Let me ask you a question. Say I give out a bunch of buisness cards... someone uses on of them to berak into my house. So I go and break into everyone elses house and take back my buisness cards.

If arrested am I "not the offender"?

A wrong, just because someone else wronged you doesn't suddenly not make you the offender.

Your entire premise is faulty.

there is a big problem

the XMB is not your house it's Sony's!

the Linux application is not even your's  also you are granted a license to use not to own, and Sony is not going into your house and taking it, they are knocking on your door and asking for it.

How are they breaking in if they are Asking for permission for you to remove the old XMB. and replace it with the new XMB.

you say no they say ok, but compatability will suffer and walk away and move on to the next house. the civil claim is that Sony is taking it away from the Consumer which is not true that's a fact that cannot be disputed can the consumer keep Linux? that answer is true can the consumer keep a previous firmware on his PS3? yes it can. the Consumer can indeed keep Firmware 3.15 or older on their PS3 but compatability will suffer. it's been that way ever since it has been released. there were game's i purchased that required a new firmware on my PS3 if i did not update i could not play the game, and there have been how many complaints that certain game's have had an effect on the PS3's and sometimes glitched the PS3 until a patch. This has been the case of not just the PS3 also the xbox360 and some PC program's.

if there was no way for the Consumer to ever update their PS3 inorder to play future game's that that would be an issue, but since the consumer can indeed make his or Her PS3 compliant with future XMB requirement's of not only security but also future games software.

Sony is not keeping the PS3 from being updated the consumer is.

Once again, that's completly faulty logic... they are forcing you to choose between other OS and playing future games, when the removal of other OS has NO effect on the capability and Sony has no reason to remove it.  They advertised other OS... and being able to play games as VITAL features.  They are now forcing you to choose between one of those two vital features.

It would be like if you signed a contract with me to mow your lawn and trim your hedges... then I tell you a few weeks later you had to choose.

When they do release regular PS3 game forcing you to remove linux your point will make sense. Until then its only an assumption and court dont like assumption. Between, by regular games I mean games that doesnt require new tech that wasnt release before 3.21 (3d an PSmove as example) and PSN titles.

Are you sure they already haven't?  Afterall, this is mentioned in the actual lawsuit.

Well PSN games cannot be played anymore since they require PSN. Those games already have multiple clause to protect them in case they need to restrict players or close servers. No normal PS3 games at the moment restrict people in removing Linux.

Once again... are you sure?  I haven't found a single website that lists what firmwares are on what games.

Yes im 100% sure theres no report of people having to remove Linux in order to play game that doest require a separate agreement and service. All Im saying is lets wait first, and if it does happen it will still be time to sue.  The fact you would have lost the ability to play PS3 games that doesnt require a separate agreement on your default PS3 would be against laws of most countries.