fordy said:
Rpruett said:
fordy said:
Rpruett said:
fordy said:
Rpruett said:
fordy said:
Rpruett said:
The case won't come down to ownership of systems.
It will come down to distributing sensitive materials to millions of other people and grand-standing it (and knowing full well of the potential harm it would cause Sony. This is not modifying your own console, this is giving instructions on how to modify in a very specific deviate manner to anyone and everyone.
He can say publicly that he doesn't condone piracy all he wants, but at the end of the day, with the materials he released he will have a hard time proving that stance.
For example, I could know exactly how to bomb the World Trade Center and where it was the most vulnerable, Maybe I helped build the WTC and had blueprints for them. By releasing the blueprints online, I would still get in trouble and by extension would probably be thrown in jail especially if my actions were proven to be ill-designed.
|
There's a difference between safety of corporate interests and safety of the public. Having the PS3 Master Keys fall into the wrong hands isn't going to kill people...
|
Absolutely, I made an extreme example to make an extreme point. The point being is, you would be considered an accomplice in this situation or case, especially if they can convince the judge or jury that you did this in a deviate, ill-willed manner. If he released the PS3 Master Keys, It's obvious what his intentions were. Additionally, his mannerisms even seem to point towards more ill-willed intentions specifically towards Sony.
The same situation applies to various other things in life. For example, you possess the blueprint for the floor plan of the Smithsonian Museum in DC and the Hope Diamond is located in there. You post this online and even little details about the Smithsonian making it more accessible for Thiefs. You very well could be convicted of a crime.
|
Actually, no you couldn't. You really should check up on your law, because proof like that would NOT stand up in court. You'd need a ton more evidence to convict him for this, but hey newsflash, HE HASN'T DONE ANYTHING LEGALLY WRONG.
|
Actually, yes you can. People are convicted of being accomplices all the time, which is exactly how this case will play out. (See many Mafia members, Masterminds of the 9/11 attacks, etc). Osama Bin Laden never physically was involved in a Terrorist act he just had his fingerprints all over it and yet he was enemy number one. Why is that? He didn't actually do anything legally wrong?
I don't have any respect for your legal credentials. Obviously, you need evidence (You always need evidence). What makes you think they won't find sufficient evidence? And you have no idea if he has or hasn't done anything legally wrong, do you have access to his PC? He could have done several things legally wrong, just because he said he is innocent doesn't make it so.
|
Are you seriously comparing 9/11, an attack that killed people, to a hacking attempt, which at best, the case is purely for corporate interest?
Why are all the ones defending Sony comparing it to bombings and murderings? A corporation laxed in security and somebody got hold of their key. Explain to me where the death is there.
I could refer you to the police as being an accomplice to a secret act of Corporatist movement. Do you think that would work?
|
Stop being a simpleton or intentionally obtuse. Obviously this is in no way as severe or comparable to a human life. However, if you are going to argue that 'Accomplices' don't get in trouble you are clearly mistaken. This case will come down whether or not he can be tied to causing piracy or spear heading it.
It's not about death, it's about someone being tied to a crime that they knowingly participated in from afar and that is what the case will continue to revolve around.
|
And the crime is.....posting a number!
It's how the attackers use that number themselves. A number cannot be copyrighted, keep in mind.
Honestly, you're clutching at straws here. 100% of the crime is done AFTER Geohot's posting of the key. If a friend of yours wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address, and you gave it to him, you can NOT be called an accomplice there.
|
If the ultimate implications were for piracy, then there is a much larger crime at stake here. Again, just because Osama Bin Laden didn't hijack an airplane and crash it into a building doesn't make him any less guilty.
I'm not clutching at any straws. You're the one responding to literally every poster who questions your stance, if there is anyone clutching at straws trying to deny anything it's you. If Geohot had any knowledge or pre-existing knowledge on the consequences of his actions (And there is any tangible form of proof of this) he will be in trouble.
If a friend of mine wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address, and I gave it to him, yes I could be called an accomplice.
