install other OS was removed out of the XMB due to the commitence of a felony offense.

http://www.gdhm.com/pdf/wrw-hack_article.pdf

and some Consumer's are trying to gain compensation from a victim from the result's of such a felony offense.

i do not think this is going to end well. no matter which side your on.

"Despite the somewhat contrary ruling in Oswalt, the clear implication of the Mitchell case is that
computer users who are permitted to use systems (whether at work or elsewhere) for one purpose,
who then use the system for other, unauthorized purposes may be guilty of breach of computer
security, and correspondingly liable under TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 143.001."

Actually they did.  It's in that link up there.  Where it says it will be on disc.

They are not required to support software until the end of time, correct. However, I don't see how that is relevent - they are not EOLing Warhawk.

No, consumers are trying to get compenastion from Sony's actions... due to their screwing the innocnent consumers.

If someone is a victim of a crime, it doesn't give them the abiltity or right to screw people... the blame is on Sony. They aren't the Victim.  They are the offender.

no they are trying to gain compensation from the result's of a crime from the victim of that crime that my friend is :

Negligence

how are they the offender?. their action was done in the response too said felony.

since Geohot release the HACK TO A COMMUNICATION NETWORK LIKE THE INTERNET. SAID PROTECTION OF THEIR SOFTWARE'S XMB requires them to react if Sony did not do anything Sony would be liable:

" which was the victim of a hacker could be subject
to liability to other parties for a hacking incident"

what this civil action would have to prove that sony could have used other action's to fix this Hack without taking out the

"install other OS function " out of the XMB!

also you:

have to take into account, that when the PS3 was sold to the consumer Linux was not preinstalled, it was something the consumer can add to the DEVICE as an option. you still had to add it your self!

every time the XMB is updated the there are changes to that new XMB. so you have to agree to a new VER. of the XMB TOU, AND TOS everytime the XMB get's updated. thus in order for Linux to be removed you had to agree to the update to continue to use the new XMB ver. yes you can say no but Sony has fully disclosed the compatability issue's that would result if you choose to keep the older XMB.

the very fact since you cannot own the XMB, when you bought the machine you were as an option allowed to :

install Linux

Linux did not come preinstalled unless you purchased the preinstalled PS3 YDL from a 3rd party company outside of Sony.

Since Linux was not preinstalled, it was not included in the purchase price of the PS3. the install other OS function was, but since Sony own's the install other OS function they can change the XMB with a new ver's of the XMB with full disclosure which they did.

Sony's new XMB no longer support's Install other OS on the PSN. but in order to install any new ver. of the XMB you as a consumer would have to choose to install it or not. At this time Sony has told the consumer you can indeed keep Linux and the install other OS by keeping the old XMB but there will be issues with future support of older VER. of the XMB.

if you you have updated your PS3's XMB before new function's were added to the new XMB, and since it did not come preinstalled with your PS3 you cannot pick or choose what you want in your XMB because you do not own it. you can only choose to or not to install any New XMB ver. Even though this is the first time a function of the XMB that was preinstalled in older XMB firmware's .

the New XMB firmware's do not have that function in the new XMB.

that one of the reason's they have to disclose what the new XMB has in it. it's considered a new XMB every time the update it. it's like windows 98, than Microsoft release windows 98 SE.

just like Microsoft removed DOS out of Window's.

the fact that Sony's has stripped "INSTALL OTHER os" enabled function's out of the new ver. of the XMB is well within their right because it's a new release of the XMB every time they release a new firmware update.

Let me ask you a question. Say I give out a bunch of buisness cards... someone uses on of them to berak into my house. So I go and break into everyone elses house and take back my buisness cards.

If arrested am I "not the offender"?

A wrong, just because someone else wronged you doesn't suddenly not make you the offender.

Your entire premise is faulty.

there is a big problem

the XMB is not your house it's Sony's!

the Linux application is not even your's  also you are granted a license to use not to own, and Sony is not going into your house and taking it, they are knocking on your door and asking for it.

How are they breaking in if they are Asking for permission for you to remove the old XMB. and replace it with the new XMB.

you say no they say ok, but compatability will suffer and walk away and move on to the next house. the civil claim is that Sony is taking it away from the Consumer which is not true that's a fact that cannot be disputed can the consumer keep Linux? that answer is true can the consumer keep a previous firmware on his PS3? yes it can. the Consumer can indeed keep Firmware 3.15 or older on their PS3 but compatability will suffer. it's been that way ever since it has been released. there were game's i purchased that required a new firmware on my PS3 if i did not update i could not play the game, and there have been how many complaints that certain game's have had an effect on the PS3's and sometimes glitched the PS3 until a patch. This has been the case of not just the PS3 also the xbox360 and some PC program's.

if there was no way for the Consumer to ever update their PS3 inorder to play future game's that that would be an issue, but since the consumer can indeed make his or Her PS3 compliant with future XMB requirement's of not only security but also future games software.

Sony is not keeping the PS3 from being updated the consumer is.

Once again, that's completly faulty logic... they are forcing you to choose between other OS and playing future games, when the removal of other OS has NO effect on the capability and Sony has no reason to remove it.  They advertised other OS... and being able to play games as VITAL features.  They are now forcing you to choose between one of those two vital features.

It would be like if you signed a contract with me to mow your lawn and trim your hedges... then I tell you a few weeks later you had to choose.

What's with all the analogies?

This court case is less about the removal of other os, and more about someone trying to make a rather disgusting amount of money.

how so:

Sony cannot force you to update, they just told the Consumer COMPATABILITY ISSUES are going to be there it is for you to choose to not update:

the judge will ask how is it they are removing the function if you can still keep it?

the fact that your or my PS3 did not come PREINSTALLED WITH LINUX when we purchased the PS3 mean's you did not purchase a PS3 with linux on your Machine you purchased a PS3 with the XMB that has at that Time the OPTION by a consumer to install other OS through the XMB function's of that XMB have changed over time. you cannot PICK OR CHOOSE WHAT YOU DO AN WHAT YOU DO NOT WANT OUT OF THE XMB

it's all or nothing: since my ps3 did not come with background downloading on the PS3 does that mean I can sue because I was forced to get background downloading because a game i purchased required the new update to play the game and on that update just so happen to have background downloading.

 you do not have a claim on the ownership of the XMB , thus you cannot tell what Sony can and cannot offer in the XMB. you can request function's in the XMB but you cannot demand them. Because you do not own the XMB.

you do have the right of not updating, but on the same token you cannot cry foul if Sony's PSN requires or a game developer requires a new ver. of the XMB to play, because you can still update your PS3.

Sony gave the consumer the reason why the Install other OS function was removed out of the XMB of future ver's of the firmware.

before hand and it was not done just on the spur of the moment. sony even before Jan 2010 Sony was looking into the Hack. If Sony cannot find a work arround to the HACK OTHER THAN TAKING OUT Other OS install out of the XMB and can very well prove that to the judge that it was the only way to protect the product's security of the console when connecting online.

and if this case so happens to be thrown out than what?