sony's illegal business practice!!!!!!!

[r505Matt]

kaneada said:

bxnytony said:
i find it funny how most people arent actually reading it just commenting about whta they think is right. the tos/eula of any company is not a legally binding contract. look it up. several companies have lost class action lawsuit sbecause their tos is in direct violation of the law as i stated in this thread. try amazon with the kindle, netflix, sony with hidden drm. i mean seriously people READ up and know ur rights.

This case has no legal standing what so ever. I have read the same argument presented in the UK and it is just as flawed. If I remember correctly the slim does not contain other OS support by default, which changes the specfications of the product. Secondly the update is optional, so if you want to keep your other OS support then don't update and buy another PS3.

The slim is a different product. We're all obviously talking about the phat. You can't consider them the same, just like an '85 Corvette is very different from a '94 Corvette or even 87' Corvette, but they're both Corvettes. Slim and phat are both PS3s, but we're not talking about the slim. They were advertised differently, the slim never came with an advertisement of the Other OS option.