padib said:
Looking at it from an advantageous position point of view: 1) Sony won because it got away with bullying the little guy. That boosts its confidence for future disputes. It also lost in a sense because it probably wanted to win a court case and obtain a favorable precedent. By lacking progress at the expense of assets and their reputation, they spent to get nowhere (they caught 1 fish in a sea of hackers). 2) Hotz lost the battle because he folded to corporate pressure despite his claims to us. However, I believe he's counting this loss as part of his plans to win a greater war, as we read in the article ssj12 posted. Also, he made a name for himself (some good, some bad). 3) Consumers lost in that Sony humiliated Hotz by making him fold under their pressure. They also won because more anger is arising that will grow into a winning war against corporate control over their due property. 4) The lawyers definitely won big time. 5) We as posters totally win cause we get to debate over an interesting topic :)
|
With out this going to trial nothing has changed though. Sony did not get away with bulltying the little guy. In fact it was the opposite. They showed how weak their hand was. They showed they knew they would not win, why else would they settle. It makes no sense for them to settle unless they thought they would of lost and set a precednt that would of hurt them. If anything this encourages the next hacker to push it farther (assuming they can raise the funds). I stand at my point, nothing has changed for anyone. We will see a similar case to this with another device. Apple tried they lost. Sony tried they settled. who is next? MS, nintendo, nokia? Could be anybody. And Geohot did not win either.
