Don't try to come off as being so noble by claiming this "not pro-corporation" act.  I've lurked this site for a while now, and I've noticed that you've always jabbed Sony when you can while defending Microsoft.  If you cannot appreciate the gaming options Sony has provided for the consumers over you having to jab at them, it's obvious what's more important to you than gaming.  And as a consumer, I don't want some "yahoo" screwing with my experience when I'm gaming.  It's simple as that.  Sony isn't perfect, these hackers are not perfect, and the situation is not prefect.  But as a legit consumer, this will serve me in the long run provided that what's right will be made right by quelling the abuse from others.  Stop making excuses.  I'm being realistic in an imperfect world by choosing the less of two evil brought upon by a greater evil.

Sony rootkits > Legit consumers

Hello pot, nice to meet you.  I have never seen you say anything nice about Microsoft and you defend Sony no matter what they do.  You even provide free ad space for them in your sig.  I'm sure they appreciate that.

Can you please show me where I jab at Sony?  I don't troll Sony.  My preference for the Xbox over the PS3 is simply because I have a better experience gaming on one than the other.  I've made no secret of the fact that the DS3 is the worst controller I have ever used, it simply gives me hand cramps.  That alone is enough of a reason to rarely play on my PS3.  Yet if it's warranted, such as with FF13 I'll pick the PS3 over the Xbox (after buying a 3rd party controller modelled after the Xbox controller).  Thankfully that's rarely the case.  Having an opinion is not taking jabs.

In a case like this I would condemn Microsoft if they tried to do the same thing.  There was a hint they might do it when Kinect was first hacked to work with PC, but in the end they decided to embrace the community instead of suing them and I think it'll work wonders for their perception amongst the modders. 

I don't pirate Xbox games even though it's pretty trivial to mod the Xbox, in fact I buy everything NEW because I want my money to go to the developers, not Gamestop or whomever. Sony has ever right to target the cheaters, this isn't even about that.  Their actions in this case are clearly stepping over a line and I just don't see it doing any good for them.  As I said, if anything they'll just get people more anxious to try to hack their systems and cause havok. 

I give you the example of ripping DVDs and Blu-rays.  This is clearly a case of hacking a system that was meant to prevent this from happening.  I wholly support this.  Does that mean I support ripping a movie and then distributing it on the internet?  NO.  However I rip all my Blu-rays and HD DVDs because I like to have everything on my media server when I can browse my collection using the covers, with descriptions of every movie, a listing of all the actors, genres, star ratings downloaded directly from IMDB etc.  I can access any movie I own within seconds and never have to touch the originals in the case.  I circumvented the copy protection but I BOUGHT THE MOVIE, I should be able to do what I want with it WITHIN MY OWN HOUSE.  According to you Sony should have the right to sue me and apparently anyone who ever read a web page or watched a video showing how to rip a movie.

You never answered my question.  Did you approve of Sony installing rootkit software on computers without your permission in an attempt to prevent ripping of their music?

I was never effect by them.  

Besides, if we were to point out every fault of every corporation, we be in support of NO ONE.

Oh, so you admit to being at fault?

I admit that it's funny you accusing someone of always defending one company while putting down another.  I was pointing out your assertion was funny, however I also asked for proof of what you claimed which means I hardly agree with it.

Anyway, way to sidestep the whole argument.  Typical.

100% corect.

however, you have not bought the software. you have bought the right to use the Software according to the terms laid out and accepted by you when you handed the money over and fired up the software.

all the 'owners' of the games who have paid up however many dollars from a store to get the disks have not bought the software. They've bought a licence to use it, and that licence is subject to various terms and conditions, exactly like the OS software on the PS3.

It would be a completely different story if the OS software or any software for that matter was released as open source, bit it isn't, and even the use of open source software is subject to certain terms and conditions.

If you went to Sony, the devs or whoerver owns the IP and actually bought the full rights to the game, it wouldn't cost you a measly $50 or whatever, the cost could run into the millions. Perhaps then you could reverse engineer to your hearts content

No, incorrect.

Fair use:

"Fair use, a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work, is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship."

Reverse engineering has historically been protected under fair use.  That includes reverse engineering of software.

http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/the-law-and-economics-of-reverse-engineering/

Again, Sony is not suing them for finding the key, they are trying to sue for distributing it.

way to skip basically all i wrote and miss my point entirely lol.

tl/dr version: he said he bought the software, but he hasn't.

anyway, as to your DMCA and fair use statement:

part 5 of the journal extract refers:

In 1998, Congress outlawed the reverse engineering of technical protections for digital versions of copyrighted works and prohibited both the creation and distribution of tools for such reverse engineering (except in very limited circumstances) as well as the disclosure of information obtained in the course of lawful reverse engineering.

also in pg 61 of the PDF:

The DMCA now permits circumvention for seven purposes: legitimate
law enforcement and national security purposes,288 achieving program-toprogram
interoperability,289 engaging in “ legitimate” encryption
research,290 testing the security of computer systems,291 enabling nonprofit
libraries, archives, and educational institutions to make purchasing decisions,292 allowing parents to control their children’s use of the
Internet,293 and protecting personal privacy

do you really think these clowns and GeoHot were doing this for engaging in “ legitimate” encryption
research?  Legitimate? Really? come on.

Gotta love typos.