By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Geohot Pleading with Community for Donations in PS3 Jailbreak Case

scottie on 20 February 2011
theprof00 said:
forest-spirit said:
theprof00 said:


This has nothing to do with the console war. >_>

maybe not YOU specifically, SIR.

People here are supporting a person who is single-handedly ruinging my online experience.

I fucking loathe you all.


Single handedly?

So the guys who developed the specific hacks did not contribute at all?

The people using the hacks didnt contribute at all?

It was 100% geohot's fault?

 

I know this is a bad situation, but single handedly is quite simply not the case.



Around the Network
Icyedge on 20 February 2011

Some just dont get it. George hotz took Sony's firmware, modified it, and then distributed it on the internet. Distributing something that you dont own while not having permission from the owner is  unlawful whether or not its modified. He should have sneakly posted it on the internet but he wanted fame, now he needs to assume that you arent suppose to distribute what you dont own.

Whats funny, im not even anti piracy myself. Its just that Sony's are in their right to sue him so I dont see why its getting so much hating. You would probably do the same thing if your own software was getting pirated and distributed by someone who was dumb enough to name itself, think about it for a minute.



fordy on 20 February 2011
scottie said:
IMU1808 said:
scottie said:

 

Problem here is that SONY's the one doing the manufacturing and selling.
Geohot's the douche that told a bunch of people how to use the device he had nothing to do with the creation of, how to use that device in a way it was never intended. This led to the people using it in ways that violated the law such as piracy and rumor has it, also a way to punish those that are using the device the way it was originally intended and doing nothing wrong... But hey, let's let Geohot be... he's not a bad guy... It's not his fault that his actions led to something bad.

 

Sorry if my analogy didnt make sense

 

Manufacturers of pocket knives provide the public with tools that can be used for good or bad, We don't blame them for people who misuse their product, we blame those misusing the knives.

 

Geohot is producing something that can be used for good or bad, but we are blaming Geohot instead of those who are creating and distributing (or even downloading) pirated games. Sony is very much sueing the wrong person and I am surprised so few Sony fans can acknowledge this.

100% true!

People should be rerouting their anger from Geohotz and towards the people who are actually performing acts of piracy. There IS a difference here, people.



Esquoret on 20 February 2011
IMU1808 said:
scottie said:

This is hilarious

 

A guy manufacturers and sells a bunch of swiss army knives

Thousands of people buy them, and a fraction of those people use them to stab people.

The families of the stabbing victims do not press charges against the murders, but against the manufacturer of a perfectly safe, legal product.

The manufacturer is too poor to afford a lawyer, and appeals for donations

You people criticise him.

 

You are sticking up for Sony because you would stick up for Sony if the company personified itself, walked in and kicked a baby in the face. If this exact situation happened to any other company you would support geohot.

 

Donated. Not a huge amount cos I'm poor as hell, but I gave what I could.

 

GL geohot

Problem here is that SONY's the one doing the manufacturing and selling.
Geohot's the douche that told a bunch of people how to use the device he had nothing to do with the creation of, how to use that device in a way it was never intended. This led to the people using it in ways that violated the law such as piracy and rumor has it, also a way to punish those that are using the device the way it was originally intended and doing nothing wrong... But hey, let's let Geohot be... he's not a bad guy... It's not his fault that his actions led to something bad.

Exactly.

If at all the analogy puts Geohot in the murderer's shoes, stabbing the experience for people who use the product normally and the healthy, legal sales related to the product.

Now the manufacturer sues the murderer in protection of the victims, and rightly so.

Anyone who blames the manufacturer are no better than the likes of the "experts" at Fox News who blame the console/game for people who play games and commit murders. The product was consumed in the wrong way, not according to its original intention, and so why should we be against the manufacturer (Sony, in this case)?

If one doesn't agree with the manufacterer's terms and the laws associated with it, then don't buy the product. No one's forcing the consumer, AND consumers shouldn't force the manufacturers too into allowing them to use the product in a way that it's not designed to be used. The creators have the say, and the least we can do is respect that. So if anyone doesn't like the PS3 and its values, you're better off donating/supporting a company that makes products to your liking and values, rather than giving to a dead end cause as is the case with Geohot.



My website: Precocious Ragamuffin

Icyedge on 20 February 2011
scottie said:

 

Sorry if my analogy didnt make sense

 

Manufacturers of pocket knives provide the public with tools that can be used for good or bad, We don't blame them for people who misuse their product, we blame those misusing the knives.

 

Geohot is producing something that can be used for good or bad, but we are blaming Geohot instead of those who are creating and distributing (or even downloading) pirated games. Sony is very much sueing the wrong person and I am surprised so few Sony fans can acknowledge this.

But distributing what you dont own is already illegal. In a perfect world, yes they should also sue everyone creating and distributing pirated games.



Around the Network
fordy on 20 February 2011
Esquoret said:

 The creators have the say, and the least we can do is respect that. So if anyone doesn't like the PS3 and its values, you're better off donating/supporting a company that makes products to your liking and values, rather than giving to a dead end cause as is the case with Geohot.

And what happens in an endgame case when ALL companies that offer products force you to play by their rules? This is what the current case will decide.



Scoobes on 20 February 2011
scottie said:
IMU1808 said:
scottie said:

 

Problem here is that SONY's the one doing the manufacturing and selling.
Geohot's the douche that told a bunch of people how to use the device he had nothing to do with the creation of, how to use that device in a way it was never intended. This led to the people using it in ways that violated the law such as piracy and rumor has it, also a way to punish those that are using the device the way it was originally intended and doing nothing wrong... But hey, let's let Geohot be... he's not a bad guy... It's not his fault that his actions led to something bad.

 

Sorry if my analogy didnt make sense

 

Manufacturers of pocket knives provide the public with tools that can be used for good or bad, We don't blame them for people who misuse their product, we blame those misusing the knives.

 

Geohot is producing something that can be used for good or bad, but we are blaming Geohot instead of those who are creating and distributing (or even downloading) pirated games. Sony is very much sueing the wrong person and I am surprised so few Sony fans can acknowledge this.

The difference in this case though is that GeoHotz didn't manufacture anything himself, but compromised someone else's tool.

It's more like he broke into someone's car, left all the doors open, turned the engine on and left it in a bad part of town... and then posted a youtube clip on the internet about his awesome ability to break into cars... but it's OK c'os he didn't steal it...

He compromised the security and then bragged about it. He acted like a fool and whilst he might not be the one who's pirating, he still screwed up.




Get your Portable ID!

Scoobes on 20 February 2011
fordy said:
Esquoret said:

 The creators have the say, and the least we can do is respect that. So if anyone doesn't like the PS3 and its values, you're better off donating/supporting a company that makes products to your liking and values, rather than giving to a dead end cause as is the case with Geohot.

And what happens in an endgame case when ALL companies that offer products force you to play by their rules? This is what the current case will decide.

It really won't. People are making a mountain out of a mole-hill. The laws are already in place, this ruling isn't going to change a thing.




Get your Portable ID!

Icyedge on 20 February 2011
fordy said:
Esquoret said:

 The creators have the say, and the least we can do is respect that. So if anyone doesn't like the PS3 and its values, you're better off donating/supporting a company that makes products to your liking and values, rather than giving to a dead end cause as is the case with Geohot.

And what happens in an endgame case when ALL companies that offer products force you to play by their rules? This is what the current case will decide.

Its already like that. When you purchase an electronic product, your being limited by the software and hardware on it. Though, you have all the rights in the world to choose between different product and features. You even have the rights to modify them and re-program them for your personal use. Your not going to loose anything you can already do with this cause.



fordy on 20 February 2011
Scoobes said:
fordy said:
Esquoret said:

 The creators have the say, and the least we can do is respect that. So if anyone doesn't like the PS3 and its values, you're better off donating/supporting a company that makes products to your liking and values, rather than giving to a dead end cause as is the case with Geohot.

And what happens in an endgame case when ALL companies that offer products force you to play by their rules? This is what the current case will decide.

It really won't. People are making a mountain out of a mole-hill. The laws are already in place, this ruling isn't going to change a thing.

Future cases are ruled based on the outcomes of previous cases. Why do you think that lawyers refer to previous case outcomes within the trial? The ruling might not always go that way, but it would give it a tremendous boost towards the side of corporate control.