By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
strunge on 01 April 2010
Edit Thread
r505Matt said:
letsdance said:

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.

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.