Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
deskpro2k3 said:
Kasz216 said:
deskpro2k3 said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
A) Do yourself a favor look up "Duty of Care". In particular, California. You will see why Sony can't sue for this. Not only would Sony lose, but they would look exremely bad doing it.
The biggest loss would be "the feasability of alternate conduct". Since there was no way to unlock the features outside of this, there would be no "feasability of alternate conduct", and in general other alternate conduct issues.
Also, sony would have to definitivly prove they were harmed. Which you can't, because most studies tend to show that even piracy has no discernable effect on the industry.
They'd have to prove without a shadow of a doubt it was done for immoral reasons. Likely a loss since most college proffesors and the like are on Hotz side and more then willing to talk about it, and all anyone has to believe is that HE thought it was the right thing to do.
They would have to prove that punishing him will prevent future harm. (tough when you can't find past harm.)
Also, that they would have to prove he could of done it safer. Which you really can't argue with hacking because he doesn't have completel knowledge of the subject.
Prove that reasonable people wouldn't do the same in his place... again with over half the gaming community behind him, most academics and most tech people... not going to do.
So no... he can't be sued for that, nor can most if not all people be sued for something someone else does, without very very very specific guidelines being followed. In general it is a VERY specific crime, otherwise everybody would get sued for it.
B) You can, it has nothing to do with Gehot though.
C) No, he can't.
D) No, i've actually corrected quite literally your mistaken comments.
|
California has developed a complex balancing test consisting of multiple factors which must be carefully weighed against one another to determine whether a duty of care exists in a negligence action. The underlying facts are universalized and analyzed in the larger context of general public policy.[5] The original factors as stated in 1968 were as follows:
- the foreseeability of harm to the injured party;
- the degree of certainty he or she suffered injury;
- the closeness of the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the injury suffered;
- the moral blame attached to the defendant’s conduct;
- the policy of preventing future harm;
- the extent of the burden to the defendant and the consequences to the community of imposing a duty of care with resulting liability for breach;
- and the availability, cost, and prevalence of insurance for the risk involved.[6]
A 1997 case added to this:
- the social utility of the defendant's conduct from which the injury arose.[7]
As far as i have read the
|
Exactly. They basically can't prove any of those.
It's good your finally starting to understand.
|
One pirated game is enough to hit almost all those bullets. All the efforts such as the removal of other OS etc, was to prevent piracy. bypassing the security in the software is pretty much opening a pandora box.
Limewire for example was taken off the grid for pirating music, and movies. I think the same should apply but this was a NY case I believe. Anyways I'm going back to Persona 3 Portable. Catch'ya punks later.
|
No it's not? Considering research generally shows piracy doesn't hurt the industry... they would lose that pretty hard... and that's not even the trickier issues, such as moral blame which is pretty hard to asses when he's trying to unlock things legally that sony is locking out.
Furthermore, all this needs to be proved under the "reasonable man" arguement. What would a "reasonable man" do in this situation.
Would a resonable man, looking for the outcome he was, do what he did? Well yeah.
|
i'm allergic to bullshit.
|
http://www.gamecritics.com/videogame-piracy-and-the-pc-gaming-industry
http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/215976/the-cost-of-piracy/
*cough* psp *cough*
heres a lovely snipit
While many hackers crack devices for the sheer enjoyment of the achievement-demonstrating their technical prowess or extending the capabilities of a game device-many of their followers do so for less noble reasons. It's no secret that the appetite for pirated games is widespread, and it's an issue that has sent the industry reeling. The Entertainment Software Association estimates that in 2007, global piracy cost the U.S. entertainment software industry more than $3 billion, and this doesn't even include losses from Internet piracy. Not only has piracy had a negative affect on game developers trying to make money from their hard work, but it's also impacted their ability to innovate and create new games and business models while eroding their control over their intellectual property.
Also this kids not going to listen so i dont know why im bothering.
|
Yeah, uh... I said scientific studies... not "Lets go on a torrent site find downloads and multiply by $60." If you look at actual economic studies that try and factually find any damages from piracy... they can't find them.
http://www.osnews.com/story/24376/Piracy_Increases_Anime_DVD_Sales_Study_Concludes
http://www.undergroundthecomic.com/2010/10/pictures-help-us-learn/
As for the PSP. PSP hardware sales were up dramtically due to piracy and jailbreaking. So you gain the misconception that software artificially low, but the truth is, hardware is artificially high.
Without jailbreaking on PSP, PSP would have sold far less.
|
My Quote is sourced from the ESA these guys
http://www.theesa.com/
i think they know more about gaming piracy than ancdotal evidence from dvd sales. Even one of think links says this
Piracy hurts the content industry. This has been the common line of thought in the piracy and copyright debate for years now, and even though study after study highlight that this is simply not the case - or at least, not as clear-cut a case
So they are not referring to all piracy just this instance saying hey maybe not all piracy is harmful. Mine show it is.
|
So, your trusting an Entertainment lobbying group...
over scientific studies conducted by goverment agencies.
Do you know the ESA's methods for studying the effects of piracy? It ain't scientific.
It's called "Lets see how many downloads something has, then multiply times $60 bucks.
Also, no, the common economic belief about software piracy is... "It causes no negative of positive effect.".
Or at least that's the belief among... people who study economics... aka economists.
I would suggest reading a book or two about software priacy and the actual effect it has on stuff. People who think it has a heavy negative effet are the same people who think gamestop are killing the Industry, when the truth is, a healthy used market INCREASES new sales.
Corporate Lobbyists like the ESA say both hurt new software sales and produce studies anyone who's taken a single research class can point out the faults of... because they know they can use that poltical clout to get concessions... to do things like limit the amount of times you can install software and find ways to force gamestop to pay the companies for the games they sell used.
|
