By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Help graf_chokolo Fight Sony!

 

Help graf_chokolo Fight Sony!

I Understand This is About Consumer Rights! 37 48.68%
 
I Don't Understand What This is About. 39 51.32%
 
Total:76
greenmedic88 on 13 March 2011
Munkeh111 said:
Xen said:
Munkeh111 said:
greenmedic88 said:

I'll be sure to send donations when he designs, engineers and produces his own successful console that has the full support of third party developers in addition to AAA first party studio games, and finds the security of his closed gaming platform compromised by consumer rights advocates who make deliberate efforts to crack any security measures implemented and threaten his legitimate business and viability as a secured gaming platform.

Simply put, his efforts do nothing for me as a legitimate consumer of games and there's no reason why I would want to nor should assist in footing the bill for the legal expenses he knowingly brought upon himself with his work.

Precisely. Sony are just trying to protect the ecosystem that they have created, and what they did was perfectly legal, there have terms of use, and what rights they have as platform owner, and they utilised them

I can understand there are some issues with consumer rights, but this is primarily a games machine, and if linux could threaten its profitability as one, then Sony had every right to stop it. As for current issues, they are seperate, and Sony seem to be making progress in dealing with them

Why are the hackers always seen as the good guys?

Security researchers, use proper language... and the answer you're looking for is obviously because the corporations are out there to screw us, even when it doesn't look that way ;)

Of course, I always forget that the rich are evil

And when the little guy "Fights the Power" that makes him the hero. You know, like when Robin Hood carriage-jacks aristocrats and distributes the wealth for free.

Only thing is, most people, myself included, aren't interested in receiving or distributing stolen goods so if anyone wants to play Robin Hood, or play the "I'm not stealing anything, nor am I condoning theft, but here's a copy of the keys to vault left right under the door mat" game, they should probably do it on their own platform.

I'm ALL for an open source gaming platform on which the games are freely distributed yet have the production quality of the games that I currently enjoy, many costing in the tens of millions to produce.

If anyone's up for spending that kind of money on a game they wish to distribute for free on a platform they designed, produced, marketed and sold, I'll buy one. I'll buy two. I'll even contribute to your legal fund when you file for bankruptcy, assuming the quality games keep coming.



Around the Network
greenmedic88 on 13 March 2011
dsister said:

@Greenmedic

EULAs don't supercede law. As the PS3 fat was sold at many retailers with a "Supports Other OS" and Sony making several mentions of the Other OS taking it away was a form of false advertising and there were lawsuits and refunds to be had after it. 

Also one of the advertising points was the ability to play all PS3 games. If you didn't update then you would lose that ability. 

So you either lost one thing or the other. Linux or playing new games. It's completely in Sony's rights to block access PSN, but not for legitimate users to play new games

Legally, there was no mention of "Supports Linux" advertised anywhere. If there was, feel free to direct everyone to it.

If SCE wanted to play legal games, seeing as how there seem to be those who think they really know the law, they could just release a not-Linux "Other OS" that was effectively useless.

If anyone wants to argue that they should legally be able to use any firmware on their console dating back to say 2006, claiming that they must legally be able to play any current software being released, many of which won't run without memory optimized firmware updates (for those who don't understand how that works, current versions of firmware use less RAM than older versions, freeing up available memory for developers to optimize their games), they can feel free to hold out a tin cup for donations for their legal case too.



Munkeh111 on 13 March 2011
greenmedic88 said:
Munkeh111 said:
Xen said:
Munkeh111 said:
greenmedic88 said:

I'll be sure to send donations when he designs, engineers and produces his own successful console that has the full support of third party developers in addition to AAA first party studio games, and finds the security of his closed gaming platform compromised by consumer rights advocates who make deliberate efforts to crack any security measures implemented and threaten his legitimate business and viability as a secured gaming platform.

Simply put, his efforts do nothing for me as a legitimate consumer of games and there's no reason why I would want to nor should assist in footing the bill for the legal expenses he knowingly brought upon himself with his work.

Precisely. Sony are just trying to protect the ecosystem that they have created, and what they did was perfectly legal, there have terms of use, and what rights they have as platform owner, and they utilised them

I can understand there are some issues with consumer rights, but this is primarily a games machine, and if linux could threaten its profitability as one, then Sony had every right to stop it. As for current issues, they are seperate, and Sony seem to be making progress in dealing with them

Why are the hackers always seen as the good guys?

Security researchers, use proper language... and the answer you're looking for is obviously because the corporations are out there to screw us, even when it doesn't look that way ;)

Of course, I always forget that the rich are evil

And when the little guy "Fights the Power" that makes him the hero. You know, like when Robin Hood carriage-jacks aristocrats and distributes the wealth for free.

Only thing is, most people, myself included, aren't interested in receiving or distributing stolen goods so if anyone wants to play Robin Hood, or play the "I'm not stealing anything, nor am I condoning theft, but here's a copy of the keys to vault left right under the door mat" game, they should probably do it on their own platform.

I'm ALL for an open source gaming platform on which the games are freely distributed yet have the production quality of the games that I currently enjoy, many costing in the tens of millions to produce.

If anyone's up for spending that kind of money on a game they wish to distribute for free on a platform they designed, produced, marketed and sold, I'll buy one. I'll buy two. I'll even contribute to your legal fund when you file for bankruptcy, assuming the quality games keep coming.

Quite right, they have a business to run



phinch1 on 13 March 2011
dsister said:

@goforgold

"... ruin the online experience for millions of users" 

I''ve only heard of one game that was hacked, and that was MW2.


I believe millions of people own this game, so his statement was correct

and whats to stop it at MW2, black ops may be next



greenmedic88 on 13 March 2011
phinch1 said:
dsister said:

@goforgold

"... ruin the online experience for millions of users" 

I''ve only heard of one game that was hacked, and that was MW2.


I believe millions of people own this game, so his statement was correct

and whats to stop it at MW2, black ops may be next

It was a foolish defense regardless. "If only one game was hacked it's okay" basically.

Even if it wasn't the best selling game of its time (which it was), if you want to talk consumer rights, I'd say the rights of those millions who are presumably paying to play a non-cheat broken gaming experience supercedes the rights of those who want to claim it's their "legal right" to run any code on the console they bought with the purpose of cheating.

I know I don't want to deal with any of that (cheating via unsigned code mods) even if it's for a game I'm playing online that sold less than 100k copies. The number have nothing to do with that.



Around the Network
dsister on 13 March 2011
greenmedic88 said:

Legally, there was no mention of "Supports Linux" advertised anywhere. If there was, feel free to direct everyone to it.

If SCE wanted to play legal games, seeing as how there seem to be those who think they really know the law, they could just release a not-Linux "Other OS" that was effectively useless.

If anyone wants to argue that they should legally be able to use any firmware on their console dating back to say 2006, claiming that they must legally be able to play any current software being released, many of which won't run without memory optimized firmware updates (for those who don't understand how that works, current versions of firmware use less RAM than older versions, freeing up available memory for developers to optimize their games), they can feel free to hold out a tin cup for donations for their legal case too.

It was on every Amazon page in the world. That's why they paid out the teeth after Sony removed it. It was also in one of those stupid "It can only do everything" commercials... Not to mention Phil harrison pimping it out all over IGN saying you don't need a PC anymore

That would still be removing otherOS support...

Now you are just rambling.



Sig thanks to Saber! :D 

dsister on 13 March 2011
phinch1 said:


I believe millions of people own this game, so his statement was correct

and whats to stop it at MW2, black ops may be next


Yes, everyone that played MW2 had their experience ruined. And from what I read all the stuff was on the disc. And yet, black-ops hasn't been yet. Look at the poor support that Activision has given to MW2 on the PS3. Didn't it take like 9 months to patch a stupid map? If the devs were competent they would have released a patch to stop the cheating instead of blaming Sony...

Lets not forget that cheating isn't half as rampant as on the 360 where people's experiences haven't been ruined 



Sig thanks to Saber! :D 

dsister on 13 March 2011

Oh my gosh. Lets blame Graf_Chocolo for Sony's poor security measures, and Infinity Ward's dismal support for their game. Because he did all of it!



Sig thanks to Saber! :D 

DonFerrari on 13 March 2011
fps_d0minat0r said:
Xen said:
Munkeh111 said:
greenmedic88 said:

I'll be sure to send donations when he designs, engineers and produces his own successful console that has the full support of third party developers in addition to AAA first party studio games, and finds the security of his closed gaming platform compromised by consumer rights advocates who make deliberate efforts to crack any security measures implemented and threaten his legitimate business and viability as a secured gaming platform.

Simply put, his efforts do nothing for me as a legitimate consumer of games and there's no reason why I would want to nor should assist in footing the bill for the legal expenses he knowingly brought upon himself with his work.

Precisely. Sony are just trying to protect the ecosystem that they have created, and what they did was perfectly legal, there have terms of use, and what rights they have as platform owner, and they utilised them

I can understand there are some issues with consumer rights, but this is primarily a games machine, and if linux could threaten its profitability as one, then Sony had every right to stop it. As for current issues, they are seperate, and Sony seem to be making progress in dealing with them

Why are the hackers always seen as the good guys?

Security researchers, use proper language... and the answer you're looking for is obviously because the corporations are out there to screw us, even when it doesn't look that way ;)

If they dont work for sony then theres no reason for them to do "security research"

if a stranger was looking around your house at all the alarms and locks and entrance/exits surely you wouldnt think their up to something and report them to the police.

and it doesnt matter if hackers condone piracy or not.....it doesnt change the FACT that their the cause of it. without hackers, there would be no piracy.

and if they loved linux so much then why did they CHOOSE to REMOVE it?

as seem in http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=125489 people seem to love people researching companies security to hack, but a company researching the security of any player is just to screw...

because everybody knows that Sony is a living evil cyborg or the eye of sauron, there isn't people working there, just pirates and hackers are people... and if for 1% of population right you have to fuck all the rest and make they get the trouble of weekly patchs what is the problem?? at least this people can pira*urgggg* use Linux all they want.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari on 13 March 2011
dsister said:
greenmedic88 said:

Legally, there was no mention of "Supports Linux" advertised anywhere. If there was, feel free to direct everyone to it.

If SCE wanted to play legal games, seeing as how there seem to be those who think they really know the law, they could just release a not-Linux "Other OS" that was effectively useless.

If anyone wants to argue that they should legally be able to use any firmware on their console dating back to say 2006, claiming that they must legally be able to play any current software being released, many of which won't run without memory optimized firmware updates (for those who don't understand how that works, current versions of firmware use less RAM than older versions, freeing up available memory for developers to optimize their games), they can feel free to hold out a tin cup for donations for their legal case too.

It was on every Amazon page in the world. That's why they paid out the teeth after Sony removed it. It was also in one of those stupid "It can only do everything" commercials... Not to mention Phil harrison pimping it out all over IGN saying you don't need a PC anymore

That would still be removing otherOS support...

Now you are just rambling.

You do realize that they never said in the commercial that Other/OS support would exist forever or printed in the box it??

What amazon advertise is their problem not Sony... and if you think that this is bad propaganda (to remove support after some years)... why don't you sue your car maker when you don't find a component for your car 30 years after it have been made and for the same price you would have paid at the time?

@last post... yes don't blame the person that hacked through the security or the bugglar let complain about the person that haven't made it hard enough... are you serious?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."