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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PS3 Hacker Raised All the Legal Funds Needed to Beat Sony in a Weekend

Ail said:
thranx said:
Ail said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
fordy said:
Ail said:
fordy said:
Ail said:

I wonder if you guys would feel the same if the dude had posted a way to hack visa card transactions...

You're missing the point, since all hardware that makes those transactions IS owned by Visa, whereas a sold PS3 does not belong to Sony. It belongs to the consumer.


Visa owns my credit card ?

That's new to me... They may own the devices that read those cards but in most civilized countries ( except the US that are very backwards in that area) credit cards actually have chips and software on them...

These is what I am talking about :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_card

Yes. Read the terms and conditions when applying. All credit cards remain the property of the credit card company.

Sony have their own TnC's about the PS3 and its security...

Sony have an EULA. The difference there is that a ToC requires a signature, and can be held up in court, whereas an EULA has little to no chance.

Sony are nailed to a wall here. Credit cards are cheap plastic. The PS3 is expensive electronics. If Sony gave the PS3 away for free, I wouldn't complain at all about whether they own it or not. However, to say that you pay upwards of $599 and NOT own your console is absurd.

I paid over 300k for my house and I can't paint it the color I want and I won't sue anyone over this.....

Really? I would be pissed. Did you buy  a house as part of a housing gated community that had pre set rules or something.


Nope.

there is a HoA but it's not a gated community, just a standard suburb and I understand the rules. if everyone does what they feel like, it's anarchy, which is exactly what happens in online games with cheaters...

 

You guys need to grow up and live in the real world.

Your are free to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't affect others.

Turns our it might be your liberty, but Geo Hotz is affecting mine too.......

 

And if you don't like the way Sony is handling the PS3. Here's a hint. it's not a necessity item, you can perfectly live without owning one, so I suggest you purchase a console with rules more to your liking...

I didn't realise that painting your house would affect others so much.

If i buy somthing I have every right to do with it what I want.

Gehot did not attack the psn, nor hack to cheat in games or pirate. So how did he affect you again?

I don't own one, I still hope too but ot enough gamin time to justify owning one yet. But this court case goes beyond that. I dopnt need it setting precedents for other companies to do the same.

Perhaps sony should go after the pirates and the people cheating instead of the guy who isn't doing those things.



Around the Network
fordy said:
Rpruett said:
fordy said:
Rpruett said:
fordy said:
Rpruett said:
fordy said:
Rpruett said:

The case won't come down to ownership of systems. 

It will come down to distributing sensitive materials to millions of other people and grand-standing it (and knowing full well of the potential harm it would cause Sony.  This is not modifying your own console, this is giving instructions on how to modify in a very specific deviate manner to anyone and everyone. 

He can say publicly that he doesn't condone piracy all he wants,  but at the end of the day,  with the materials he released he will have a hard time proving that stance.

 

For example,  I could know exactly how to bomb the World Trade Center and where it was the most vulnerable, Maybe I helped build the WTC and had blueprints for them.  By releasing the blueprints online,  I would still get in trouble and by extension would probably be thrown in jail especially if my actions were proven to be ill-designed.

There's a difference between safety of corporate interests and safety of the public. Having the PS3 Master Keys fall into the wrong hands isn't going to kill people...

Absolutely,  I made an extreme example to make an extreme point.  The point being is,  you would be considered an accomplice in this situation or case, especially if they can convince the judge or jury that you did this in a deviate, ill-willed manner.   If he released the PS3 Master Keys,  It's obvious what his intentions were.  Additionally,  his mannerisms even seem to point towards more ill-willed intentions specifically towards Sony.

The same situation applies to various other things in life.  For example, you possess the blueprint for the floor plan of the Smithsonian Museum in DC and the Hope Diamond is located in there. You post this online and even little details about the Smithsonian making it more accessible for Thiefs.     You very well could be convicted of a crime. 

 

Actually, no you couldn't. You really should check up on your law, because proof like that would NOT stand up in court. You'd need a ton more evidence to convict him for this, but hey newsflash, HE HASN'T DONE ANYTHING LEGALLY WRONG.

Actually,  yes you can. People are convicted of being accomplices all the time, which is exactly how this case will play out.   (See many Mafia members,  Masterminds of the 9/11 attacks, etc).   Osama Bin Laden never physically was involved in a Terrorist act he just had his fingerprints all over it and yet he was enemy number one.   Why is that?  He didn't actually do anything legally wrong? 

I don't have any respect for your legal credentials.   Obviously, you need evidence (You always need evidence).  What makes you think they won't find sufficient evidence?      And you have no idea if he has or hasn't done anything legally wrong, do you have access to his PC?   He could have done several things legally wrong,  just because he said he is innocent doesn't make it so.


Are you seriously comparing 9/11, an attack that killed people, to a hacking attempt, which at best, the case is purely for corporate interest?

Why are all the ones defending Sony comparing it to bombings and murderings? A corporation laxed in security and somebody got hold of their key. Explain to me where the death is there.

I could refer you to the police as being an accomplice to a secret act of Corporatist movement. Do you think that would work?


Stop being a simpleton or intentionally obtuse.  Obviously this is in no way as severe or comparable to a human life.  However,  if you are going to argue that 'Accomplices' don't get in trouble you are clearly mistaken.   This case will come down whether or not he can be tied to causing piracy or spear heading it.

It's not about death, it's about someone being tied to a crime that they knowingly participated in from afar and that is what the case will continue to revolve around.

And the crime is.....posting a number!

It's how the attackers use that number themselves. A number cannot be copyrighted, keep in mind.

Honestly, you're clutching at straws here. 100% of the crime is done AFTER Geohot's posting of the key. If a friend of yours wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address, and you gave it to him, you can NOT be called an accomplice there.

If the ultimate implications were for piracy,  then there is a much larger crime at stake here.  Again, just because Osama Bin Laden didn't hijack an airplane and crash it into a building doesn't make him any less guilty.  

I'm not clutching at any straws.  You're the one responding to literally every poster who questions your stance, if there is anyone clutching at straws trying to deny anything it's you.    If Geohot had any knowledge or pre-existing knowledge on the consequences of his actions  (And there is any tangible form of proof of this)  he will be in trouble. 

If a friend of mine wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address,  and I gave it to him,  yes I could be called an accomplice.



Rpruett said:
fordy said:

And the crime is.....posting a number!

It's how the attackers use that number themselves. A number cannot be copyrighted, keep in mind.

Honestly, you're clutching at straws here. 100% of the crime is done AFTER Geohot's posting of the key. If a friend of yours wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address, and you gave it to him, you can NOT be called an accomplice there.

If the ultimate implications were for piracy,  then there is a much larger crime at stake here.  Again, just because Osama Bin Laden didn't hijack an airplane and crash it into a building doesn't make him any less guilty.  

I'm not clutching at any straws.  You're the one responding to literally every poster who questions your stance, if there is anyone clutching at straws trying to deny anything it's you.    If Geohot had any knowledge or pre-existing knowledge on the consequences of his actions  (And there is any tangible form of proof of this)  he will be in trouble. 

If a friend of mine wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address,  and I gave it to him,  yes I could be called an accomplice.

your not clutching at straws?  you are comparing 911 and osama bin laden to geohot and some video game pirates.

oh and yes if someone wanted to go beat up a guy and asked me for his address and i knew this then yes i am an accomplise

 

But let me ask you this.  Is Yellow pages an accomplise for every wrong doing done by anyone that used their website or phone books to look up someones address?



thranx said:
Ail said:
thranx said:
Ail said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
fordy said:
Ail said:
fordy said:
Ail said:

I wonder if you guys would feel the same if the dude had posted a way to hack visa card transactions...

You're missing the point, since all hardware that makes those transactions IS owned by Visa, whereas a sold PS3 does not belong to Sony. It belongs to the consumer.


Visa owns my credit card ?

That's new to me... They may own the devices that read those cards but in most civilized countries ( except the US that are very backwards in that area) credit cards actually have chips and software on them...

These is what I am talking about :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_card

Yes. Read the terms and conditions when applying. All credit cards remain the property of the credit card company.

Sony have their own TnC's about the PS3 and its security...

Sony have an EULA. The difference there is that a ToC requires a signature, and can be held up in court, whereas an EULA has little to no chance.

Sony are nailed to a wall here. Credit cards are cheap plastic. The PS3 is expensive electronics. If Sony gave the PS3 away for free, I wouldn't complain at all about whether they own it or not. However, to say that you pay upwards of $599 and NOT own your console is absurd.

I paid over 300k for my house and I can't paint it the color I want and I won't sue anyone over this.....

Really? I would be pissed. Did you buy  a house as part of a housing gated community that had pre set rules or something.


Nope.

there is a HoA but it's not a gated community, just a standard suburb and I understand the rules. if everyone does what they feel like, it's anarchy, which is exactly what happens in online games with cheaters...

 

You guys need to grow up and live in the real world.

Your are free to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't affect others.

Turns our it might be your liberty, but Geo Hotz is affecting mine too.......

 

And if you don't like the way Sony is handling the PS3. Here's a hint. it's not a necessity item, you can perfectly live without owning one, so I suggest you purchase a console with rules more to your liking...

I didn't realise that painting your house would affect others so much.

If i buy somthing I have every right to do with it what I want.

Gehot did not attack the psn, nor hack to cheat in games or pirate. So how did he affect you again?

I don't own one, I still hope too but ot enough gamin time to justify owning one yet. But this court case goes beyond that. I dopnt need it setting precedents for other companies to do the same.

Perhaps sony should go after the pirates and the people cheating instead of the guy who isn't doing those things.

You have to realize that for houses the view is something that has a monetary value, so anything that you can do that can affect the view people have from their houses is frowned upon and regulated by Home owners associations...

Same way that if you don't mow your lawn for a while or let it die you will be fined...

Some suburbs have rules against having prominent satelite dishes on houses...

Heck do you realize that to make any significant modification to your house you need  a permit, even if it's something that is not visible from the street side...

Try to buy a car and remove the safety belts and see how it goes. It's your car and you can do whatever you want with it right ? Wrong...And removing those belts will not endanger anyone else except you...

It's illegal in Europe to put heating gazoline into diesel car. And it's not because it doesn't work as well, They are the same, heating gaz has just a colorant to make it look different. The reason ? Because one is less taxed than the others so the government doesn't want to loose taxes....

It's not so different with Sony, they don't want you to run apps not coming from them because they don't perceive taxes on those. Seeing how they sold most of their PS3 at a loss, I can understand why.

So a government can do it but not a corporation ?



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

irstupid said:
Rpruett said:
fordy said:

And the crime is.....posting a number!

It's how the attackers use that number themselves. A number cannot be copyrighted, keep in mind.

Honestly, you're clutching at straws here. 100% of the crime is done AFTER Geohot's posting of the key. If a friend of yours wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address, and you gave it to him, you can NOT be called an accomplice there.

If the ultimate implications were for piracy,  then there is a much larger crime at stake here.  Again, just because Osama Bin Laden didn't hijack an airplane and crash it into a building doesn't make him any less guilty.  

I'm not clutching at any straws.  You're the one responding to literally every poster who questions your stance, if there is anyone clutching at straws trying to deny anything it's you.    If Geohot had any knowledge or pre-existing knowledge on the consequences of his actions  (And there is any tangible form of proof of this)  he will be in trouble. 

If a friend of mine wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address,  and I gave it to him,  yes I could be called an accomplice.

your not clutching at straws?  you are comparing 911 and osama bin laden to geohot and some video game pirates.

oh and yes if someone wanted to go beat up a guy and asked me for his address and i knew this then yes i am an accomplise

 

But let me ask you this.  Is Yellow pages an accomplise for every wrong doing done by anyone that used their website or phone books to look up someones address?

I'm not comparing the scale, magnitude of the acts, just the broken down basics of the two acts.  Tell me they are different. 

Yellow pages is not an accomplise for every wrong doing done by anyone because of no knowledge of a crime being committed using their information.  (Additionally,  this information is willfully given by the public, or can be removed at a persons discretion.)



Around the Network
Spankey said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
 


What he has done is the same as if he bought a movie on DVD.  That DVD is his to do what he wants with it but the film on the DVD does not belong to him is belongs to the makers, so when he starts posting the film for everyone to see he screwed up.  This is no different.


I wish people could get their facts straight.

A movie is an artwork. Artwork can be copyrighted.

A master key is a binary INTEGER. Integers cannot be copyrighted.


Oddly, product identification codes such as ISBN numbers and UPC barcode numbers can be protected, at least in the US

http://www.gs1us.org/barcodes_and_ecom/i_need_a_u.p.c._barcode?utm_campaign=InternalCampaign&utm_source=Home&utm_medium=QuickLinks&utm_content=Barcode

http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/index.asp

you are not allowed to generate your own and claim it's UPC's or ISBN's. that could be fraud depending on xyz. might apply to GeoHot here provided Sony can successfully claim that only they have the right to generate and distribute their security keys for their products and services.


UPCs and ISBNs are different. They need an independent governing body in order to prevent doubling up of codes. Nothing worse than the commercial sector being in disorder.

In the case of security keys, there is no governance thre. It's up to the key user to ensure the safety of their key.



fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
 


What he has done is the same as if he bought a movie on DVD.  That DVD is his to do what he wants with it but the film on the DVD does not belong to him is belongs to the makers, so when he starts posting the film for everyone to see he screwed up.  This is no different.


I wish people could get their facts straight.

A movie is an artwork. Artwork can be copyrighted.

A master key is a binary INTEGER. Integers cannot be copyrighted.


Oddly, product identification codes such as ISBN numbers and UPC barcode numbers can be protected, at least in the US

http://www.gs1us.org/barcodes_and_ecom/i_need_a_u.p.c._barcode?utm_campaign=InternalCampaign&utm_source=Home&utm_medium=QuickLinks&utm_content=Barcode

http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/index.asp

you are not allowed to generate your own and claim it's UPC's or ISBN's. that could be fraud depending on xyz. might apply to GeoHot here provided Sony can successfully claim that only they have the right to generate and distribute their security keys for their products and services.


UPCs and ISBNs are different. They need an independent governing body in order to prevent doubling up of codes. Nothing worse than the commercial sector being in disorder.

In the case of security keys, there is no governance thre. It's up to the key user to ensure the safety of their key.


UPCs and ISBNs are examples of numbers (or integers) which have been generated, distributed, and are protected against misuse, are they not? you claimed that no number could be afforded protection, obviously you were mistaken.



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
 


What he has done is the same as if he bought a movie on DVD.  That DVD is his to do what he wants with it but the film on the DVD does not belong to him is belongs to the makers, so when he starts posting the film for everyone to see he screwed up.  This is no different.


I wish people could get their facts straight.

A movie is an artwork. Artwork can be copyrighted.

A master key is a binary INTEGER. Integers cannot be copyrighted.


Oddly, product identification codes such as ISBN numbers and UPC barcode numbers can be protected, at least in the US

http://www.gs1us.org/barcodes_and_ecom/i_need_a_u.p.c._barcode?utm_campaign=InternalCampaign&utm_source=Home&utm_medium=QuickLinks&utm_content=Barcode

http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/index.asp

you are not allowed to generate your own and claim it's UPC's or ISBN's. that could be fraud depending on xyz. might apply to GeoHot here provided Sony can successfully claim that only they have the right to generate and distribute their security keys for their products and services.


UPCs and ISBNs are different. They need an independent governing body in order to prevent doubling up of codes. Nothing worse than the commercial sector being in disorder.

In the case of security keys, there is no governance thre. It's up to the key user to ensure the safety of their key.


UPCs and ISBNs are examples of numbers (or integers) which have been generated, distributed, and are protected, are they not? you claimed that no number could be afforded protection, obviously you were mistaken.

any one can still use that string of numbers for anything they want. they are not copyrighted. But the controlling body of UPC and ISBN would not recognize them if they do not want to. Nothing to do with copyright.

 

this article talks about trying to copyright a number, and also of another similar case involving hd dvd.

http://ipnotions.com/2007/05/you-can-copyright-number-but-not-as.html

"Update: Lots of good coverage out there. Only one link to me, but them's the wages of sin. Or in this case the wages of toiling in obscurity. In any event, I found particularly heartening the coverage at EFF Deep Links, that makes clear that it is, in fact, an anti-circumvention claim, and not a copyright one."

I suggest people read it as it is somewhat similar to this case at hand, and sony isn't on the bad end of this one hd dvd was.



Rpruett said:

If the ultimate implications were for piracy,  then there is a much larger crime at stake here.  Again, just because Osama Bin Laden didn't hijack an airplane and crash it into a building doesn't make him any less guilty.  

I'm not clutching at any straws.  You're the one responding to literally every poster who questions your stance, if there is anyone clutching at straws trying to deny anything it's you.    If Geohot had any knowledge or pre-existing knowledge on the consequences of his actions  (And there is any tangible form of proof of this)  he will be in trouble. 

If a friend of mine wanted to punch up another guy and asked you for his address,  and I gave it to him,  yes I could be called an accomplice.


Once again piracy is a corporate interest. Terrorism/murder is public concern. There are different measures in these cases. Measures as drastic for things such as terrorism/murder do not apply to corporate interests.

Geohot did everything legal. He hacked his own machine, that he purchased, and he posted a number. I'll repeat this again and again a DIGITAL INTEGER. He didn't post anytihng saying "Now, this is how you pirate games", or "this is hw you cheat"

If you honestly think you can be an accomplice for citing an address, your stance is flawed, and I honestly do not wish to argue with such ridiculous, vague assumptions anymore.



Ail said:
thranx said:
Ail said:
thranx said:
Ail said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
fordy said:
Ail said:
fordy said:
Ail said:

I wonder if you guys would feel the same if the dude had posted a way to hack visa card transactions...

You're missing the point, since all hardware that makes those transactions IS owned by Visa, whereas a sold PS3 does not belong to Sony. It belongs to the consumer.


Visa owns my credit card ?

That's new to me... They may own the devices that read those cards but in most civilized countries ( except the US that are very backwards in that area) credit cards actually have chips and software on them...

These is what I am talking about :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_card

Yes. Read the terms and conditions when applying. All credit cards remain the property of the credit card company.

Sony have their own TnC's about the PS3 and its security...

Sony have an EULA. The difference there is that a ToC requires a signature, and can be held up in court, whereas an EULA has little to no chance.

Sony are nailed to a wall here. Credit cards are cheap plastic. The PS3 is expensive electronics. If Sony gave the PS3 away for free, I wouldn't complain at all about whether they own it or not. However, to say that you pay upwards of $599 and NOT own your console is absurd.

I paid over 300k for my house and I can't paint it the color I want and I won't sue anyone over this.....

Really? I would be pissed. Did you buy  a house as part of a housing gated community that had pre set rules or something.


Nope.

there is a HoA but it's not a gated community, just a standard suburb and I understand the rules. if everyone does what they feel like, it's anarchy, which is exactly what happens in online games with cheaters...

 

You guys need to grow up and live in the real world.

Your are free to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't affect others.

Turns our it might be your liberty, but Geo Hotz is affecting mine too.......

 

And if you don't like the way Sony is handling the PS3. Here's a hint. it's not a necessity item, you can perfectly live without owning one, so I suggest you purchase a console with rules more to your liking...

I didn't realise that painting your house would affect others so much.

If i buy somthing I have every right to do with it what I want.

Gehot did not attack the psn, nor hack to cheat in games or pirate. So how did he affect you again?

I don't own one, I still hope too but ot enough gamin time to justify owning one yet. But this court case goes beyond that. I dopnt need it setting precedents for other companies to do the same.

Perhaps sony should go after the pirates and the people cheating instead of the guy who isn't doing those things.

You have to realize that for houses the view is something that has a monetary value, so anything that you can do that can affect the view people have from their houses is frowned upon and regulated by Home owners associations...

Same way that if you don't mow your lawn for a while or let it die you will be fined...

Some suburbs have rules against having prominent satelite dishes on houses...

Heck do you realize that to make any significant modification to your house you need  a permit, even if it's something that is not visible from the street side...

Try to buy a car and remove the safety belts and see how it goes. It's your car and you can do whatever you want with it right ? Wrong...And removing those belts will not endanger anyone else except you...

It's illegal in Europe to put heating gazoline into diesel car. And it's not because it doesn't work as well, They are the same, heating gaz has just a colorant to make it look different. The reason ? Because one is less taxed than the others so the government doesn't want to loose taxes....

It's not so different with Sony, they don't want you to run apps not coming from them because they don't perceive taxes on those. Seeing how they sold most of their PS3 at a loss, I can understand why.

So a government can do it but not a corporation ?

 sony doesn't want to give us extra freedoms because of money. sort of what you said, but in one word.

and the government can do "it" (to cars anyway) because they own the roads you drive on.

houses i won't pretend to know much about, but if you do get in trouble from painting your own house it's either because you painted the word "satan" on your garage door, or because you have pissy neighbors. or both.