| Wlakiz said: I dunno whats there to sue about... Sony has no right to add, revise or remove features? If they are not allowed to remove features, then they shouldn't be allowed to add features or revise them. If you don't know what their is to sue Sony or retailers who sold older model PS3s they you clearly are incapable of grasping how consumer protection laws work. It's as simple as this. If a company, in this case Sony, either implies or directly states that their product, in this case the PS3, has certain features or performance characteristics, and a consumer purchases that product, then they are legally entitled to be able to expect that the product will function in that manner for an extended period of time. Some consumer laws class this as mewrely being the warranty period, others for the life of the product, however the company is legally entitled to ensure that the products performance characteristics and features match those required by the customer for the reasons they purchased the item for. Should the company fail to do this then they are required to renumerate or compensate the customer in a fair and just manner. If Sony aren't willing to accept this then they should completely cease operating in Australia and the EU, along with any other place that has consumer protection laws in place. They already notified the user of this act since the beginning with eula. I see you fail to also grasp the way contract law works. To begin with no contract is valid if any form of duress has been used (which is exactly what has transpired with this firmware update). Furthermore if any term or condition within any contract is in breach of that country's laws, then the contract is legally considered null and void. If you sue them and miraculously win, you would force them to revert their firmware back to 1.0. Is that what you really want? Again, that's not the way it works. Sony can add all the features they like, they can also remove features which were added after the time of purchase as well as arguably these were not advertised nor were they implied at the time of sale with any of these units. However in this case, removing access to the PSN, future game and BRD playability where FW3.21 or higher is required or otherOS feature is illegal as all of which were either directly implied or explicitly stated prior to and while "phat" PS3s were being sold. The only exception is any "phat" PS3s (most presumably preowned as opposed to new) which has been sold after April 1 this year. Firmware update is a double edge sword, most of time you get new things, and sometimes you get less. Are you going to use the argument that you paid to not have the new features but sony twisted your arm to install them? Again you fail to grasp the situation. Sony's so called "choice" they gave consumers, is a clear cut case of duress, so in the case of FW3.21, Sony have clearly resorted to "arm-twisting", making their conduct in places such as Australia and the EU, completely unlawful. Furthermore, while things can be altered, once again it all comes down to the features which existed at the time of sale. The firmware revision which should legally take place in Australia, the EU and all other countries or regions with similar consumer protection laws, is that Sony should be forced to revert their firmware to FW3.15 until such time as Sony can address the issue at hand without breaching consumer protection laws by removing advertised deciding factors in the PS3 being purchased, regardless of the actual number of people who are affected. |
