By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Tsudai on 21 February 2011
Edit Thread
thismeintiel said:

Damn fine first post by Tsudai.  Welcome to the boards.  Unfortunately, some will ignore it and continue to scream about "consumer rights."  Of course, they will completely ignore company rights.  Without company rights, they would not be able to protect their interests/products, and many would go out of business.  With that comes the decline of tech advancement (there goes with all the cool little gadgets we are priviledged to have) and millions would lose their jobs, followed by the world economy turning to crap.  And yes, there has to be a balance between both sets of rights.  But we already have a very powerful tool to ensure our consumer rights, our wallet.  We are not forced to buy anything we don't want and corporations don't automatically get money from our wages.    This is something many seem to forget here.

Thanks for the welcome. I've been following this since the beginning, but didn't post anything cause internet back and forth doesn't amount to much, and really it's interesting to see people's view points. Plus, since this is affecting something that I enjoy, I wanted to know more about the laws and rules that govern it. People tend to throw around stuff like the DMCA(typo in my original post) and the new rules that apply to the iPhone jailbreak, but not many seem to, you know, research what they're "quoting". However, once people start to tangibly help, they should atleast be informed as to what can and cannot be applied to the case so that they can make an informed decision.

radiantshadow92 said:

Tsudai said:

Comparing the jailbreak of the iPhone with what is happening to the PS3 is a stretch, at best. The ruling for the jailbreak of the iPhone being legal states specifically that that ruling only applies to "wireless telephone handsets". On Tuesday, July 27, 2010, the Librarian of Congress created 6 new class of works that would be exempt from the DCMA, with 2 dealing specifically with jailbreaking of those "wireless telephone handsets".

The two classes as quoted from the Federal Register / Vol. 75 No. 143 / Tuesday, July 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations are:

"B. Computer programs that enable
wireless telephone handsets to execute
software applications, where
circumvention is accomplished for the
sole purpose of enabling
interoperability of such applications,
when they have been lawfully obtained,
with computer programs on the
telephone handset."

and:

"C. Computer programs, in the form of
firmware or software, that enable used
wireless telephone handsets to connect
to a wireless telecommunications
network, when circumvention is
initiated by the owner of the copy of the
computer program solely in order to
connect to a wireless
telecommunications network and
access to the network is authorized by
the operator of the network."

The first class is one that many people would see as applying to the PS3 for the case of homebrewing. However, it states specifically that this new class is in regards to wireless telephone handsets ONLY. The second class is probably the one most people know of, that allows people to jailbreak their phones so that they can use their phones on the wireless network provider of their choice.

What I find interesting is another class, that in all probablility not many people know about, that was introduced by the Librarian of Congress in the same document as stated above that deals specifically with video games and the circumvention of their security:

"D. Video games accessible on personal
computers and protected by
technological protection measures that
control access to lawfully obtained
works, when circumvention is
accomplished solely for the purpose of
good faith testing for, investigating, or
correcting security flaws or
vulnerabilities, if:
•The information derived from the
security testing is used primarily to
promote the security of the owner or
operator of a computer, computer
system, or computer network; and
•The information derived from the
security testing is used or maintained in
a manner that does not facilitate
copyright infringement or a violation of
applicable law."

This is where I think SONY could have a case if you say PS3s are PCs. If Geohot brought the weak security protection to SONY's attention beforehand so that SONY could look into it and not just post the key on his site for the world to see, I doubt SONY would be suing him. If PS3s are not PCs, then it could be argued that this class does not apply.

So yes, Geohot has every right to hack HIS system. But when he posted the keys to the PS3 for everyone and their mother to see while pretty much giving SONY the finger, he crossed a line. He broke and exposed a flaw in the PS3's "technological protection measures", but he didn't use this knowledge to help SONY fix it. What he really did by exposing this flaw in the way he did it is "facilitate copyright infringement".

Link to the Federal Register PDF: http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2010/75fr43825.pdf

Thats a good post you got there.

Thanks. What I would find ironic is if SONY uses that class that pertains to video games and the circumvention of their security against Geohot in this case. That new class came about because of what happened with SecuROM.

tl;dr Learn to read...? lol... j/k... Well not really, cause you really should read it; might learn something. Or not. It's up to you.