The problem you have is that you're calling for a man to be held legally responsible for the crimes of others.  It is akin to saying that a markmanship instructor should be held liable if any of his students becomes a murderer.  That does not fly.  Not morally, and certainly not legally.

You're actually providing a better analogy, for my purposes, than I did.  The gun distributor in question would not be held liable.  In fact, gun manufacturers are NOT held liable for crimes committed with their products. 

Australian law may be different, but debtor prisons have been done away with in nearly every country.

 an few hits and kidnappings and intimidations will do the trick. 

1. nope if he made it, kept it to himself and such then that's perfectly fine. No harm no foul. Not the situation here.

2. Nope, unless the gun distributor had a permit to do so, he is breaking the law.

I hope Sony wins.

Because, yeah the exploits  purpose is to homebrew but the majority of the people following this, only want free games. Developers will stop giving support to the PS3 if this is kept loose, just like PSP and DS.

For your first paragraph, how many games have the defendants themselves pirated?

For your second paragraph, when did software modifications become a controlled commodity under American law?

1. they created the method to do so, and I don't know what they pirated themselves now would I?

2. Sw modification for personal use should be fine as far as I know, but distributing that? Pretty sure that will have legal issues.

again you are still stuck on the making it for self use part of it. If he himself used it then that's fine but this is like piratebay. you can torrent innocent personal material. But it leads to piracy.

I'm no expert on law btw :P I have no idea about the clauses and such nor the history of such cases. That's why I said I hope they win. Cuz this is gonna cause harm to the industry whether you admit it or not. So yes I hope they find a way to corner his ass in court. Doubt it will happen but I hope it happens.

Reverse engineering windows for eg is illegal. Even for personal use. Which is why many people use other OS such as linux.

So, again, your theory is that they should be punished not because they themselves did something wrong, but because they're spreading knowledge to the people, some of whom may use that knowledge to engage in illegal activities. 

Once again, your theory would hold every instructor liable for the illegal actions of his pupils.  I reject that.

Modification of any consumer product, especially software, is only possible for the majority of us is the more proficient share that knowledge first.  Under your proposed framework, anyone who's ever written a book or made a youtube video which teaches people how to modify a person's personal property is liable to the product's manufacturers. 

That's right, anyone who ever taught someone else how to make a mix tape, or remix music, is now liable to the record companies.  Performing an action is kosher; merely spreading the knowledge to others is not.  I reject this model of thinking as well.

From what I understand, this is actually incorrect.  Torrent sites like piratebay offer users the copyrighted, pirated end product.  The end user does not have a license to the product.  The end user lacks any property right whatsoever to the copyrighted product.  That is not modifying their own property, but stealing that of the copyright holder. 

Here, by contrast, the defendants have merely told property owners how the property owners themselves can modify their personal property.  The modifiers obviously own the right to the property they are modifying (the PS3), since it is impossible to modify hardware that you do not physically possess.

To break it down even more, you're accusing the defendants here of distributing pirated games to the masses.  They are not.  There is a clear line separating what the defendants herein are doing and what you're accusing them of doing.

Well the problem is whether you want to put your head in the sand on purpose or not we all know why this "homebrew" was made. You only break it down to the fundamental level because we all know why he did it and it wasnt for legal reasons, so thats really the lamest argument for this guy and others like him. Its not like he upped his toasters wattage to cook bagels faster and voided the warrenty, he created malicious software with the intent on playing games for free, no sense in trying to mask it as anything different.

If im not mistaken, 3rd parties and such file requests to develop software for the PS3, sony gets royalties IE they control what goes in and thsu out of the PS3 brand/image. If this person created alterations with the intent on bypassing the legal purchase of software (which he did) then there are not only terms violations im sure with the PSN and online connectivity (which there are) but also with the fact that the aforementioned software that will eventually be pirated falls on Sonys doorsteps.

Ill supply an analogy, if i make a meth lab in my basement but dont make meth, i build and supply the lab but my brother uses it an dmakes it im still guilty for "opening the door" so to speak. You think i can go in front of a jury or judge and defend myself, say "its my property, i bought these tubes and this legal equipment, got the burners legally i cant help that he made the stuff"?

The bottom line is this douche and other people whose intent for doing these things hurts potential sales in an industry that sorely needs it and people depend on to feed their families, that should be enough for any civilized, logical and mature human being to not support this guy or any other people like him.