Kasz216 said:
pizzahut451 said:
Kasz216 said:
pizzahut451 said:
Kasz216 said:
Er, yes I can? It's called citing case law.
I mean, it's like you don't know how the court system works or how supeona's work.
Supeona's basically ALWAYS err on the side of caution, often to the point of illegal actions when it comes to big companies. With the theory being, if the people who are being served with supeona care enough about their rights being violated they will file a motion to quash.
|
And you think what Bleem did wasnt illegal but Sony taking IPs was? If what Sony did actually was illegal than that supeona would be filled agaisnt Sony (correct me if it is
|
Again, your coming off as kinda incoherent and sloppy here. I'm not sure what your trying to ask.
|
Do you think that making money off Sony PlayStation games (without the permission from Sony) its ok but getting IPs to prove people used Geohotz code is not?
|
A) Getting IP's doesn't prove that people used Geohotz code.
B) He doesn't deny distributing it... that part of the case isn't in arguement.
C) Ok to make money off Playstation games? Yeah. See Gamestop. Not sure how that's relevent to anything though.
|
They used youtube to prove that he distributed the code and that the peopple watched it and took it for hacks
I never said anything about denial, im not arguing agaisnt or for him at all. Im arguing about Sony vs. Bleem
Gamestop is a retalier. They didnt build thier own hardware and make it play games from the other systems and make money off of it without the premision from the people who own those games (in this case Sony)
