have no problem sleeping at night, and am not by any stretch some "selfish idiot gamer".

Do you use PSN or Xbox Live? If so, you would qualify. You have to agree to give up your right to sue in order to use these services.

No you don't. You can choose to agree to arbitration instead of participation in a class action lawsuit or (at least with Sony) you can opt out with relatively minimal effort.

Really: if you are going to make an argument at least make an informed one. Otherwise, you're the one coming across like an idiot...

[AppleQueso]

Bribing a congressman to vote in favor of a bill is completely legal too,

it is?

He's obviously talking about lobbying.

[Inazuma]

But they aren't fucking you over or affecting you in any way. They are trying to pevent people from pirating software. You have no concern for a company's rights at all? To protect their investments and ips?

I don't think it's right to punish legitimate customers in the name of piracy protection. It never stops piracy and only serves to give people more justification to do it, myself included.

If a company provides a good product and treats me right, I want to give them money to support such a thing. If they treat me like a pirate and punish me for shit I didn't do, then fuck them. I will stop giving them money.

[noiseredux]

He's obviously talking about lobbying.

ah ok. It was the choice of words that threw me off.

[MrPopo]

But they aren't fucking you over or affecting you in any way. They are trying to pevent people from pirating software. You have no concern for a company's rights at all? To protect their investments and ips?

I don't think it's right to punish legitimate customers in the name of piracy protection. It never stops piracy and only serves to give people more justification to do it, myself included.

If a company provides a good product and treats me right, I want to give them money to support such a thing. If they treat me like a pirate and punish me for shit I didn't do, then fuck them. I will stop giving them money.

You've never used Other OS, so how precisely are you being punished here?

And you dodged the question. Aren't companies afforded rights to protect their investments and IPs? Each side has to give a little and meet somewhere in the middle.

[Jmustang1968]

I have no problem sleeping at night, and am not by any stretch some "selfish idiot gamer".

Do you use PSN or Xbox Live? If so, you would qualify. You have to agree to give up your right to sue in order to use these services.

Yay I am a selfish idiot gamer having fun and enjoying my consoles and games. I guess you can sit there and be miserable fighting the imaginary good fight for peoples right to try and get a quick buck over being denied pirating assistance and other such nonsense most of these class action lawsuits are about.

I'm not giving up my right to sue as I would'nt sue anyway. I don't feel entitled to mass compensation because some 60$ game doesn't play exactly how I want it. The effort isn't worth it anyway, id just cut my losses and move on. Might as well start suing companies that make shitty games because they wasted my time and money...