but here is the POINT people could still refuse the update.

yes that make's it where you loose the majority of it's function's , but you would still be able to keep Linux.

Sony did not want Mod chipped PS3 access to the PSN. and It may still happen, but atleast they did something for their share holder's.

you cannot tell me share holder's would not have wanted Sony to do something anything to prevent this.

the point is if Geohot would have just used linux and not used a board shocker and than showed everyone how to do this, this pretty much allowed people to get the first step's of a Mod chip on the PS3. if he would have just stuck to Linux this would never of happened.

at this point , while I like Linux, the hacking community did not have to go to the route that they know full well would lead to Piracy.

Saying you don't condone Piracy , but yet show other people in great length how you did it and posting it across the internet is exactly like what happened to a certain book that got banned EVEN THOUIGH COPY'S ARE STILL FLOATING you may have heard of it the :

Anarchist Cook Book

THE POINT BEING Geohot may not condone Piracy, but he knew full well that what he would when released to the public would indeed lead to it, not only that but it would help Pirates not hinder them, he did not care about his effect it would have on Piracy.

Sony took what action they needed to remove a security Risk.

many People my not like it, but anyone can see that when people already had ideas for Mod chip's and GEOHOT's method already was used to Mod the PS3 already you could understand why Sony did this.

like I stated Geohot could have used Linux to make HomeBrew without modding the hardware, but Geohot decided to do so and release his Hack, Sony mostlike did this in response to the Mod Chip bypass more than just doing this out of spite. but it's not like the Hacker's had to do this, He even stated this would lead to playing backup's of playstation 3 software.

The PS3 was advertised as having a set of features. Removing one of them later, or telling a consumer to choose between them (which is still effectively removing them), can still count as false advertising, regardless of the reason for doing it.

I can understand they don't want the system modded, but this could even speed up that process. Pissing off the hacking community is NEVER a good idea. I wouldn't be surprised if the normally docile, awesome hackers come out and and find other ways through with or without the other OS option. And, if this gets taken to court, and Sony loses, they could be ordered to restore the feature anyways.

So in a single move, they could bring up 2 bad results, instead of just taking a possible hit from piracy and move on. Not to mention, you would still need the bluray discs and burners, and the write speed isn't amazing, it's not like it's hassle or cost free to pirate. 

Most companies act in manners to either minimize losses and maximize profits, but this is a big risk from the 3rd place console manufacturer, and they're increasing the range of possible losses. 

But the main point is that this just stomps all over consumer rights. What if someone finds some kind of strange exploit through the use of blu-ray discs that make the PS3 easily hackable? And Sony's only course of action at that point is to remove blu-ray usage? Is that bad only because more people use it? Or is it fine, Sony would have to cover their tracks after all, who cares about consumer rights, they need to minimize losses. I know it's an extreme example, but I think the point there is important. How much a feature is used is unimportant, it was advertised, it should stay there.

 but is that not the point anyway. the Hacking community had somewhat the best open of all the game platform's out  of all three system's and yet that was not good enough? Sony's software does not have sales for most of their software at 6 million copy's or higher in sales. Even Geohot knew this would lead to "playing backup's"

which alway's lead's to piracy. right now moderen warfare 2 was pirated over 4 million time's and is still going.

Invester's see that and you cannot say they don't want sony to take some kind of action over this?

"What if someone finds some kind of strange exploit through the use of blu-ray discs that make the PS3 easily hackable? And Sony's only course of action at that point is to remove blu-ray usage?"

so who is to blame for that Sony or the hacker's?

Im all for Hacking, but when Hacker take thing's too far to where it hurt's a companies ability to to support or gain money for their product, than that company has the right to protect themselves and the investor's who invest into the company.

Yes I agree it's a raw deal but the complaint's are directed it seem's entirely toward Sony "which is nothing new ever since this generation started" this is just another free pass at bash festing , now not to say that sony does not deserve some of this , but on the same token so does the Hacking community that caused this in the first place.

 but is that not the point anyway. the Hacking community had somewhat the best open of all the game platform's out  of all three system's and yet that was not good enough? Sony's software does not have sales for most of their software at 6 million copy's or higher in sales. Even Geohot knew this would lead to "playing backup's"

which alway's lead's to piracy. right now moderen warfare 2 was pirated over 4 million time's and is still going.

Invester's see that and you cannot say they don't want sony to take some kind of action over this?

"What if someone finds some kind of strange exploit through the use of blu-ray discs that make the PS3 easily hackable? And Sony's only course of action at that point is to remove blu-ray usage?"

so who is to blame for that Sony or the hacker's?

Im all for Hacking, but when Hacker take thing's too far to where it hurt's a companies ability to to support or gain money for their product, than that company has the right to protect themselves and the investor's who invest into the company.

Yes I agree it's a raw deal but the complaint's are directed it seem's entirely toward Sony "which is nothing new ever since this generation started" this is just another free pass at bash festing , now not to say that sony does not deserve some of this , but on the same token so does the Hacking community that caused this in the first place.

Oh you are misunderstanding me, I'm not talking about blame at all, blame doesn't even matter here. It all comes down to the law. I'll lay it out as simply as possible.

Sony advertised a set of features. Now, they have removed one of those advertised features. This constitutes false advertising, since said feature is no longer included. Terms of Service or other such contracts cannot pardon this.

I don't care who's to blame, I care about the legality behind Sony's actions, as should you, since this thread is about law not blame, specifically EU law, but we've been talking pretty broadly about the laws behind this anyways. It may be hackers' fault, but they aren't the one pulling the bait and switch.

I dont think you know the law as well as you do. The ToS wont be upheld in court only if its illegal... which it isnt. The Ps3 does as advertised. Case closed. You need to agree to the feature being taken out. Case closed. You cant download the feature and then claim you werent aware it would remove a feature as Sony makes you aware before hand. And you arent forced to DL the FW either so the PS3 still works. This will be thrown out of court if it even makes it that far

That's not really right though. If you don't download the firmware, you can keep the other OS option, but new blu-rays and games that require newer firmware won't work. That wasn't part of the deal when I bought the system. Essentially, you have an option of which feature(s) you want removed. Either A) get rid of the "other os" feature or B) get rid of the features of playing new games, watching new blu-rays, accessing free PSN, and whatever else will be blocked off for you. That's still removal of features. So the update is optional just like eating food, or going to work/school is optional. 

The thing about the ToS is that it's not okay to remove a feature just because the ToS say so. If the courts find that Son'y maneuver isn't illegal that's a different story. But there are consumer protection laws for a reason. 

If the PS3 is losing features, it no longer does as advertised. Don't get me wrong, I don't care about the feature, it's the horrible treatment of the consumer that I have a problem with.

That's not really right though. If you don't download the firmware, you can keep the other OS option, but new blu-rays and games that require newer firmware won't work. That wasn't part of the deal when I bought the system. Essentially, you have an option of which feature(s) you want removed. Either A) get rid of the "other os" feature or B) get rid of the features of playing new games, watching new blu-rays, accessing free PSN, and whatever else will be blocked off for you. That's still removal of features. So the update is optional just like eating food, or going to work/school is optional. 

The thing about the ToS is that it's not okay to remove a feature just because the ToS say so. If the courts find that Son'y maneuver isn't illegal that's a different story. But there are consumer protection laws for a reason. 

If the PS3 is losing features, it no longer does as advertised. Don't get me wrong, I don't care about the feature, it's the horrible treatment of the consumer that I have a problem with.

so if I buy a PS3 but don't have internet service to get additional firmware updates and the system won't play blu rays, I can sue Sony because my system is not providing me the features it claims to because of my choice not to get internet service?  by your argument, yes.

that's why your argument is poor.