MARCUSDJACKSON said:
|
By far my favourite since I joined the site!
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
|
By far my favourite since I joined the site!
Kasz216 said:
This hack by the way... doesn't even allow piracy. "breaking into anything is wrong". I thought you were a democrat? Your strange Neo-conservative view here is weird. Should it be illegal to break into your own house? Afterall that's what he was breaking into... his own PS3.
If someone gave everybody the keys to break into their own house... should it be illegal? |
no see, this is where are wrong. when you buy a ps3 you by the hardware NOT the software. if geohotz wants to bedazzled his ps3 -- go right ahead. but you, i, or geohot do not own the software on the ps3, that's not part of the deal.
i own a copy of windows -- what i don't own is the right to modify and redistribute the code because i don't own it. if i wanted to do that i'd have to pony up the 8 or whatever BILLION dollars it would cost to buy those rights.
naruball said:
By far my favourite since I joined the site! |
well stay tuned as the yr goes on and you'ii be shocked by the things you see and hear
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
liberal independent. gun rights and all. S&W 500's for all. carry them openly, but check for the crazy people no i don't think they are the same people but they could be. in my eyes its the same thing. if Sony wanted the PS3 to be brokend into they would have knocked on the hackers front door and gave them the tools them selves. i know hackers don't gain anything(and thats wht puzzles me as to why they do it.(i'd still like to learn the trade of hacking though its genious) but others can and thats the part that im not ok with. the hack maynot allow piracy, but it can be modified to do so. wasn't somebody arrested for that last yr? it was in the news! |
Liberal Independent... but against a basic consumer rights case?
Uh..... what? I mean, maybe your just not fully informed on the importance of this case to users rights... or something?
i mean, your even for carrying guns... despite the fact that it's not.
I mean you do know there are many legal reasons to hack a piece of hardware right? I'm just having a hard time here, because your opinion is completely inconsistant with the rest of your stances. It's like those Libretarians who want everything to be legal except gay marriage.
Also, yes, somebody was arrested for that last year... or it might of been the year before.
kitler53 said:
no see, this is where are wrong. when you buy a ps3 you by the hardware NOT the software. if geohotz wants to bedazzled his ps3 -- go right ahead. but you, i, or geohot do not own the software on the ps3, that's not part of the deal. i own a copy of windows -- what i don't own is the right to modify and redistribute the code because i don't own it. if i wanted to do that i'd have to pony up the 8 or whatever BILLION dollars it would cost to buy those rights. |
it really begs the question does anybody know wht copyright infringement is or means?
and if they did we would still be having this conversation.
i know everybody here knows wht it means but when it comes to hacking some people throw laws out the window.
kitler53 said:
really, when you think about it this hole thing is your fault. you should have known i was going to try and make copies of your household protection mechanisms. you really should have had a more secure house. i hope you learned your lesson. |
Hahahaha, oh wow.
That's right, just one "d"
In b4 "it's addict"
-----------------------------------------------
Add me:
Kasz216 said:
Liberal Independent... but against a basic consumer rights case? i mean, your even for carrying guns... despite the fact that it's not. I mean you do know there are many legal reasons to hack a piece of hardware right? I'm just having a hard time here, because your opinion is completely inconsistant with the rest of your stances. It's like those Libretarians who want everything to be legal except gay marriage. Also, yes, somebody was arrested for that last year... or it might of been the year before. |
well i don't know everything so i may be missing something. if it makes sense i'll back it up without prejudice. if you say something i can agree with when i involves hacking i'll back you up on that point.
the funny thing is that gay marriage is an issue i bypassed and don't consider an issue for me to get into and abortion rights is a womens issue so i don't deal with that one either.
user rights are very important but bracking into hardware to open the software is know right of the consumer.
give me one legal reason i can agree with, without me being able to say it should be against the law. by the way i love being informed as you should know by now considering you know that im a liberal independent(although im still considered a democrat) so inform me.
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
it really begs the question does anybody know wht copyright infringement is or means? and if they did we would still be having this conversation. i know everybody here knows wht it means but when it comes to hacking some people throw laws out the window. |
Did he break copyright though? I do know what copyright is and that code is protected by it, but he hasn't published any code as such has he?
kitler53 said:
no see, this is where are wrong. when you buy a ps3 you by the hardware NOT the software. if geohotz wants to bedazzled his ps3 -- go right ahead. but you, i, or geohot do not own the software on the ps3, that's not part of the deal. i own a copy of windows -- what i don't own is the right to modify and redistribute the code because i don't own it. if i wanted to do that i'd have to pony up the 8 or whatever BILLION dollars it would cost to buy those rights. |
No. That is where YOU are wrong.
Look at the recent Iphone ruling.
If the software prevents you from doing something legal with the hardware you are perfectly free to hack said software under Fair Use.
If the security company you hired to protect your house if preventing you from enetering your house at 3 am because you agreed to not let anyone come in or out between 3&5. You are perfectly allowed to break their shit and enter your own house.
All they can do is end your contract.
spiffiness said:
If you'd read the article, you would know that it's an order of impoundment, which means that his equipment was taken away, like impounding a car or something. I didn't have enough room to type out Order of Impoundment in the header. |
Titles are supposed to be a summary of the actual article... Im sorry i found the title confusing (The title didnt say exactly what was impounded).
I read "Sony granted temporary restraining order and impoundment against geohot", That means that Sony has a court order that he cannot come near them and he is in jail...
Regardless, it is messed up that a corporation can take this mans stuff away, especially when he did nothing illegal..