By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Sony's Removal of "Other OS" May Be Against EU Law

 

Sony's Removal of "Other OS" May Be Against EU Law

Bad Sony, bad! 131 69.31%
 
I still hope it's an early April's Fools 58 30.69%
 
Total:189
Squilliam on 30 March 2010
Ail said:
Squilliam said:
EULA don't mean squat. If they break the law then they are invalid. There are numerous cases where the EULA hasn't held up in a court of law.

It's happened to pretty much every software company to remove a feature in a service pack that was previously available, you're gonna sue all of them ?

 

Did you sue EA when they canned the Madden 09 servers ?

I don't think so....

That was America, this is the EU. If people want their money back for their PS3s they may have a case though it has to be tested in court. I hope so personally as I want to get a slim and making a fuss is an awesome way to do it.



Tease.

Around the Network
A Bad Clown on 30 March 2010

A company LYING?!??!! Well I never....



19:44:34 Skeezer METAL GEAR ONLINE
19:44:36 Skeezer FAILURE
19:44:51 ABadClown You're right!
19:44:55 ABadClown Hur hur hur
19:45:01 Skeezer i meant
19:45:04 Skeezer YOU ARE A FAILKURE
19:45:08 Skeezer FAILURE*
r505Matt on 30 March 2010
Epoch said:

Wow, whats with the hostility?  The fact is, this is a bullshit, overreactionary move from Sony to a minor exploit that can't even be used for anything yet.  The fact that there aren't many people who use Linux on their PS3 is moot. Those that do use it went through a lot of trouble to put it on there, and obviously will want to keep it.  Just because it doesn't matter to you doesn't mean it doesn't matter to everybody.

I hope this turns into a shitshow for Sony, because thats the only way a company leanrs anything.  Better yet, I'm really hoping it is just an April fools joke.  Seriously, who releases a ridiculous piece of firmware on April 1st anyways? 

This. If it's April Fool's then whatever, bad taste, and should have been announced on the 1st, not for the 1st. But whatever.

If it's true, I hope it blows up in their face, taking away features is no good in my book. Sure, MS took away 3rd party memory card support, but I doubt they advertised it as a major feature (or any feature) when releasing and marketing the system. The "other OS" option was talked about, since no other system did it, and it was a selling point for some. 



Tridrakious on 30 March 2010

It's Sony's machine. Technically they can do whatever they with it. By playing it, you've agreed to their Terms and Services.

While it sucks that Sony is taking away a feature from the system. GET OVER IT!



strunge on 30 March 2010
Damnyouall said:
If the BUYER didn't agree to those terms prior to buying the PS3, they are invalid.

the buyer agreed to those terms inherently in purchasing the PS3.  you aren't just grasping at straws, you've lost hold entirely.



Around the Network
markers on 30 March 2010

Try reading the User agreement thing on the playstation again



strunge on 30 March 2010
Damnyouall said:
Spankey said:
Damnyouall said:
Again, let me make this clear. When you bought it, you purchased a device that could play Blu Ray discs, PS3 games and use Linux. Taking either of this away after the fact is a breach of contract.

When I formatted my hard drive as NTFS, it removed the ability to install Linux on that drive too.

the bastards. I'll have to sue them now.

MS didn't even warn me about that.

sure I can partition after the fact but it's so inconvenient.

I know I shouldn't even reply to this, but please explain how we can use Linux on PS3 after Sony removes the Other OS feature via an update that is mandatory to continue to use PSN, play new games and watch new Blu Ray discs?

you can still watch blu rays and play games without the update, hence why users are able to do so when the system isn't connected online,  and PSN is an additional option that is dependent upon a seperate acceptance of regulations the player has to agree to and isn't an inherent right to have access to simply by owning a PS3, so it is irrelevant. 

so, with those factors non-factors, a user can refuse the update and still maintain the use of elements the system is required to provide, and if a user voluntarily chooses to update they are voluntarily choosing to remove the feature.  none of this is confusing.



Damnyouall on 30 March 2010
strunge said:
Damnyouall said:
If the BUYER didn't agree to those terms prior to buying the PS3, they are invalid.

the buyer agreed to those terms inherently in purchasing the PS3.  you aren't just grasping at straws, you've lost hold entirely.

You can't "inherently agree" that way. There have been several court decissions in Europe regarding this. I know what I am talking about. You don't, apparently.



"Well certainly with the Xbox 360, we had some challenges at the launch. Once we identified that we took control of it. We wanted to do it right by our customers. Our customers are very important to us." -Larry "Major Nelson" Hryb (10/2013). Note: RRoD was fixed with the Jasper-revision 3 years after the launch of 360

"People don't pay attention to a lot of the details."-Yusuf Mehdi explaining why Xbone DRM scheme would succeed

"Fortunately we have a product for people who aren't able to get some form of connectivity; it's called Xbox 360,”-Don Mattrick

"The region locking of the 3DS wasn't done for profits on games"-MDMAlliance

Galaki on 30 March 2010

Now now, let's not get facts in the way of the arguments.



Pre-order limited edition Blue Slime Condoms

Khuutra on 30 March 2010
Tridrakious said:
It's Sony's machine. Technically they can do whatever they with it. By playing it, you've agreed to their Terms and Services.

While it sucks that Sony is taking away a feature from the system. GET OVER IT!

Again: if the ToS go against trade laws, then the ToS is not valid.

I don't know if it's actually against trade laws, but the EULA and the ToS won't mean diddly poop if they go against EU law.