kowenicki said:
Grimes said:
I don't think for a second that Sony's only objective was to stop one guy from hacking.
They wanted to prevent set precedent where if you hack, you will be punished. The problem with this settlement is that nobody got punished, unless you consider not using Sony products a punishment. I guess that's pushishment or a blessing depending on how you look at it.
But this case will do nothing to stop people from hacking in the future, so IMO the case is a loss for Sony.
|
Yep, if they were sure they would have gone to court and got the precedent... they didn't... why? Its obvious why Hotz didnt want to go to court but why not Sony?
|
why, because neither of you get why any of this happened, and are trying your hardest to spin it becasue you both disfavor Sony.
and @ bold WORNG!! so very very worng
