I'm not goign to touch the subject of hacking and pirates, but there is a bigger issue on this action by the Federal Judge.  We all need to put down that Fanboy mentallity and start think clearly on this matter,  This country is becoming a corporate owned government.  It is unneccessary to collect IP of anyone that browse or even downloaded the hack,  this is invade of privacy.  Ask yourself this simple question, would you want the US government allowed to setup a system that will record all citizens daily use of phone conversation, internet action or even under survilliance watch?  Granting this action is no different than the above example. 

It is completely different.

What you're saying amounts to:

Would you want a federal agent living in your house, taking up space so they can make sure you're not breaking the law at any given moment? Because that's what this will allow.

There is no invasion of privacy. They are finding WHERE in the country these IPs are from. They don't care who looked at what, only where they are from. 

There is a big difference, and it was outlined in the case which is what the judge ruled on. He did rule to give them full authority to sue downloaders or youtube watchers. He sided with them in the circumstance that they are using it to prove jurisdiction. 

EDIT: and before you say my analogy isn't the same, let me explain. Both analogies (future possible repurcussions) are made-up, unrelated implications meant to elicit fear responses. This case has no bearing on individual internet rights. No precedent is being set. You are spreading fear either intentionally, or have not done yourself the favor of educating yourself after hearing this fantasy from someone else.

You know if sony did not release the ps3, publishers would not have put games on it and those games would not have been pirated. Sony should be sued for supporting piracy. I mean i know you had to take the ps3 and alter it and than go and pirate a game, but this could not be done with out the ps3. How dare they. Who is suiing sony first?

I mean its the same case. Gehot did release any hacks specificaly for pirating. Other hackers had to do the work. All he did was give people the ability to jailbreak their ps3.

Stop using biased example, the better example is do you want none law enforcer to peep through your damn house?  and NO government don't need to put an agent inside the house to monitor everyone.  There are inventions called computer and camera system for that.

Not invasion of privacy? I don't need corporate giving the right to track our ips.

Your contradicting your own arguement.

sorry, there was an edit on my post you seem to have missed.

The point is that this case is not setting any precedents and right in the OP the judge ruled in their favor because of what they needed the information for. It is a jurisdictional case, and also to prove that geohotz distributed the code. There is nothing to do with looking at what you downloaded or watched or anything. The thing that is similar to your and my examples is that they are exaggerations of which neither are supported by the outcome of this case, and are meant to serve one purpose; spreading fear, uncertaintly, and disorder.

They are not tracking your IPs in order to persecute you or track you or do anything to you. It is against Geohot only. End of story. Finito. Any of this fear-mongering you keep falling back on is a misguided fantasy at best, and at worst, a complete misrepresentation and a lie.

First of all I don't care if Geohotz's case, I have stated at the beganing I'm not going to touch on the subject of hacking or pirating illegal software.  My was always about corporate owned government,  Mega corporate are giving too much power to abuse the people.  In this case Sony have absolutely no right looking at other companies IP log, if someone break a law the Law enforcer will grant the right to look at any possbile evident.  What we have here is our Jurisdication giving a company right to look at stuff they have no right to.   

He knew the consequences of sharing the encryption key, he even publicly admitted it. He set out on this crusade to get back at Sony. He flagrantly wanted to hit Sony between the legs, because why? Because Sony had the right to remove a feature they now deemed a security risk? Because their ToA says at any time they can remove any feature they wish? Big woop, if you want to run linux buy a PC.

By this logic we should sue Apple, Intel, Microsoft (etc.) for making computers and giving us the means to do this. And then we should sue Al Gore (lol) I mean DARPA for coming up with the internet.

Yes, "could."  From a factual point of view, what I said still stands.

Either way, it doesn't look good on them, that they violate consumer privacy in order to jockey for a better chance to damage consumer rights just so they can fight a threat by attacking non-consumers...