| NJ5 said: He was sued but that lawsuit didn't go anywhere (the settlement reached out of court was almost without consequences for Geohot). Sony can try to sue anyone, whether they're successful at it or not is a very different question. Disabling access to Sony's network is a different matter, since that's not a guaranteed part of the sold product. Obviously people would get pissed off at Sony if they ended the PSN since it is advertised as part of the PS3 experience, but Sony is still allowed to restrict access to it. Regarding the outright disabling of jailbroken products by Apple, I believe that would be a breach of the customer's rights and wouldn't hold up in court even if the "license agreement" theoretically allows them to do it. |
The end result of the sueing wasn't to get money as Sony know Mr Hotz obviously has none but Sony got a result in that he is no longer allowed to own a Sony product. A victory for Sony even if a moral one. The discussion was about the legality of his actions and while not illegal, they did breach Sony's rights as a business.
People would get pissed true but Sony were nice enough to offer it to us to begin with. It's a privilege not a right. If they did take it away and put full blame on hackers I'd support them for doing so.
I reread it and realised disabling was a bad choice of words (reason why I editted it). Apple do need to guard their store from thefts and they should be doing all they can to do that.
Hmm, pie.
