Only if we keep firing back and forth with Kasz. Otherwise, I'll go for some French (the Language =/ ).

You said you didn't understand "replacements"... the custom firmware enabling linux would allow them to replace their systems that are broken down, and also allow others who want to build supercomputers and such.

So your proof is... antecdotal website postings about the reasons some people modded their console, and that makes the group someone "vastly smaller"?

Ignoring the fact that there in fact could be other reasons as well... and those were just the primary but not only reasons.  Also, anetdotal random postings from probably a half dozen people or so isn't exactly what i'd call proof?

Ignoring you know, nobody was using the PS2 or gamecube hacks for things like... Super computers.

Also, ever think the demand might be lower then PS2 hacks because well... how many people own a PS3 compaired to a PS2.

You have a VERY simple out here.  Just admit you were wrong earlier when you hacked your PS2 and Gamecube.

Okay, got it. Well, yeah, that's probably one good there.

Half a dozen? As if. Check out SnesOrama, Giantbomb, Gamefaqs, etc. My proof is internet buzz. When somebody wants an emulator for his SNES rom, nobody recommends him a console one or adds it on to their PC one saying "this is better with a controller!". They are also all far less popular and are usually meek PC ports.

Ah, and how much people you know/heard of that build supercomputers in their homes? I'd say... half a dozen. Technology is proportional, and if people really wanted supercomputers out of them, they;d try something - you can hack linux into PS2/Xbox/GC - all three suck since nobody really cares. So did the PS3 one.

Just listen to the arguments.  It's about consumer rights to use their devices how they want.  Few if anyone are defending piracy, which is illegal.  The majority are defending their right to do what they want with what they bought.  I have no vendeta against Sony because I'm not retarded enough to pledge loyalty to any multi-national gaming company that could care less about me, only my money.  You're the one with loss of character for taking a stance for a corporation that wants to take away consumer rights.  Fight the pirates, not the modders.  It's a simple concept. 

He broke copyright code by modifying and distributing his CFW, and what he has made available in face of signing codes for people can easily is, in legal terms, "aiding and abetting".

In other words, he is guilty as sin. Let people do what they want with their devices? Alright. As long as it doesn't compromise others, but hey, that's all it achieved so far. Do whatever you want, however, don't break the law. He did.

Er.. that doesn't really prove your point.  I... don't see why you think it would... unless people were rampantly promoting Gamecube and PS2 emulators back in the day?

A class action lawsuit disagrees with you.  Fun fact by the way.  Sony is being sued under the same law as one of the thigns they are suieng Hotz under... it's even being held in the same court system.  In fact their lawsuit against Hotz has hurt their Other OS lawsuit... because well, their reasoning in both cases in contradictory.

Much like you... Sony is trying to have it both ways as it suits them.

He hasn't been convicted yet so you can't say he broke the law.  This will set a precedent and I sure hope he wins, so I can do what I want with what I buy. 

Lol. Then I guess I should give nuclear bomb schematics to under developed countries. I'm not the one that's going to use them.

I don't think it's that easy.

Actually, if he's "guilty as sin" chances are that means Sony is too and will lose the Other OS lawsuit.  Whose defense is "Once your warranty is up, we can do whatever the hell we want to your PS3, because we never said "Forever" when we talked about features."

B. SCEA’S Statements in Hotz.

In Hotz, SCEA sued several PS3 users for injunctive relief and damages in connection with their purported unauthorized access to and copying of SCEA’s proprietary PS3 technology. In the complaint, SCEA claimed privity of contract with the defendant PS3 users, although the users did not purchase their PS3s directly from SCEA, but rather at retail. SCEA’s complaint in Hotz (attached to the RJN as Exhibit A) states, in pertinent part, as follows:

15. This Court has personal jurisdiction over each Defendant for the following reasons, among others:

(a) On information and belief, Hotz has purposely availed himself of the benefits of this district by doing business with PayPal, Inc., a company located in San Jose, California. Specifically, Hotz has utilized his PayPal account to solicit and obtain financial benefits in connection with the unlawful conduct alleged herein. Hotz is also subject to personal jurisdiction pursuant to the PlayStation Network Terms of Service and User Agreement (“PSN User Agreement”), which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. On information and belief, Hotz has used software updates delivered by SCEA for one or more PS3 Systems he is using. To obtain such software, users must consent to the terms and conditions of the PSN User Agreement, which require that both parties submit to personal jurisdiction in California and further agree that any dispute arising from or relating to this Agreement shall be brought in a court within San Mateo County, California.

53. All PS3 System users who have used software updates delivered by SCEA for the PS3 System are bound by the PSN User Agreement or similar agreement. A copy of the PSN User Agreement is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. On information and belief, Defendants herein have consented and are subject to the terms of the PSN User Agreement or similar agreement.

92. SCEA is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants agreed to the terms of the PSN User Agreement or similar agreement and entered into that contract or similar agreement with SCEA. The PSN User Agreement or similar agreement is a written contract that limits their use of the PS3 System, related hardware, and related code, including restricting access and governing allowable uses.

97. SCEA has contractual relationships with users of the PlayStation Network.

SCEA further claims in its Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Order to Show Case Re: Preliminary Injunction, and Order of Impoundment; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support (“TRO Motion”), filed on January 11, 2011, that “Hotz is bound by the ‘Playstation Network Terms of Service and User Agreement.’” RJN, Exhibit B. The Court ultimately issued the TRO sought by SCEA. RJN, Exhibit C. Thus, in Hotz, SCEA itself argues that SCEA maintains contractual privity with all PS3 users, which supports plaintiffs’ breach of implied warranty claim, and contradicts arguments made by SCEA in its motion to dismiss that claim.