I'm really not exactly sure how to respond to that logic. It is extremely flawed. The creator of a product cannot advertise it as such, and then remove things after you have bought it. That just screams Anti-Consumer Rights. Otherwise, what's to stop some scam artist from creating phony products and advertise them as having a set of features, then you buy the product, and it does nothing and he says "well, I stopped advertising those features before you bought it, so it's legal". Your logic essentially states that this is okay.

Edit: All said scam artist would have to do is prove the product at one point had the features, and removed them for some bogus reason.

There are different "types" of false advertising, but when you advertise a product, and then someone buys it, the product cannot lose anything between the time of acquisition and the time of failure (if it breaks or whatnot). But, law is not cut and dry, and is thus often used in "what if" situations to see what may be legal or not from a common sense point of view. If you ever check out transcriptions from major corporations going to trial, you may know what I'm talking about. Anyways, what if:

Sony determines that playing blu-ray discs on the PS3 opens up the system to security vulnerabilities. Would it be legal for them to remove that? Or, what if it's playing games? Is that okay too? Or are these not okay because more people care about them? The law exists to protect the minority as well, and just because you and I and most people on this forum don't care about the Other OS option, there are people that do. And some people bought the PS3 knowing that, and expecting to use that as well as being able to play new games, and access PSN. They no longer have the product advertised to them. The product they might not have bought if they knew this would happen. While there may be very few people that fit that, that doesn't make it okay. If there is even one person who feels that way, they can bring it to court.

As I said, unless Sony uses specific details to show that the existence Other OS poses a security risk to the PS3, and I mean very concrete details, the whole "because we say it's not safe" wouldn't fly, then I do believe this could hurt them pretty badly. Just because we have things like firmware updates today doesn't make it okay for companies to do whatever they want.

Further, I've been hearing things (not sure how true it is) that the PS3 was classified as a computer in some parts of the world for cheaper taxes than being classified as a gaming machine? Not sure if this is true, but if so, since the system no longer supports other operating systems, it could lose that classification and get nailed for tax evasion. I'm not sure if it was classified as such, but it could lose that designation from this.

Overall, everyone should be sickened by this move. There is no guarantee that this will stem piracy on PS3, and it just seems like an awful breach of consumer rights. Again, I don't care about the Other OS option whatsoever, but it sickens me that Sony can pull a move like this and SOOO many people here are still 100% on their side. Even if we ignore the legality, it's still sickening.

Does anyone have any theories or evidence to suggest that this was done for any other reason than anti piracy.
I see some users asking what if they stop you from playing games or watching Blu Ray movies. This to me makes no sense as it's all about money and those things would cause them to lose money.
Piracy causes them to lose money. Whether or not it sets a precedent is irrelevant. The onus is on you the consumer to exercise your rights.
So again I ask, is there any other reason. Sometimes you have to step away from the cold hard facts and start using some common sense.

No one has really thought of much beyond an anti-piracy reason, though I think one person took "security risk" to mean that their credit cards (that are saved/used on the PS3) could be hacked, but that's something else I think. Granted, I know very little about hacking, but I don't think the installation of Linux or Ubuntu would open the system up to that sort of threat, nor do I think if there is such a threat, the removal of the Other OS option would really protect you anyways. Unless there is some serious flaw where someone could log into another OS on a PS3 and somehow tap into your PS3 that way, but I'm not sure that's the issue.

It would be pretty far-fetched if so, but then again, after Sony's recent blunder with the time-clock date thing, I wouldn't be surprised if there was something in there. But it's odd at the timing, shortly after Geohot breaks in through Linux, they remove the Other OS option. It just seems that an anti-piracy reason makes the most sense with the information we have.

I've checked a couple of other forums, the general consensus is anti-piracy, but I'm curious too on if there are other possible explanations. I wouldn't expect any evidence though, just theories.

people need to give this a rest now so many people complaining about a small, potentially harmful and insignificant feature that a terribly small minority was using.

the people using the ps3 for positive mathematical super computer solving are still going to use it for the same purpose , their intentions with the hardware was never to play games in the first place .

now the people that were using the os feature for exploiting and trying to hack networks and potential pirating of software that is what sony wants to get rid of. (totally dont blame them)

then there is the crowd that for some reason used the gimped version of linux just to surf the net or for whatever other reasons god only knows, the real question to these people is WHY THE HELL ARENT YOU USING A PC, why buy linux and install it on a platform that dosnt even offer full access to its resources therefore making it very troublesome to use ??? WHY??? it hurts my head just thinking about that type of person , the ignorance level is easily at the limit.

98% of ps3 owners bought it to play games , watch blurays and use it as an overall entertainment piece we have all got our monies worth time and time again, the slim doesnt even offer an install other os function and that sells better than any other ps3 to date .

NO ONE CARES ABOUT THIS FUNCTION IF YOU DO BUY A PC IT WAS GARBAGE FROM THE BEGINNING SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN A FUNCTION FROM THE START TAKE IT AND BURN IT!!

notice the Time line:

Sony looking into PS3 hack rumors

Posted Jan 25, 2010 at 3:05PM by Glenn M.

t's not every day that you hear about the PS3 getting hacked, especially when the guy behind it is a pretty well-known iPhone hacker. Smelling the potential threat to the threshold, Sony has sent out word that they're on the case and investigating the truth behind the PS3 hack rumors.

"We are investigating the report and will clarify the situation once we have more information," said a statement from a Sony rep.

Though the hack is said to be unpatchable, the hacker, Geohot, himself said that firmware updates could complicate the implementation. As it is, we'll just have to wait for updates from both ends of the battleground.

http://www.qj.net/qjnet/playstation-3/sony-looking-into-ps3-hack-rumors.html

Geohot releases his hack exploit to the internet:

Monday, 25 January 2010

read this interview:

A US hacker who gained notoriety for unlocking Apple's iPhone as a teenager has told BBC News that he has now hacked Sony's PlayStation 3 (PS3).

George Hotz said the hack, which could allow people to run pirated games or homemade software, took him five weeks.

He said he was still refining the technique but intended to post full details online soon.

The PS3 is the only games console that has not been hacked, despite being on the market for three years.

"It's supposed to be unhackable - but nothing is unhackable," Mr Hotz told BBC News.

"I can now do whatever I want with the system. It's like I've got an awesome new power - I'm just not sure how to wield it."

Sony said it was "investigating the report" and would "clarify the situation" when it had more information.

'Open curiosity'

Mr Hotz said that he had begun the hack last summer when he had spent three weeks analysing the hardware.

After a long break, he spent a further two weeks cracking the console, which he described as a "very secure system".

He said that he was not yet ready to reveal the full details of the hack but said that it was "5% hardware and 95% software"

"You can use hardware to inject an insecurity and then you can build on that," he said.

The hack could allow gamers to play pirated games

He admitted that he had not managed to hack the whole system, including the protected memory, but had worked out ways to trick the console into doing what he wanted.

Mr Hotz said that he was continuing to work on the hack and, once finished, would publish details online in a similar way to his previous iPhone exploits.

In particular, he said, he would publish details of the console's "root key", a master code that once known would make it easier for others to decipher and hack other security features on the console.

He said his motivation was "curiosity" and "opening up the platform".

"To tell you the truth, I've never really played a PS3," he said. "I have one game, but I've never really played it."

Opening the system could allow people to install other operating systems on their console and play homemade games, he said.

In addition, he said, the hack would allow people to play older PS2 games on their consoles.

Recent versions of the PS3 do not have the ability to play PS2 games after Sony controversially removed a piece of hardware.

He admitted that it could also allow people to run pirated games.

"I'm not going to personally have anything to do with that," he told BBC News.

Gaming firms do not take the issue of game piracy and console modification lightly. Recently, Microsoft disconnected thousands of gamers from its online gaming service Xbox Live for modifying their consoles to play pirated games.

Mr Hotz said that the nature of his PS3 hack means that Sony may have difficulty patching the exploit.

"We are investigating the report and will clarify the situation once we have more information," said a Sony spokesman.

Mr Hotz rose to fame in 2007 at the age of 17 when he unlocked the iPhone, which could only be used on the AT&T network in the US at launch.

The hack allowed the popular handset to be used on any network.

He has since released various other hacks, allowing people to unlock later versions of the popular handset.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8478764.stm

that's exactly why sony took the step's they did!

by george's own admission he said it could, he hacked another big corperation's device I think you heard about it:

the Iphone!

First off, I don't see what gives you the right to tell people that they should be sickened by this move.  I make my own decisions.  I don't need you to tell me how to live my life.    Second, as a PS3 consumer I really could care less if it runs Linux or not.  If this move will help prevent hackers from stealing my credit card information on PSN, then by all means do it.  I'll gladly give up my consumer rights and let Sony take this feature away.  Sony isn't doing this for no apparent reason.  So I don't know why people should be sickened by it.  Look, I understand a small minority of people may be angry because the remove of this feature, but if running Linux is the SOLE reason why they own a PS3, then they're free to get rid of their PS3 and go buy a PC.  There are not millions of PS3 owners out there who are going to lose sleep over this.  This is no different than when Microsoft removed SMTP and POP3 server support from the IIS in Windows Vista via Windows Update because of possible security risks.  Do I have any grounds to sue Microsoft because they removed a functionality that is listed in the user manual and thus violating my consumer rights?   

no one cares we want games thats why we bought a ps3 , if dad bought a ps3 to run linux im sorry but bad move you could have made a 500 dollar pc that ran linux like a dream and gave you full access to its resources.

this is such a small upset minority and just from reading on so many forums im so glad the people complaining that thay cant use linux anymore will soon just go away to the pc market where they should have invested their money in the first place.

i just dont understand what these people were thinking like its gotta be only .1% of the ps3 base cause i cant see more than .1% being mentally retarded and being able to actually understand whats going on.

or many of these complainers actually were very willing and ready to run pirated software if so , your the reasons why the pc market is in such a decline your the reason why the music industry is in such decline so many entertainment outlets are so ruined because of piracy i want games to get better and im willing to pay for it , i am not willing to pay for mediocre software just meet demands , just look at most of the garbage pc is getting for games these days its sad

So many people in this thread can't see the forest for the trees. I honestly feel sorry for them.

Say man your trying to teach monkeys! The average person on here doesn't care, or see why this is a problem. Yet if we were talking about Nintendo. Not allowing you to transfer DSiware games from a old DSi to the XL. Most would be screaming bloody murder. Let them be! When  one of these companies pull this again. Taken something they care about. They will listen to you then. To bad by then it will be too late.

You're absolutely correct, I have no right in telling people they should be sickened by this move, hence I said should. It is the keyword of that phrase, don't ignore it. But you still missed the point(s).

A) There is absolutely NO evidence that states having the Other OS could somehow compromise your credit card info. Sony didn't say this whatsoever, but merely tried to imply it with wording. Most likely, they are just trying to deter piracy.

B) Just because you don't care for the feature doesn't mean you can't find it gross (as in the way this situation is being dealt with). It's pretty self-centered to only think the things you care about matter.

C) Why are you bringing MS into this? This is about Sony, if you want to rant on MS, that's for another time and place. Or at least place

It's okay if you want to give up your consumer rights for something you know little about. You know little about it because Sony won't really say anything specific. That's your right, you can give up your rights if you so choose.

@joeorc,

Yes, we're not talking about why they did it, that's pretty clear, even if they didn't come out to say it directly. And most (keyword @yinkadare) people agree that this morally wrong. But most people just don't care. Apathy, it's the greatest "illness" of our time. They figure "well it doesn't affect me, so it doesn't really matter" but it does matter. The more things like this happen with no recourse on our part (our being the consumers), the more companies will pull stuff like this, and eventually without good cause.

I think some people have misread what I said. I'm not saying it was DEFINITELY illegal, I just think it could be illegal, only a court will be able to actually decide.

@Darc Requiem,

Yeah -.- I'm giving up after this post