Well you can do everything other than going online.

It only does everything (Minus online)

I don't care who wins and who loses, and long as someone gives Sony shit for what they did, I'm happy :)

They argue that Sony forces consumer to agree to the ULA by removing other advertised features (Online, etc.) if they don't. And they have a quote saying a "promise" that Other OS would not be removed in future firmware update. The argument is that they have the option to either remove one advertise feature or loose many other advertised features and thus is oppression.

The fact that person used the Playstation 3 online means they agreed to the previous ULA which granted Sony the power to make changed at any time and for any reason. Case dismissed.

This will get thrown out.

Oh well,  I still have linux on my phat.

>.< No!

Have you ever watched a blu-ray on PS3?

Yeah.

Why? You can't watch Blu-Ray offline? :/

Good luck without new firmwares 

http://www.blu-ray.com/firmware/ 

It's fine now yes, but they just need to upgrade the DRM one more time and everyone is screwed

I didn't knew about that. I guess that's our key argument.

Probably will go something like this:

Prosecutor: Sony has advertised that the PS3 has the feature of being able to install and use another OS, but they have removed that feature with this update, making it fraud and false advertising.

Defendant: That's a misleading argument. First of all, it is an optional update. If there is a feature you're disputing, it should not be the OS, but really only the PSN. You either decide to update and accept its changes, or you can maintain the original product, but be barred from our network. We have (my guess) never guaranteed the PSN as a given feature, but something you can gain access to IF you accept to our terms and services.

Ultimately, you can even renew your PS3 if you unwittingly downloaded the firmware to its original, and have the ORIGINAL product. We have never "removed" anything, nor against anyone's will. You always have the original product, always. You always have the option to return to that state.

This is simply consumers feeling entitled, to get updates, as they want them, and to be able to access features, that require them to agree to another person's terms. PSN is owned by Sony, and was always free, under the conditions that its users play by our rules. If they do not, fine, but that simply means they don't get access to it. Simple, as that.

To allow this case to go to prosecution, sets a ridiculous and dangerous precedent. For one, it prevents any update, however minor or major, to remove or alter any of the feature's of the product's software. It also rules that somehow that one party can forcefully impose an act on another, even though they clearly provided a full contract, asked for their consent, AND gave them the option to reverse that act.

Same with games... One more firmware update and we won't be able to play new games

Edit: I mean. Once developers decide that they want to release their games to be played with 3.21 and up. Then we are screwed out of new games