Kynes said:
JazzyJeez said:
Kynes said:
JazzyJeez said:
Kynes said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
Kynes said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
Kynes said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
removing features from a product (which are not core to its primary function) is not illegal.
attacking servers, pirating and hacking PSN is illegal.
thats why geo hot is in court and FBI are after anonymous and not sony.
anyways, PROTIP: dont study law because you dont even understand basic morals.
|
In Europe it is. If you advertise it, then you can't remove it, or you have to compensate your users.
Even they used it to import it as a computer, not a videogames system, so they pay less duties.
|
i remember they were taken to court but didnt hear anything after...
you know what happened?
|
http://games.slashdot.org/story/11/04/23/031220/Sony-Should-Pay-For-OtherOS-Removal-Says-Finnish-Board
|
exactly....so they paid the consequences.
and now, so must geo hot and anonymous.
|
You just said that it isn't illegal, but it doesn't seem to be that way. Sony hasn't paid anything, yet, but if this jurisprudence extends, it could cost them some money.
|
That's the verdict of a finnish consumer complaint's board, they have absolutely no legal power to enforce that payment, thats upto the courts to decide, until the courts say otherwise the removal of os was legal.
|
That consumer complaint's boards resolution have a quasi mandatory legal status in Finland, so it's probable that Sony would try to reach an agreement, as it's more than probable that they would lose in a court. The most important thing is were it says that EULAs can't be against consumer rights.
|
I'm not disputing what they said, but they have no legal power, they're the equivalent of a probation officer giving their recomendations to a court, it's taken into consideration but it's not they who decide anything, so until this case is brought up in court ( which it hasn't) and they decide in favour of the plaintiff then this means very little atm.
I'm not disputing with you whether the removal of os was morally correct, but at present it was legal.
|
So you say that if I don't pay my taxes, which I consider are abusive, while the government doesn't notice, it's legal? Something that isn't judged doesn't mean that's legal, it only means that isn't judged. Sony broke the consumers rights, so they broke the law. You can justify it in the pursue of a greater right, but what they did is against the law. Plain and simple.
|
If you don't pay taxes and not get caught/noticed it's still illegal, I'm sorry but thats a rather weak and flawed example you got there, I don't recall me ever saying an illegal act that's not been discovered is legal.
You might be of the opinion that what Sony did was illegal thats your prerogative, but the courts don't agree with you at present, provide evidence that the courts have decided that the removal of os was illegal, not some consumer board's recommendations or quite frankly I'd leave it alone, thinking its illegal doesn't make it so.
Personally I couldn't give a shit about os, but if it's illegal then let people be compensated.
