nope they are not: if anything Geohot is very lucky :

Computer Misuse Act 1990

Computer misuse offences

1 Unauthorised access to computer material

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer;

(b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and

he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case.

(2) The intent a person has to have to commit an offence under this section need not be directed at—

(a) any particular program or data;

(b) a program or data of any particular kind; or

a program or data held in any particular computer.

(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to both.

2 Unauthorised access with intent to commit or facilitate commission of further offences

(1) A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he commits an offence under section 1 above (“the unauthorised access offence”) with intent—

(a) to commit an offence to which this section applies; or

(b) to facilitate the commission of such an offence (whether by himself or by any other person);

and the offence he intends to commit or facilitate is referred to below in this section as the further offence.

(2) This section applies to offences—

(a) for which the sentence is fixed by law; or

(b) for which a person of twenty-one years of age or over (not previously convicted) may be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of five years (or, in England and Wales, might be so sentenced but for the restrictions imposed by section 33 of the [1980 c. 43.] Magistrates' Courts Act 1980).

(3) It is immaterial for the purposes of this section whether the further offence is to be committed on the same occasion as the unauthorised access offence or on any future occasion.

(4) A person may be guilty of an offence under this section even though the facts are such that the commission of the further offence is impossible.

(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both; and

(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine or to both.

3 Unauthorised modification of computer material

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and

(b) at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing—

(a) to impair the operation of any computer;

(b) to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or

to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

(3) The intent need not be directed at—

(a) any particular computer;

(b) any particular program or data or a program or data of any particular kind; or

any particular modification or a modification of any particular kind.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite knowledge is knowledge that any modification he intends to cause is unauthorised.

(5) It is immaterial for the purposes of this section whether an unauthorised modification or any intended effect of it of a kind mentioned in subsection (2) above is, or is intended to be, permanent or merely temporary.

(6) For the purposes of the [1971 c. 48.] Criminal Damage Act 1971 a modification of the contents of a computer shall not be regarded as damaging any computer or computer storage medium unless its effect on that computer or computer storage medium impairs its physical condition.

(7) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both; and

(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine or to both.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/UKpga_19900018_en_1.htm

Terrible analogy. Sony isn't forcing people to turn off their ps3's and computers securities are updated all the time just like Sony just did.

THIS!

BTW Hot Sig

People shouldn't be mad at people who simply want to take advantage of a feature that at one time was available for PS3. They should be blaming Sony for taking away that feature in the first place..

It's not like hackers MADE this other OS option, Sony themselves originally had it included as part of their $300-$400 investment. I think they have a right to want the feature back. If console makers can now continually axe features after you already made the investment of the console with the assumption that those features would be included, where does the line get drawn? What if Sony started to charge for online? Would you be mad at people who shortly after tried to find loopholes to stay connected online for free?

Next time a link will suffice. I'm tired of your pointless walls of text.

And I can't believe how thick you are. Yes it allows piracy. Your door also allows home invasion, and your windows allow burglary, and your SSN allows ID theft. Do you have doors and windows in your house? Because then you are doing something wrong. It leads to so much more to piracy, but I guess you wouldn't understand, seeing how you think piracy is theft, which by the way is not mentioned at all in the article you found. Microsoft was sued for copyright infringement, not theft. I'm done with people like you who think they know how things work, when in fact they know as much as the rock in my garden.

Still availble just like Ps BC

Hey calm down, your exagerating man. Piracy is actually theft in most countries laws. But surely its not a reason to remove everything that open the door to it (like windows and doors), that I agree. Also joeorc is not that thick at all. If theres one person on the forum that always try to be impartial and always have something to back up his claim its him.

no it's people like you who praise people who violate the law, than when someone or some corperation try's to protect themselves you blame the corperation?

Geohot=

Computer Misuse Act 1990

1990 CHAPTER 18

Computer misuse offences

1 Unauthorised access to computer material

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer;

(b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and

he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case.

(2) The intent a person has to have to commit an offence under this section need not be directed at—

(a) any particular program or data;

(b) a program or data of any particular kind; or

a program or data held in any particular computer.

(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to both.

2 Unauthorised access with intent to commit or facilitate commission of further offences

(1) A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he commits an offence under section 1 above (“the unauthorised access offence”) with intent—

(a) to commit an offence to which this section applies; or

(b) to facilitate the commission of such an offence (whether by himself or by any other person);

and the offence he intends to commit or facilitate is referred to below in this section as the further offence.

(2) This section applies to offences—

(a) for which the sentence is fixed by law; or

(b) for which a person of twenty-one years of age or over (not previously convicted) may be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of five years (or, in England and Wales, might be so sentenced but for the restrictions imposed by section 33 of the [1980 c. 43.] Magistrates' Courts Act 1980).

(3) It is immaterial for the purposes of this section whether the further offence is to be committed on the same occasion as the unauthorised access offence or on any future occasion.

(4) A person may be guilty of an offence under this section even though the facts are such that the commission of the further offence is impossible.

(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both; and

(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine or to both.

3 Unauthorised modification of computer material

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and

(b) at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing—

(a) to impair the operation of any computer;

(b) to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or

to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

(3) The intent need not be directed at—

(a) any particular computer;

(b) any particular program or data or a program or data of any particular kind; or

any particular modification or a modification of any particular kind.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite knowledge is knowledge that any modification he intends to cause is unauthorised.

(5) It is immaterial for the purposes of this section whether an unauthorised modification or any intended effect of it of a kind mentioned in subsection (2) above is, or is intended to be, permanent or merely temporary.

(6) For the purposes of the [1971 c. 48.] Criminal Damage Act 1971 a modification of the contents of a computer shall not be regarded as damaging any computer or computer storage medium unless its effect on that computer or computer storage medium impairs its physical condition.

(7) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both; and

(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine or to both.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/ukpga_19900018_en_1#pb1-l1g3

even though he is guility you and other's  want to blame Sony?

If any thing UNDER UK LAW

MR. George Hotz could be liable for every PS3 that has had their function  of other OS install removed, so where's your outrage against George Hotz, o'l that's right you like open system's.

You don't seem to understand. The entirety of the PS3 is mine, every last teeny molecule of silicone on the wafer is mine and I am allowed to do with it as I see fit. I have the right to break it, I have the right to set it on fire, I have the right to use it, I have the right to pirate. I can do whatever I want with that hardware and there is 0 reason why SONY should restrict me in any way.

Now if I use it for something illegal by law, then it's up to the law enforcement to punish me, not the corporation. Just about any hardware you will find in my house is 100% legit, and also 100% useable to anything you can think of, from my mobile to my consoles and PC.

You don't have the right to use it as a weapon... You dont have a right to use it to store child porn on it... you don't have a right to play pirated games on it. All those things = felonies.